pith. sign in

arxiv: 2602.17420 · v2 · pith:6RJA4GQYnew · submitted 2026-02-19 · ❄️ cond-mat.quant-gas · nucl-th

Hartree shift and pairing gap in ultracold Fermi gases in the framework of low-momentum interactions

Michael Urban , S. Ramanan This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-25 07:31 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.quant-gas nucl-th
keywords ultracold Fermi gasesBCS-BEC crossoverHartree shiftpairing gapmany-body perturbation theorylow-momentum interactionsBogoliubov theory
0
0 comments X

The pith

A momentum-dependent interaction scaled with the Fermi momentum yields third-order Hartree shift and pairing gap results that match known weak-coupling corrections in ultracold Fermi gases.

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

The paper applies a momentum-dependent interaction that reproduces s-wave scattering phase shifts up to a cutoff scaled with the Fermi momentum to a two-component Fermi gas at zero temperature on the BCS side. It employs a self-consistent diagrammatic formulation of Bogoliubov many-body perturbation theory to compute the Hartree shift and pairing gap through third order. In weak coupling these quantities converge and recover the Gor'kov-Melik-Barkhudarov gap corrections together with the Galitskii Hartree shift. Near unitarity the Nambu-Gor'kov self-energy remains only partially converged yet still aligns reasonably with both experiment and quantum Monte-Carlo data.

Core claim

Using a low-momentum interaction that matches contact-interaction phase shifts up to a Fermi-momentum-scaled cutoff inside self-consistent Bogoliubov perturbation theory, the Hartree shift and pairing gap are obtained to third order; the results reproduce established weak-coupling corrections and show reasonable agreement with experiment and Monte-Carlo calculations closer to unitarity.

What carries the argument

Momentum-dependent interaction reproducing s-wave phase shifts of a contact interaction up to a cutoff scaled with the Fermi momentum, inside a diagrammatic self-consistent Bogoliubov many-body perturbation theory.

If this is right

  • In the weak-coupling regime the third-order results are well converged and recover the Gor'kov-Melik-Barkhudarov corrections for the gap and the Galitskii result for the Hartree shift.
  • Near unitarity the Nambu-Gor'kov self-energy remains only partially converged but still produces values consistent with existing experiments and quantum Monte-Carlo simulations.
  • The same framework can be refined by adding higher-order diagrams or adapted to neutron-matter calculations.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The cutoff scaling with density could be varied to test sensitivity of the gap and shift to the precise ultraviolet regularization.
  • Direct comparison of the computed self-energy at several intermediate coupling strengths against newer quantum Monte-Carlo data would quantify the remaining truncation error.
  • The method's diagrammatic structure naturally lends itself to finite-temperature extensions that could be checked against thermodynamic measurements in trapped gases.

Load-bearing premise

The chosen momentum-dependent interaction captures the essential low-energy scattering physics when its cutoff is scaled with the Fermi momentum and the added self-consistency conditions correctly extend the perturbative expansion.

What would settle it

A calculation at a weak-coupling value of the interaction strength where the third-order gap or Hartree shift deviates from the Gor'kov-Melik-Barkhudarov or Galitskii analytic results by more than a few percent would show the method fails to converge as claimed.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2602.17420 by Michael Urban, S. Ramanan.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Elements for Feynman diagrams: (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. (1.1a), (1.1b), and (1.mf) First-order self-energy di [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. (2.1a), (2.1b), and (2.mf) Diagrams for the second [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Second-order self-energy diagrams that cancel as a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Left column, (3.1)-(3.3): general form of the three [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Cutoff dependence of the gap (upper row) and mean field shift (lower row) computed within HFB+perturbation theory [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Graphical solution of Eq. (40) by plotting the rhs, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Cutoff dependence of the gap (upper row) and mean field shift (lower row) computed within the selfconsistent scheme [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. (a), (b) Gap, (c) mean field shift, and (d) chemical [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. Rough estimate of how the third-order corrected gap [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_10.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

In this paper we consider a two-component gas of fermions on the BCS side of the BCS-BEC crossover at zero temperature. We use a momentum dependent interaction that reproduces the s-wave scattering phase shifts of a contact interaction up to a momentum cutoff that is scaled with the Fermi momentum. Using a diagrammatic formulation of Bogoliubov many-body perturbation theory, suitably augmented by self-consistency conditions, we obtain the Hartree shift and the pairing gap to third order. In the weak-coupling regime, our results are not only well-converged but also agree with the well-established Gor'kov-Melik-Barkhudarov corrections for the gap and the Galitskii result for the Hartree shift. Near the unitary regime, our results for the Nambu-Gor'kov self-energy are less converged, but there is still reasonable agreement with experiments as well as with quantum Monte-Carlo results. Perspectives for improvements and applications of this approach to neutron matter are discussed.

