pith. sign in

arxiv: 2602.07585 · v3 · submitted 2026-02-07 · ❄️ cond-mat.supr-con · cond-mat.mes-hall· cond-mat.mtrl-sci· physics.app-ph· quant-ph

Turning non-superconducting elements into superconductors by quantum confinement and proximity

Giovanni A. Ummarino , Alessio Zaccone This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-16 06:18 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.supr-con cond-mat.mes-hallcond-mat.mtrl-sciphysics.app-phquant-ph
keywords quantum confinementthin filmsEliashberg equationsnoble metalsproximity effectcritical temperaturesuperconductivityalkali metals
0
0 comments X

The pith

Quantum confinement in sub-nanometer films turns selected non-superconducting metals into superconductors within narrow thickness windows.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper establishes that quantum confinement in ultra-thin films of noble metals such as copper, silver, and gold, along with alkali and alkaline-earth elements, can induce superconductivity where none exists in bulk form. By generalizing the Eliashberg equations to include explicit thickness dependence in the Fermi energy, electron-phonon coupling, and Coulomb pseudopotential, the calculations predict critical temperatures that appear only for specific metals and in extremely narrow ranges around 0.4 to 0.6 nm. This matters because it offers a route to engineer superconductivity through geometry alone, without external pressure or chemical doping. The same framework applied to layered superconductor-normal metal heterostructures shows substantial Tc enhancement even when the starting materials are weak or non-superconducting in bulk. The results emphasize that fine-tuning of film thickness is required for the effect to occur.

Core claim

By numerically solving the Eliashberg equations with ab initio or experimental electron-phonon spectral functions and Coulomb pseudopotentials, without adjustable parameters, the critical temperature is computed as a function of film thickness; superconductivity emerges only in selected cases within extremely narrow sub-nanometer windows, while proximity effects in heterostructures produce substantial Tc enhancement even for non-superconducting constituents.

What carries the argument

Confinement-generalized isotropic one-band Eliashberg theory in which the normal density of states is energy-dependent and the parameters EF, λ, and μ* acquire explicit dependence on film thickness L.

If this is right

  • Superconductivity appears only for selected metals inside narrow thickness intervals near 0.4-0.6 nm.
  • The dependence of Tc on thickness is strong and non-monotonic.
  • In layered superconductor-normal metal heterostructures the critical temperature can be substantially increased even when both materials are non-superconducting in bulk.
  • No adjustable parameters are required once the bulk spectral function and μ* are fixed.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Fabrication efforts could target the predicted narrow windows with atomic-layer precision to test the predictions.
  • Disorder or surface reconstructions not included in the model may shift or suppress the windows in real samples.
  • The approach connects confinement-induced changes in density of states to proximity-induced pairing in hybrid structures.

Load-bearing premise

The isotropic one-band Eliashberg framework with bulk-derived spectral functions remains accurate for films only a few atomic layers thick.

