Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 215 references

Fluctuations and pairing in Fe-based superconductors: Light scattering experiments

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Raman scattering from iron pnictides reveals sharp in-gap collective modes whose symmetry, temperature dependence, and doping dependence match the hierarchy of pairing channels predicted for spin-fluctuation-mediated $s_\pm$…

desk verdict A thorough, honest review of Raman work in iron-based superconductors whose central pairing conclusion depends on a mode assignment the authors concede is not settled. read the letter →

arxiv 1909.00173 v1 pith:74ZBHF2H submitted 2019-08-31 cond-mat.supr-con

N Lazarevic , R Hackl This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.supr-con
keywords iron-basedsuperconductorsRamanscatteringBardasis-Schrieffermodesspin-fluctuationpairings±collectivepnictideschannels
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This review argues that Raman light scattering from iron pnictides can see the pairing interaction itself, not just the size of the superconducting gap. In Ba1-xKxFe2As2 sharp, nearly resolution-limited lines appear below the pair-breaking peak in the B1g channel once the material enters the superconducting state, and the review reads these as Bardasis-Schrieffer exciton modes: bound states that form inside the gap when a sub-leading pairing channel competes with the dominant one. Their symmetry, BCS-like temperature dependence, and evolution with potassium doping match many-body calculations (functional renormalization group and random-phase approximation) that predict an $s_\pm$ ground state followed by two sub-leading $d_{x^2-y^2}$ channels. On this reading, Raman spectroscopy provides a direct measure of competing pairing tendencies, and the doping dependence of the sub-leading channels makes a strong case that spin fluctuations contribute partially or predominantly to Cooper pairing in the pnictides.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the Bardasis-Schrieffer in-gap mode, an exciton-like bound pair of quasiparticles inside the superconducting gap that appears when a sub-leading attractive pairing channel coexists with the dominant one; first proposed for superconductors in 1961 and adapted to light scattering through the final-state-interaction formula of Eq. (10). That formula describes how the bare pair-breaking continuum loses spectral weight into sharp poles at energies below $2\Delta_{\max}$, with binding energy set by the ratio of the sub-leading coupling $\lambda_\alpha$ to the ground-state coupling $\lambda_1$ through $\sqrt{E_{\mathrm{BS}}/2\Delta_{\max}} \approx \lambda_\alpha/\lambda_1$. The B1g Raman vertex projects onto $d_{x^2-y^2}$ components of the pairing potential, so this channel is the one that exposes the sub-leading $d_{x^2-y^2}$ instabilities; the doping dependence of the mode energies then traces how the hierarchy of pairing channels changes as the Fermi surface evolves.