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 / 1 minor

Summary. The paper computes the Hartree shift and pairing gap at T=0 for a two-component Fermi gas on the BCS side of the crossover using a momentum-dependent low-momentum interaction that matches s-wave phase shifts of a contact interaction up to a cutoff scaled with k_F. It employs a self-consistent diagrammatic formulation of Bogoliubov many-body perturbation theory to third order in the Nambu-Gor'kov formalism. Results show good convergence and agreement with Gor'kov-Melik-Barkhudarov gap corrections and Galitskii Hartree shift in weak coupling; near unitarity convergence is poorer but agreement with experiment and QMC remains reasonable. Perspectives for neutron-matter applications are noted.

Significance. If the central results hold, the work demonstrates a controlled perturbative framework for incorporating low-momentum interactions into self-consistent diagrammatic calculations of the BCS-BEC crossover, recovering established weak-coupling benchmarks while providing a route to systematic higher-order corrections. The explicit discussion of applications to neutron matter is a strength.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the momentum-dependent interaction is defined to reproduce contact phase shifts only up to a cutoff scaled with the Fermi momentum. This choice renders the effective interaction explicitly density-dependent (k_F ~ n^{1/3}), unlike the physical contact interaction with fixed scattering length a. The resulting density dependence is load-bearing for the unitary-regime claims, as it may alter the self-consistent Nambu-Gor'kov self-energy and extracted gap without being a controlled approximation to the fixed-a system.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: poorer convergence of the Nambu-Gor'kov self-energy is reported near unitarity, yet the manuscript still asserts 'reasonable agreement' with QMC and experiment. Without quantitative convergence diagnostics (e.g., cutoff variation, order-by-order changes, or error estimates) in the results section, the robustness of the unitary-regime comparison cannot be assessed.
minor comments (1)
  1. Notation for the self-consistent equations and the precise definition of the cutoff scaling should be clarified with an explicit equation in the methods section.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading of our manuscript and the constructive comments. We respond to each major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the momentum-dependent interaction is defined to reproduce contact phase shifts only up to a cutoff scaled with the Fermi momentum. This choice renders the effective interaction explicitly density-dependent (k_F ~ n^{1/3}), unlike the physical contact interaction with fixed scattering length a. The resulting density dependence is load-bearing for the unitary-regime claims, as it may alter the self-consistent Nambu-Gor'kov self-energy and extracted gap without being a controlled approximation to the fixed-a system.

    Authors: The density dependence arising from scaling the cutoff with k_F is a deliberate and standard feature of low-momentum interaction approaches (as used in nuclear physics contexts, including the neutron-matter applications noted in the manuscript). It ensures the cutoff remains above the relevant Fermi-sea momenta at each density, improving perturbative convergence. The model is not presented as an exact reproduction of a fixed-a contact interaction at all densities but as an effective description matching s-wave phase shifts up to the cutoff. The unitary regime is accessed by taking the scattering length to infinity while retaining the cutoff scaling. We will add a clarifying sentence to the abstract noting this density dependence by construction. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: poorer convergence of the Nambu-Gor'kov self-energy is reported near unitarity, yet the manuscript still asserts 'reasonable agreement' with QMC and experiment. Without quantitative convergence diagnostics (e.g., cutoff variation, order-by-order changes, or error estimates) in the results section, the robustness of the unitary-regime comparison cannot be assessed.

    Authors: The referee correctly identifies that the current text relies on qualitative statements about convergence near unitarity. We will revise the results section to include quantitative diagnostics: specifically, plots or tables showing the variation of the gap and Hartree shift with the cutoff prefactor (Lambda = c k_F) and the changes between second- and third-order results at unitarity. These will support the assessment of 'reasonable agreement' with QMC and experiment. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation uses independent perturbation theory matched to external benchmarks

full rationale

The paper applies standard diagrammatic Bogoliubov many-body perturbation theory (augmented by self-consistency) to a low-momentum interaction chosen to reproduce contact-interaction phase shifts up to a scaled cutoff. In the weak-coupling limit the computed Hartree shift and gap are shown to recover the independent Galitskii and Gor'kov-Melik-Barkhudarov results; near unitarity they are compared to external QMC and experimental data. No equation reduces by construction to a fitted parameter, self-citation, or input ansatz, and no uniqueness theorem or prior self-work is invoked to force the outcome.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Central claim rests on applicability of low-momentum effective interaction and third-order diagrammatic perturbation theory; abstract-only review prevents exhaustive ledger.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Bogoliubov many-body perturbation theory applies to the zero-temperature BCS-side Fermi gas
    Invoked in the diagrammatic formulation with self-consistency