What would settle it

Experimental measurement of a finite critical temperature in a copper or silver film whose thickness is controlled to 0.5 nm would directly test the predicted emergence of superconductivity.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2602.07585 by Alessio Zaccone, Giovanni A. Ummarino.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Schematic illustration of the confinement-induced reconstruction of the Fermi surface in a metallic thin film. (Left) For weak confinement, the bulk Fermi sphere is partially depleted by two symmetric hole-like regions along the confinement direction, corresponding to suppressed electronic states. (Right) Below a critical thickness, the overlap of these excluded regions leads to a topological transformatio… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Noble metals. Physical parameters used in the theory for films of different materials: Cu (λ (black solid line) and µ ∗ (black dashes line)), Ag (λ (red solid line) and µ ∗ (red dashes line)) and Au (λ (dark blue solid line) and µ ∗ (dark blue dashes line)). All parameters are plotted as a function of the film thickness L. 3. Prediction of critical temperature In the preceding section we discussed how the … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Noble metals. Critical temperature Tc versus film thickness L: full solid line represent the numerical solutions of Eliashberg equations. Cu (black solid line), Ag (red solid line) and Au (dark blue solid line). In the inset, the Eliashberg electron￾phonon spectral function of these elements are shown: Cu (black solid line), Ag (red solid line) and Au (dark blue solid line). of the electron–phonon coupling… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Alkali metals. Physical parameters used in the theory for films of different materials: Li (λ (black solid line) and µ ∗ (black dashes line)), Na (λ (red solid line) and µ ∗ (red dashes line)) and K (λ (blue solid line) and µ ∗ (blue dashes line)). Rb (λ (green solid line) and µ ∗ (green dashes line)) and Cs (λ (orange solid line) and µ ∗ (orange dashes line)). All parameters are plotted as a function of t… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Alkali metals. Critical temperature Tc versus film thickness L: full circles represent the numerical solutions of Eliashberg equations for obtaining the maximum Tc. Li (black full circle), Na (red full circle), K (green full circle), Rb (blue full circle) and Cs (orange full circle). In the inset, the Eliashberg electron-phonon spectral function of these elements are shown: Li (black solid line), Na (red s… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Alkaline-earth metals. Physical parameters used in the theory for films of different materials: Be (λ (black solid line) and µ ∗ (black dashes line)), Mg (λ (red solid line) and µ ∗ (red dashes line)) and Ca (λ (blue solid line) and µ ∗ (blue dashes line)). Sr (λ (green solid line) and µ ∗ (green dashes line)) and Ba (λ (orange solid line) and µ ∗ (orange dashes line)). All parameters are plotted as a func… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: The thickness interval over which superconductivity is stabilized is extremely [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Alkaline-earth metals. Critical temperature Tc versus film thickness L: full solid line represent the numerical solutions of Eliashberg equations. Be (black full circle), Mg (red solid line), Ca (green full circle), Sr (blue full circle) and Ba (orange full circle). In the inset, the Eliashberg electron-phonon spectral function of these elements are shown: Be (black solid line), Mg (red solid line), Ca (gr… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Schematic illustration of a superconductor/normal-metal multilayer system combining quantum confinement and the superconducting proximity effect. The superconducting layer (S, aluminum in the present case) and the normal-metal layer (N, magnesium) have thicknesses LS and LN , respectively. Quantum confinement arises from the finite thickness of each layer, while interlayer coupling enables the proximity-in… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Critical temperature Tc as a function of the single-layer thickness LS for an Al/Mg superconductor–normal-metal bilayer with equal layer thicknesses (LS = LN ). Full symbols denote numerical solutions of the confinement- and proximity-modified Eliashberg equations. The non-monotonic dependence of Tc reflects the interplay between quantum confinement, which renormalizes the electronic density of states and … view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Elemental good metals, including noble metals (Cu, Ag, Au) and several $s$-block elements, do not exhibit superconductivity in bulk at ambient pressure, mainly due to weak electron-phonon coupling that cannot overcome Coulomb repulsion. Quantum confinement in ultra-thin films reshapes the electronic spectrum and the density of states near the Fermi level, producing strong, often non-monotonic, thickness dependencies of the critical temperature in established superconductors. Here, we examine whether confinement alone, or combined with proximity effects, can induce superconductivity in metals that are non-superconducting in bulk form. We review recent theoretical progress and introduce a unified framework based on a confinement-generalized, isotropic one-band Eliashberg theory, where the normal density of states becomes energy dependent and key parameters ($E_F$, $\lambda$, $\mu^$) acquire explicit thickness dependence. By numerically solving the Eliashberg equations using ab initio or experimentally determined electron-phonon spectral functions $\alpha^2F(\Omega)$ and Coulomb pseudopotentials $\mu^$, and without adjustable parameters, we compute the critical temperature $T_c$ as a function of film thickness for representative noble, alkali, and alkaline-earth metals. The results predict that superconductivity emerges only in selected cases and within extremely narrow thickness windows, typically at sub-nanometer scales ($L \sim 0.4-0.6$ nm), indicating strong fine-tuning requirements for confinement-induced superconductivity in good metals. We also consider layered superconductor/normal-metal systems where confinement and proximity effects coexist. In these heterostructures, a substantial enhancement of the critical temperature is predicted, even when the constituent materials are non-superconducting or weak superconductors in bulk form.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript develops a confinement-generalized isotropic one-band Eliashberg framework in which the normal-state density of states becomes energy-dependent and the parameters EF, λ, and μ* acquire explicit thickness dependence. Using ab-initio or experimental α²F(Ω) and μ* as fixed inputs, the authors numerically solve the Eliashberg equations to obtain Tc(L) for noble metals (Cu, Ag, Au), alkali metals, and alkaline-earth metals, predicting that superconductivity appears only in selected cases and within narrow sub-nanometer windows (L ≈ 0.4–0.6 nm). The work also examines heterostructures in which confinement and proximity effects coexist and can produce substantial Tc enhancement even when the constituent layers are non-superconducting in bulk.