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5704 in / 1172 out tokens · 22708 ms · 2026-05-25T07:31:41.863345+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

48 extracted references · 48 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    (b) the first-order gap ∆ (1)

    We need a function that computes for givenk F and ∆: (a) the effective chemical potentialµ ∗ and the first-order mean fieldU (1) k such that k3 F 3π2 = Z d3k (2π)3 v2 k .(39) where theuandvfactors are computed with the given ∆ and not with ∆ (1). (b) the first-order gap ∆ (1). (c) the second-order mean fieldU (2) and gap ∆(2). (d) the third-order gap ∆(3)...

    work page

  2. [2]

    Find the self-consistent value of ∆ by solving the non-linear equation ∆ = ∆(1) + ∆(2) + ∆(3) .(40)

    work page

  3. [3]

    Illustration of the self-consistent procedure Let us illustrate the procedure defined by Eq

    ComputeU (3) [diagrams (3.1)-(3.4)] to obtain the mean field shift U=U (1) +U (2) +U (3) .(41) B. Illustration of the self-consistent procedure Let us illustrate the procedure defined by Eq. (40) in a specific case. We choose (k Fa)−1 =−2, corresponding to a relatively weak coupling where one expects pertur- bation theory to converge. The HFB solution cor...

    work page

  4. [4]

    1(a), corresponding to a factorG (0) αβ(k, ω)

    As usual with Fermions, we draw the matrix Green’s function as a line with an arrow, see Fig. 1(a), corresponding to a factorG (0) αβ(k, ω)

    work page

  5. [5]

    If one of the in- and outgoing Fermion lines has Nambu index 1, the other line must have Nambu index 2 (and vice versa), as shown in Fig

    The interaction vertices generated by the two-body interaction term ˆHint are diagonal in the Nambu indices. If one of the in- and outgoing Fermion lines has Nambu index 1, the other line must have Nambu index 2 (and vice versa), as shown in Fig. 1(b). Each interaction is associated with a factor of−V k+p′ 2 , k′+p 2 , where the negative sign comes from Eq. (8)

    work page

  6. [6]

    1(c), and they are associated with a factor of−H mf,αβ(k)

    The interaction vertices generated by the one-body interaction term− ˆHmf are represented by a cross as shown in Fig. 1(c), and they are associated with a factor of−H mf,αβ(k)

    work page

  7. [7]

    Each vertex conserves energy and momentum, the remainingN i unconstrained energies and momenta are integrated over with a factori Ni /(2π)4Ni, un- constrained Nambu indices are summed over, and each closed Fermion loop gives rise to a factor (−1). 13

    work page

  8. [8]

    particle- particle like

    If a loop contains only one propagatorG (0) 11 or G(0) 22 , it is necessary to multiply it by a factore iηω ore −iηω, respectively (withη→0 +) [21], such that the result of the integration overωis±2πiv 2 k, whereas forG (0) 12 andG (0) 21 the result of theωinte- gration is−2πiu kvk, independently of such a factor. Appendix B: Symmetry properties of the se...

    work page

  9. [9]

    − B1B2B3A4A5 E2345(ω−E − 145) − A1B2B3A4A5 E2345(ω+E −

    work page

  10. [10]

    − A1A2A3B4B5 E2345(ω+E − 145) + B1A2A3A4A5 (ω−E − 123)(ω−E − 145) − A1B2B3B4B5 (ω+E − 123)(ω+E −

    work page

  11. [11]

    particle-hole like

    (C10) The five momenta are not independent but they have to satisfyp+k 1 =k 2 +k 3 =k 4 +k 5, i.e., we can choose, e.g.,k 1,k 2, andk 4 as integration variables. Denoting the vertices in each diagram (3.2i) byV (3.2i) A ,V (3.2i) B , and V (3.2i) C , we can write the contribution of diagram (3.2i) as Σ(3.2i) αβ (ω) = Z d3k1 (2π)3 Z d3k2 (2π)3 Z d3k4 (2π)3...

    work page

  12. [12]