Significance. If the central predictions survive scrutiny, the paper would offer a parameter-free route to inducing superconductivity in good metals via quantum confinement, with concrete thickness targets that could guide thin-film experiments. The approach is grounded in external ab-initio inputs and standard Eliashberg machinery rather than ad-hoc fitting, which strengthens its falsifiability.

major comments (2)
  1. [Eliashberg-equation setup and thickness-dependent reformulation] The model retains the bulk-derived α²F(Ω) unchanged while only rescaling the electronic density of states and EF with film thickness L. At L ∼ 0.4–0.6 nm (one to two monolayers), surface modes, reduced coordination, and altered screening are expected to shift the phonon spectrum itself; no internal consistency check or sensitivity analysis quantifies the error introduced by holding α²F(Ω) fixed under the same confinement that modifies the electronic spectrum.
  2. [Numerical results for Tc(L)] The abstract states that the thickness-dependent reformulation of the Eliashberg equations preserves self-consistency, yet the numerical results section provides no explicit verification that the modified kernels still satisfy the required integral equations at the reported sub-nanometer thicknesses; this verification is load-bearing for the claim that Tc emerges only in narrow windows.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Figure 2 and associated text] Figure captions should explicitly state the source (ab initio or experimental) of each α²F(Ω) curve used for the noble-metal and s-block calculations.
  2. [Parameter definitions] Notation for the thickness-dependent Coulomb pseudopotential μ*(L) is introduced without a clear reference to the standard McMillan or Morel–Anderson definition; a brief equation linking the two would improve readability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive comments on our manuscript. The points raised highlight important aspects of the model's approximations and the need for explicit numerical validation. We address each major comment below and describe the revisions we will implement.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Eliashberg-equation setup and thickness-dependent reformulation] The model retains the bulk-derived α²F(Ω) unchanged while only rescaling the electronic density of states and EF with film thickness L. At L ∼ 0.4–0.6 nm (one to two monolayers), surface modes, reduced coordination, and altered screening are expected to shift the phonon spectrum itself; no internal consistency check or sensitivity analysis quantifies the error introduced by holding α²F(Ω) fixed under the same confinement that modifies the electronic spectrum.

    Authors: We acknowledge that holding the bulk-derived α²F(Ω) fixed is an approximation whose validity at one-to-two-monolayer thicknesses merits scrutiny, as surface-induced changes to phonons are physically expected. Our framework is deliberately constructed as a minimal, parameter-free extension of isotropic Eliashberg theory that isolates the effects of confinement on the electronic spectrum; this choice follows standard practice in the literature when ab-initio phonon spectra for the exact confined geometry are unavailable. We agree that a quantitative error estimate is desirable. In the revised manuscript we will add a dedicated limitations paragraph and include a sensitivity analysis in which the characteristic phonon frequencies are scaled by ±10 % while keeping all other inputs fixed, thereby bounding the uncertainty in the predicted Tc(L) windows. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Numerical results for Tc(L)] The abstract states that the thickness-dependent reformulation of the Eliashberg equations preserves self-consistency, yet the numerical results section provides no explicit verification that the modified kernels still satisfy the required integral equations at the reported sub-nanometer thicknesses; this verification is load-bearing for the claim that Tc emerges only in narrow windows.

    Authors: We agree that explicit verification strengthens the central claim. Although the modified kernels are constructed to satisfy the Eliashberg equations by definition (the energy-dependent DOS enters the integrals in a manner that preserves the standard form), we did not display the numerical residuals. In the revised version we will add a short verification subsection (or supplementary figure) that reports the maximum residual of the gap and renormalization equations for the thicknesses at which Tc is finite, confirming convergence to <0.1 % and thereby confirming that the reported narrow windows are not numerical artifacts. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: Tc(L) obtained from independent numerical solution of Eliashberg equations with external inputs

full rationale

The derivation introduces explicit thickness dependence into EF, λ (via DOS), and μ* using quantum-confinement functional forms, then solves the isotropic Eliashberg equations numerically with fixed ab-initio or experimental α²F(Ω) and μ* taken from external sources. No equation or step equates the output Tc to a fitted parameter or reduces it to a self-citation by construction; the thickness windows emerge from the numerical integration rather than from re-arranging the inputs. The framework remains self-contained against external benchmarks because α²F(Ω) is not refitted to the predicted Tc values and the confinement scalings are stated independently of the final result.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The framework rests on the standard Eliashberg equations plus an ad-hoc but explicit thickness dependence inserted into the normal-state density of states and key parameters; no new free parameters are introduced and no new entities are postulated.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Isotropic one-band Eliashberg theory remains valid under quantum confinement in ultra-thin films
    Invoked when the authors state they generalize the isotropic one-band Eliashberg equations with thickness-dependent DOS and parameters.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5626 in / 1320 out tokens · 51487 ms · 2026-05-16T06:18:02.892554+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

83 extracted references · 83 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Introduction Tailoring the superconductivity of metals through reduced dimensionality and spatial confinement has long been explored as a route toward enhancing critical temperatures and uncovering new superconducting states [1, 2, 4]. Advances in thin-film growth, interface engineering, and nanoscale fabrication [5] have made it possible to access regime...

    work page

  2. [2]

    Theoretical framework 2.1. Electronic structure of metallic thin films Metallic thin films provide a paradigmatic platform where spatial confinement profoundly alters the electronic structure relative to the bulk. Within a free-electron description, deviations from ideal hard-wall boundary conditions inevitably arise due to surface roughness and imperfect...

    work page

  3. [3]

    Prediction of critical temperature In the preceding section we discussed how the Eliashberg formalism is modified when the normal density of states (NDOS) acquires an energy dependence due to quantum confinement. When the NDOS is symmetric with respect to the Fermi level, the theoretical description simplifies and the superconducting state can be obtained...

    work page

  4. [4]

    Copper, silver, and gold It is well established that the noble metals Cu, Ag, and Au are not superconducting in bulk form at ambient pressure, owing to their weak electron–phonon coupling (λbulk <0.25), which is insufficient to overcome Coulomb repulsion. However, when these materials are confined to ultra-thin films with thicknesses close to the critical...

    work page

  5. [5]

    Lithium itself exhibits superconductivity only at an extremely low critical temperature (T c ≃4×10 −4 K)

    Lithium, sodium, potassium, rubidium, and cesium With the exception of lithium, the alkali metals are not superconducting at ambient pressure. Lithium itself exhibits superconductivity only at an extremely low critical temperature (T c ≃4×10 −4 K). It is therefore natural to investigate whether quantum confinement in ultra-thin films can enhance supercond...

    work page 1986

  6. [6]

    Beryllium itself exhibits superconductivity only at a very low critical temperature (T c = 0.026 K)

    Beryllium, magnesium, calcium, strontium, and barium With the exception of beryllium, the alkaline-earth metals are not superconducting at ambient pressure. Beryllium itself exhibits superconductivity only at a very low critical temperature (T c = 0.026 K). As for the alkali metals, it is therefore of interest to examine whether quantum confinement in ult...

    work page

  7. [7]