    + A1A2B3B4A5 E2345(ω−E − 145) + B1A2B3B4A5 E2345(ω+E −

    work page

  13. [13]

    + B1B2A3A4B5 E2345(ω+E − 145) − A1B2A3B4A5 (ω−E − 123)(ω−E − 145) + B1A2B3A4B5 (ω+E − 123)(ω+E −

    work page

  14. [14]

    (C10), but theAandB(i.e.,uandv) factors in the numerators appear in different combinations

    (C17) We see the same energy denominators as in Eq. (C10), but theAandB(i.e.,uandv) factors in the numerators appear in different combinations. Again, we can choose three out of the five momentak 1 . . .k5 as integration variables, the two remaining momenta are then deter- mined by the relationshipsp−k 1 =k 3 −k 2 =k 5 −k 4. Analogously to Eq. (C11), we w...

    work page

  15. [15]

    M. J. H. Ku, A. T. Sommer, L. W. Cheuk, and M. W. Zwierlein, Revealing the Superfluid Lambda Transition in the Universal Thermodynamics of a Unitary Fermi Gas, Science335, 563 (2012)

    work page 2012

  16. [16]

    Horikoshi, M

    M. Horikoshi, M. Koashi, H. Tajima, Y. Ohashi, and M. Kuwata-Gonokami, Ground-State Thermodynamic Quantities of Homogeneous Spin-1/2 Fermions from the BCS Region to the Unitarity Limit, Phys. Rev. X7, 041004 (2017)

    work page 2017

  17. [17]

    Calvanese Strinati, P

    G. Calvanese Strinati, P. Pieri, G. R¨ opke, P. Schuck, and M. Urban, The BCS-BEC crossover: From ultra- cold Fermi gases to nuclear systems, Phys. Rep.738, 1 (2018)

    work page 2018

  18. [18]

    G. A. Baker, Neutron matter model, Phys. Rev. C60, 054311 (1999)

    work page 1999

  19. [19]

    Stewart, J

    J. Stewart, J. Gaebler, and D. Jin, Using photoemission spectroscopy to probe a strongly interacting Fermi gas, Nature454, 744 (2008)

    work page 2008

  20. [20]

    L. P. Gor’kov and T. K. Melik-Barkhudarov, Contribu- tion to the theory of superfluidity in an imperfect Fermi gas, Zh. Exp. Teor. Fiz.40, 1452 (1961)

    work page 1961

  21. [21]

    Gezerlis and J

    A. Gezerlis and J. Carlson, Strongly paired fermions: Cold atoms and neutron matter, Phys. Rev. C77, 032801 (2008)

    work page 2008

  22. [22]

    H. Biss, L. Sobirey, N. Luick, M. Bohlen, J. J. Kinnunen, G. M. Bruun, T. Lompe, and H. Moritz, Excitation Spec- trum and Superfluid Gap of an Ultracold Fermi Gas, Phys. Rev. Lett.128, 100401 (2022)

    work page 2022

  23. [23]

    Pisani, P

    L. Pisani, P. Pieri, and G. C. Strinati, Gap equation with pairing correlations beyond the mean-field approximation and its equivalence to a Hugenholtz-Pines condition for fermion pairs, Phys. Rev. B98, 104507 (2018)

    work page 2018

  24. [24]

    Urban and S

    M. Urban and S. Ramanan, Low-momentum interactions for ultracold Fermi gases, Phys. Rev. A103, 063306 (2021)

    work page 2021

  25. [25]

    Ramanan and M

    S. Ramanan and M. Urban, Screening and antiscreening of the pairing interaction in low-density neutron matter, Phys. Rev. C98, 024314 (2018)

    work page 2018

  26. [26]

    Pieri and G

    P. Pieri and G. C. Strinati, Strong-coupling limit in the evolution from BCS superconductivity to Bose-Einstein condensation, Phys. Rev. B61, 15370 (2000)

    work page 2000

  27. [27]

    C. A. R. S´ a de Melo, M. Randeria, and J. R. Engelbrecht, Crossover from BCS to Bose superconductivity: Transi- tion temperature and time-dependent Ginzburg-Landau theory, Phys. Rev. Lett.71, 3202 (1993)

    work page 1993

  28. [28]

    S. K. Bogner, A. Schwenk, R. J. Furnstahl, and A. Nogga, Is nuclear matter perturbative with low-momentum in- teractions?, Nucl. Phys. A763, 59 (2005)

    work page 2005

  29. [29]