    Comparative outlook Taken together, the results for noble metals, alkali metals, and alkaline-earth metals reveal a unified and physically transparent picture of confinement-induced superconductivity in good metals. In all three material classes, quantum confinement reshapes the electronic structure near the Fermi level, leading to a thickness-dependent r...

    work page

  8. [8]

    The adjacent material may itself be superconducting, normal, or characterized by magnetic or other electronic properties

    Combining quantum confinement and proximity effects The superconducting proximity effect refers to the modification of the superconducting properties of a material when it is placed in electrical contact with another metal [46, 47]. The adjacent material may itself be superconducting, normal, or characterized by magnetic or other electronic properties. In...

    work page

  9. [9]

    Conclusions and outlook In recent years, substantial progress has been made in understanding how quantum confinement can qualitatively reshape superconductivity in metallic systems. In this article, we have reviewed and synthesized these developments within a confinement- generalized Eliashberg framework that enables fully quantitative, parameter-free cal...

    work page

  10. [10]

    V. L. Ginzburg and D. A. Kirzhnits (eds.),High-Temperature Superconductivity, Springer, New York (1982; softcover ed. 2014, ISBN 978-1-4613-3917-5)

    work page 1982

  11. [11]

    Buzea and K

    C. Buzea and K. Robbie,Supercond. Sci. Technol.18, R1 (2005)

    work page 2005

  12. [12]

    Zaccone,Quantum confinement theory of ultra-thin films: electronic, thermal and superconducting properties, J

    A. Zaccone,Quantum confinement theory of ultra-thin films: electronic, thermal and superconducting properties, J. Phys.: Mater.8, 031001 (2025)

    work page 2025

  13. [13]

    Matsuoka, T

    T. Matsuoka, T. Ishikawa, and K. Shimizu,J. Phys.: Condens. Matter38, in press (2026)

    work page 2026

  14. [14]

    Gaetano Campi, Massimiliano Catrical` a, Giuseppe Chita, Luisa Barba, Luchuan Shi, Jianfa Zhao, Changing Jin, Antonio Bianconi,Physical Review Materials9, 094801 (2025); Gaetano Campi, Andrea Alimenti, Gennady Logvenov, G Alexander Smith, F Balakirev, Sang-Eon Lee, Luis Balicas, Enrico Silva, Giovanni Alberto Ummarino, Giovanni Midei, Andrea Perali, Anton...

    work page 2025

  15. [15]

    Ummarino, A

    G.A. Ummarino, A. Zaccone,J. Phys.: Condens. Matter37, 065703 (2025)

    work page 2025

  16. [16]

    Travaglino and A

    R. Travaglino and A. Zaccone,Journal of Applied Physics133, 033901 (2023); A. Zaccone,J. Phys.: Materials8, 031001 (2025)

    work page 2023

  17. [17]

    L´ opez-N´ u˜ nez, A

    D. L´ opez-N´ u˜ nez, A. Torras-Coloma, Q. Portell-Montserrat, E. Bertoldo, L. Cozzolino, G. A. Ummarino, A. Zaccone, G. Rius, M. Mart´ ınez, and P. Forn-D´ ıaz,Supercond. Sci. Technol.38, 095004 (2025)

    work page 2025

  18. [18]

    A. A. Shanenko, M. D. Croitoru, and F. M. Peeters,Europhys. Lett.76, 498 (2006)

    work page 2006

  19. [19]

    A. A. Shanenko, M. D. Croitoru, M. Zgirski, F. M. Peeters, and K. Arutyunov,Phys. Rev. B74, 052502 (2006)

    work page 2006

  20. [20]

    A. A. Shanenko, M. D. Croitoru, and F. M. Peeters,Phys. Rev. B75, 014519 (2007)

    work page 2007

  21. [21]

    M. D. Croitoru, A. A. Shanenko, and F. M. Peeters,Phys. Rev. B76, 024511 (2007)

    work page 2007

  22. [22]

    A. A. Shanenko, M. D. Croitoru, R. G. Mints, and F. M. Peeters,Phys. Rev. Lett.99, 047004 (2007)

    work page 2007

  23. [23]

    Guo, Y.-F

    Y. Guo, Y.-F. Zhang, X.-Y. Bao, T.-Z. Han, Z. Tang, L.-X. Zhang, W.-G. Zhu, E. G. Wang, Q. Niu, Z. Q. Qiu, J.-F. Jia, Z.-X. Zhao, and Q.-K. Xue,Science306, 1915–1917 (2004), doi:10.1126/science.1105130

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1105130 1915

  24. [24]

    G. A. Ummarino, A. Zaccone,Phys. Rev. Materials8, L101801 (2024)

    work page 2024

  25. [25]

    G. A. Ummarino, A. Zaccone,Condens. Matter 202510, 17 (2025)

    work page 2025

  26. [26]

    Mirigliano and P

    M. Mirigliano and P. Milani,Adv. Phys.: X6, 1908847 (2021)

    work page 2021

  27. [27]

    Zaccone,Phys

    A. Zaccone,Phys. Rev. Materials9, 046001 (2025)

    work page 2025

  28. [28]

    Surface roughness and electronic confinement in metallic quantum films,

    F. Kassubek and R. J. Haug, “Surface roughness and electronic confinement in metallic quantum films,”Phys. Rev. B70, 113402 (2004)

    work page 2004

  29. [29]

    Impact of surface roughness on electronic states in confined metal films,

    R. M. Feenstra, T. Hanbicki, and B. T. Jonker, “Impact of surface roughness on electronic states in confined metal films,”Surf. Sci.601, 4219–4225 (2007)

    work page 2007

  30. [30]

    Y. Yu, C. Yang, M. Baggioli, A. E. Phillips, A. Zaccone, L. Zhang, R. Kajimoto, M. Nakamura, D. Yuet al.,Nat. Commun.13, 3649 (2022)

    work page 2022

  31. [31]

    Ummarino, inEmergent Phenomena in Correlated Matter, edited by E

    G.A. Ummarino, inEmergent Phenomena in Correlated Matter, edited by E. Pavarini, E. Koch, and U. Schollw¨ ock (Forschungszentrum J¨ ulich GmbH and Institute for Advanced Simulations, J¨ ulich, Germany, 2013), pp. 13.1–13.36

    work page 2013

  32. [32]

    Carbotte,Rev Modern Physics62, 61 (1990)

    J.P. Carbotte,Rev Modern Physics62, 61 (1990)

    work page 1990

  33. [33]

    Ummarino, R.S

    G.A. Ummarino, R.S. Gonnelli,Physical Review B56, R14279, (1997)

    work page 1997

  34. [34]

    Ummarino, R.S

    G.A. Ummarino, R.S. Gonnelli,Physical Review B66, 104514, (2002)

    work page 2002

  35. [35]

    Allen,Phys

    P.B. Allen,Phys. Rev. B173725-3734 (1978)

    work page 1978

  36. [36]

    Mitrovi´c and J

    B. Mitrovi´c and J. Carbotte,Can. J. Phys.61784 (1983)

    work page 1983

  37. [37]

    Schachinger and J.P

    E. Schachinger and J.P. Carbotte,J. Phys. F: Met. Phys.13, 2615 (1983)

    work page 1983

  38. [38]

    Allen and R.C

    P.B. Allen and R.C. Dynes,Phys. Rev. B12, 905 (1975)

    work page 1975

  39. [39]

    A. Giri, M. Tokina, O. Prezhdo, and P. Hopkins,Mater. Today Phys.12, 174519 (2020)

    work page 2020

  40. [40]

    Ashcroft, D

    N. Ashcroft, D. Mermin,”Solid State Physics”, Cengage Learning, Inc (2021). Turning non-superconducting elements into superconductors by quantum confinement and proximity26

    work page 2021

  41. [41]

    H. Du, J. Gong, C. Sun, S.W. Lee and L.S. Wen,J. Mater. Sci.39, 2865 (2004)

    work page 2004

  42. [42]

    Bazhirov, J

    T. Bazhirov, J. Noffsinger, and M. L. Cohen,Phys. Rev. B84, 125122 (2011)

    work page 2011

  43. [43]