    Schwenk, B

    A. Schwenk, B. Friman, and G. E. Brown, Renormal- ization group approach to neutron matter: quasiparticle interactions, superfluid gaps and the equation of state, Nucl. Phys. A713, 191 (2003)

    work page 2003

  30. [30]

    Taillat and H

    P.-L. Taillat and H. Kurkjian, A low-energy effec- tive Hamiltonian for Landau quasiparticles (2025), arXiv:2511.15938 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

    work page arXiv 2025

  31. [31]

    Urban and S

    M. Urban and S. Ramanan, Neutron pairing with medium polarization beyond the Landau approximation, Phys. Rev. C101, 035803 (2020)

    work page 2020

  32. [32]

    Palaniappan, S

    V. Palaniappan, S. Ramanan, and M. Urban, Equation of state of superfluid neutron matter with low-momentum interactions, Phys. Rev. C107, 025804 (2023)

    work page 2023

  33. [33]

    Palaniappan, S

    V. Palaniappan, S. Ramanan, and M. Urban, Induced three-neutron interactions with low cutoffs for dilute neu- tron matter, Phys. Rev. C111, 035803 (2025)

    work page 2025

  34. [34]

    Tabakin, Inverse Scattering Problem for Separable Po- tentials, Phys

    F. Tabakin, Inverse Scattering Problem for Separable Po- tentials, Phys. Rev.177, 1443 (1969)

    work page 1969

  35. [35]

    J. R. Schrieffer,Theory of Superconductivity(W. A. Ben- jamin, New York, 1964)

    work page 1964

  36. [36]

    Som` a, T

    V. Som` a, T. Duguet, and C. Barbieri, Ab initio self-consistent Gorkov-Green’s function calculations of semimagic nuclei: Formalism at second order with a two- nucleon interaction, Phys. Rev. C84, 064317 (2011)

    work page 2011

  37. [37]

    Perali, P

    A. Perali, P. Pieri, G. C. Strinati, and C. Castellani, Pseudogap and spectral function from superconducting fluctuations to the bosonic limit, Phys. Rev. B66, 024510 (2002)

    work page 2002

  38. [38]

    Schirotzek, Y.-i

    A. Schirotzek, Y.-i. Shin, C. H. Schunck, and W. Ketterle, Determination of the Superfluid Gap in Atomic Fermi Gases by Quasiparticle Spectroscopy, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 140403 (2008)

    work page 2008

  39. [39]

    Pieri, L

    P. Pieri, L. Pisani, and G. C. Strinati, BCS-BEC crossover at finite temperature in the broken-symmetry phase, Phys. Rev. B70, 094508 (2004)

    work page 2004

  40. [40]

    Haussmann, W

    R. Haussmann, W. Rantner, S. Cerrito, and W. Zwerger, Thermodynamics of the BCS-BEC crossover, Phys. Rev. A75, 023610 (2007)

    work page 2007

  41. [41]

    S. K. Bogner, R. J. Furnstahl, and A. Schwenk, From low-momentum interactions to nuclear structure, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.65, 94 (2010)

    work page 2010

  42. [42]

    Ramanan and M

    S. Ramanan and M. Urban, BEC-BCS Crossover in Neu- tron Matter with Renormalization Group based Effective Interactions, Phys. Rev. C88, 054315 (2013)

    work page 2013

  43. [43]

    Ramanan and M

    S. Ramanan and M. Urban, Pairing in pure neutron mat- ter, Eur. Phys. J. ST230, 567 (2021)

    work page 2021

  44. [44]

    Bulgac, J

    A. Bulgac, J. E. Drut, and P. Magierski, Quantum Monte Carlo simulations of the BCS-BEC crossover at finite temperature, Phys. Rev. A78, 023625 (2008)

    work page 2008

  45. [45]

    V. M. Galitskii, The energy spectrum of a non-ideal Fermi gas, Sov. Phys. JETP34, 104 (1958)

    work page 1958

  46. [46]

    A. L. Fetter and J. D. Walecka,Quantum Theory of Many-Particle Systems(McGraw-Hill, New York, 1971)

    work page 1971

  47. [47]

    Wellenhofer, C

    C. Wellenhofer, C. Drischler, and A. Schwenk, Effective field theory for dilute Fermi systems at fourth order, Phys. Rev. C104, 014003 (2021)

    work page 2021

  48. [48]

    Tinkham,Introduction to superconductivity (McGraw-Hill, 1975)

    M. Tinkham,Introduction to superconductivity (McGraw-Hill, 1975)

    work page 1975