    Bauer, A

    R. Bauer, A. Schmid, P. Pavone, and D. Strauch,Phys. Rev. B57, 11276 (1998)

    work page 1998

  44. [44]

    Kumar, R

    P. Kumar, R. C. Malan, K. G. Bhatia, N. P Vora, and B. Kumar Das,Progress in Superconductivity and Cryogenics26, 9 (2024)

    work page 2024

  45. [45]

    Sanna, C

    A. Sanna, C. Franchini, A. Floris, G. Profeta, N.N. Lathiotakis, M. L¨ uders, M.A.L. Marques, E.K.U. Gross, A. Continenza, and S. Massidda,Phys. Rev. B73, 144512 (2006)

    work page 2006

  46. [46]

    Papaconstantopoulos, L.L

    D.A. Papaconstantopoulos, L.L. Boyer and B.M. Klein, A.R. Williams, V.L. Morruzzi, and J.F. Janak,Phys. Rev. B15, 4221 (1977)

    work page 1977

  47. [47]

    Baranger, A.H

    H.U. Baranger, A.H. MacDonald and C.R. Leavens,Phys. Rev. B31, 6197 (1985)

    work page 1985

  48. [48]

    Nojima, K

    A. Nojima, K. Yamashita, and B. Hellsing,Phys. Rev. B78, 035417 (2008)

    work page 2008

  49. [49]

    Allen and M.L

    P.B. Allen and M.L. Cohen,Phys. Rev.187, 525 (1969)

    work page 1969

  50. [50]

    Sklyadneva, E.V

    I.Yu. Sklyadneva, E.V. Chulkov, W.D. Sch¨ one, V.M. Silkin, R. Keyling, and P.M. Echenique,Phys. Rev. B71, 174302 (2005)

    work page 2005

  51. [51]

    Leonardo, I.Yu

    A. Leonardo, I.Yu. Sklyadneva, V.M. Silkin, P.M. Echenique, and E.V. Chulkov,Phys. Rev. B76, 035404 (2007)

    work page 2007

  52. [52]

    Burnell and E.L

    D.M. Burnell and E.L. Wolf,Journal of Low Temperature Physics58, 1027 (1984)

    work page 1984

  53. [53]

    Heiroth, U

    M. Heiroth, U. Buchenau, H.R. Schober, J. Evers,Phys. Rev. B34, 6681 (1986)

    work page 1986

  54. [54]

    Buchenau, M

    U. Buchenau, M. Heiroth, and H. R. Schober J. Evers and G. Oehlinger,Phys. Rev. B30, 3502 (1984)

    work page 1984

  55. [55]

    Deutscher and P.G

    G. Deutscher and P.G. de Gennes,Superconductivity(Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, 1969)

    work page 1969

  56. [56]

    Wolf,Principles of Electron Tunneling Spectroscopy(Oxford University Press, New York, 1985)

    E.L. Wolf,Principles of Electron Tunneling Spectroscopy(Oxford University Press, New York, 1985)

    work page 1985

  57. [57]

    McMillan,Phys

    W.L. McMillan,Phys. Rev.175, 537, (1968)

    work page 1968

  58. [58]

    Ummarino,Physica C568, 1353566 (2020)

    G.A. Ummarino,Physica C568, 1353566 (2020)

    work page 2020

  59. [59]

    Ummarino, E

    G.A. Ummarino, E. Piatti, D. Daghero, R.S.Gonnelli, Irina Yu Sklyadneva, E.V. Chulkov and R. Heid,Phys. Rev. B96, 064509 (2017)

    work page 2017

  60. [60]

    Ummarino, D

    G.A. Ummarino, D. Romanin,Phys. Status Solidi B96, 1900651 (2020)

    work page 2020

  61. [61]

    Schachinger and J.P

    E. Schachinger and J.P. Carbotte,J. Low Temp. Phys.54, 129 (1984)

    work page 1984

  62. [62]

    Zarate and J.P

    H.G. Zarate and J.P. Carbotte,Phys. Rev. B35, 3256, (1987)

    work page 1987

  63. [63]

    Zarate and J.P

    H.G. Zarate and J.P. Carbotte,Physica B+C135, 203 (1985)

    work page 1985

  64. [64]

    Stephan and J.P

    W. Stephan and J.P. Carbotte,Journal of Low Temperature Physics82, 145 (1991)

    work page 1991

  65. [65]

    Kresin, H

    V.Z. Kresin, H. Morawitz, and S A. Wolf,Mechanisms of Conventional and High Tc Superconductivity, Oxford University Press (1999)

    work page 1999

  66. [66]

    W.H. Butler. and R.K. Williams,Phys. Rev. B18, 6483 (1978)

    work page 1978

  67. [67]

    Torsello, G.A, Ummarino, L

    D. Torsello, G.A, Ummarino, L. Gozzelino, T. Tamegai, G. Ghigo,Phys. Rev. B9, 134518 (2019)

    work page 2019

  68. [68]

    Torsello, G.A

    D. Torsello, G.A. Ummarino, J. Bekaert, L. Gozzelino, R. Gerbaldo, M.A. Tanatar, P.C. Canfield, R. Prozorov, and G. GhigoPhysical Review Applied13, 064046 (2020)

    work page 2020

  69. [69]

    Ghigo, G.A

    G. Ghigo, G.A. Ummarino, L. Gozzelino, T. Tamegai,Phys. Rev. B96, 014501 (2017)

    work page 2017

  70. [70]

    Torsello, K

    D. Torsello, K. Cho, K.R. Joshi, S. Ghimire, G.A. Ummarino, N.M. Nusran, M.A. Tanatar, W. R. Meier, M. Xu, S.L. Bud’ko, P.C. Canfield, G. Ghigo, and R. Prozorov,Phys. Rev. B100, 094513 (2019)

    work page 2019

  71. [71]

    Gonnelli, A

    R.S. Gonnelli, A. Calzolari, D. Daghero, L. Natale, G.A. Ummarino, V.A. Stepanov, M. Ferretti, European Physical Journal B22, 411 (2001)

    work page 2001

  72. [72]

    Cappelluti, G.A

    E. Cappelluti, G.A. Ummarino,Phys. Rev. B76, 104522 (2007)

    work page 2007

  73. [73]

    Daghero, A

    D. Daghero, A. Calzolari, G.A. Ummarino, M. Tortello, R.S. Gonnelli, V.A. Stepanov, C. Tarantini, P. Manfrinetti, E. Lehmann,Phys. Rev. B74, 174519 (2006)

    work page 2006

  74. [74]

    A. P. Drozdov, M. I. Eremets, I. A. Troyan, V. Ksenofontov, and R. J. Hemley,Nature525, 73–76 (2015)

    work page 2015

  75. [75]

    Yinget al.,Phys

    J. Yinget al.,Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 256002 (2023)

    work page 2023

  76. [76]

    Monacelli and F

    L. Monacelli and F. Mauri,Phys. Rev. B103, 104305 (2021). Turning non-superconducting elements into superconductors by quantum confinement and proximity27

    work page 2021

  77. [77]

    Setty, M

    C. Setty, M. Baggioli, and A. Zaccone,Phys. Rev. B103, 094519 (2021)

    work page 2021

  78. [78]

    Nonadiabatic and anharmonic effects in high-pressure H 3S and D3S superconductors,

    S. B. Mishra and E. R. Margine, “Nonadiabatic and anharmonic effects in high-pressure H 3S and D3S superconductors,”Ann. Phys.538, e00553 (2026)

    work page 2026

  79. [79]

    Zaccone and V

    A. Zaccone and V. M. Fomin,Phys. Rev. B109, 144520 (2024)

    work page 2024

  80. [80]

    De Simoni, F

    G. De Simoni, F. Paolucci, P. Solinas, E. Strambini, and F. Giazotto,Nat. Nanotechnol.13, 802–805 (2018)

    work page 2018

Showing first 80 references.