What would settle it

A decisive test would be to measure the sharp in-gap mode near 140 cm-1 in optimally doped Ba1-xKxFe2As2 while systematically adding impurities or applying a magnetic field: a Bardasis-Schrieffer mode must track the maximum gap and the sub-leading coupling strength, whereas a Leggett mode would sit near the smaller gap and a pair-breaking remnant would follow the quasiparticle scattering rate; observation of either of the latter scalings would falsify the pairing-hierarchy claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the sharp, nearly resolution-limited lines observed below the superconducting gap edge in the B1g Raman spectra of Ba1-xKxFe2As2 are Bardasis-Schrieffer exciton modes: collective two-particle bound states inside the gap that exist because a sub-leading pairing channel with $d_{x^2-y^2}$ symmetry competes with the dominant $s_\pm$ ground state. The modes scale with doping as $1-x$, follow a BCS-like temperature dependence tied to the maximum gap, and drain spectral weight from the pair-breaking continuum, all of which the review argues are properties peculiar to Bardasis-Schrieffer modes. Fits using the final-state-interaction response function yield sub-leading coupling ratios that agree semi-quantitatively with functional renormalization-group and random-phase-approximation calculations, which give the same hierarchy: an $s_\pm$ ground state plus two $d_{x^2-y^2}$ instabilities of different order. The review therefore concludes that the doping dependence of the sub-leading channels in Ba1-xKxFe2As2, and presumably the results in CaKFe4As4 as well, make a strong case for spin fluctuations contributing partially or predominantly to the Cooper pairing in the pnictides.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the sharp lines inside the superconducting gap of Ba1-xKxFe2As2 are Bardasis-Schrieffer excitons (bound states produced by a competing pairing channel) and not some other collective mode or a leftover pair-breaking peak; the review acknowledges this interpretation is not universally accepted.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Raman spectra become a quantitative probe of the channel structure of the pairing potential in multiband superconductors, not just of the gap magnitude.
  • The predicted hierarchy (one $s_\pm$ ground state and two $d_{x^2-y^2}$ sub-leading channels) means the superconducting state in optimally doped Ba1-xKxFe2As2 sits close to competing instabilities, so doping, pressure, or disorder should shift the balance and change the in-gap mode spectrum.
  • For CaKFe4As4, the same phenomenology predicts a weak low-energy Bardasis-Schrieffer mode plus a pair-breaking remnant near 160 cm-1, which is the interpretation proposed for the observed B1g substructures.
  • The absence of sharp in-gap modes in Ba(Fe1-xCox)2As2 follows naturally from the strong gap anisotropy of that family, which overdamps sub-leading-channel modes; this makes the potassium-doped family the clean testing ground for pairing-channel spectroscopy.
  • Agreement with spin-fluctuation-based calculations supports spin-fluctuation-mediated pairing but does not by itself prove the sign change of the $s_\pm$ gap; the review points to tunneling and impurity experiments to settle the sign.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Beyond the paper: the same final-state-interaction analysis could be applied to other multiband superconductors (for instance MgB2 or FeSe under pressure) as a generic way to discover sub-leading pairing channels that ARPES and tunneling cannot resolve.
  • Beyond the paper: a clean Raman study across the Lifshitz transition in overdoped Ba1-xKxFe2As2 would discriminate Bardasis-Schrieffer from pair-breaking assignments, because the mode energy should track the sub-leading coupling and weaken as the relevant Fermi-surface pocket disappears.
  • Beyond the paper: if the normal-state B1g fluctuations are indeed spin fluctuations, the same datasets link the nematic susceptibility to a magnetic quantum critical point; combined Raman and elastic measurements under pressure could test that connection directly.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. This is a review article on Raman (inelastic light scattering) studies of iron-based superconductors. It covers the theoretical framework for electronic Raman scattering in metals and superconductors, including the Tsuneto-Maki response, collision-limited regime, selection rules, and possible collective modes (Bardasis-Schrieffer (BS) excitons, Leggett modes, quadrupolar fluctuation modes). It reviews experimental results on spin-density-wave order, nematic fluctuations above the structural transition, and superconducting gap spectroscopy in several families (122 pnictides, 111, 11 chalcogenides, and CaKFe4As4). The central original claim is that the sharp in-gap B1g modes observed in Ba1-xKxFe2As2 are BS excitons arising from sub-leading d_x2-y2 pairing channels, and that the doping dependence of these modes, combined with fRG/RPA calculations, supports spin-fluctuation-mediated s± pairing. The paper also discusses the spin-versus-charge origin of low-energy fluctuations and the two-magnon interpretation of the response in FeSe.

Significance. If the BS-mode interpretation is correct, Raman scattering would provide a rare direct spectroscopic probe of sub-leading pairing channels, strengthening the case for spin-fluctuation-mediated s± superconductivity in the pnictides. The review is valuable as a comprehensive, well-referenced survey: Table 2 compiles gap determinations from many techniques, and the text is unusually transparent about unresolved controversies, explicitly flagging the spin/charge ambiguity in the fluctuation response and the contested assignment of the in-gap modes. The authors state key limitations in the text, including that the experimental distinction between particle-particle and particle-hole collective modes is difficult or impossible, and that the Hubbard-Holstein model would produce Raman spectra indistinguishable from the BS interpretation if its sub-leading channels had d_x2-y2 symmetry. These caveats, however, are not carried through to the strength of the final conclusion in Section 7, which currently overstates the degree to which the data uniquely support spin-fluctuation pairing.

major comments (4)
  1. [§6.3, §7] The central conclusion of Section 7 that the doping dependence of the sub-leading channels in BKFA and “presumably the results in CKFA” makes a strong case for spin-fluctuation pairing is built on the assumption that the sharp B1g in-gap modes are Bardasis-Schrieffer (BS) excitons. The authors themselves flag the fragility: Section 6.3 states “this interpretation is not entirely accepted,” and Section 6.2 states that “from an experimental point of view a distinction is difficult or impossible” between particle-particle and particle-hole bound states. Because Eq. (10) and the approximate relation √(E_BS/2Δmax) ≈ λ_d/λ_s in Section 6.2(c) are specific to BS excitons arising from a sub-leading pairing channel, the extracted λ_d/λ_s values shown in Figure 17 and the fRG/RPA comparison lose their quantitative meaning if the modes are Leggett modes, quadrupolar fluctuation modes, or pair-breaking remnants. The concluding claim should be reformulated as explicitly conditional on the BS assignment, with the unresolved degeneracy presented as a central open question rather than a minor qualification.
  2. [§6.4] The manuscript admits in Section 6.4 that if the sub-leading interactions in the Hubbard-Holstein model were identified to have d_x2-y2 symmetry, “the resulting Raman spectra would be indistinguishable from those observed in BKFA and CKFA.” This admission directly weakens the subsequent claim that the fRG/RPA comparison supports spin-fluctuation pairing, because it shows that the Raman data do not discriminate between the s± spin-fluctuation scenario and an s++ orbital/electron-phonon scenario once sub-leading channels are included. The authors should connect this caveat explicitly to the Section 7 conclusion and state which independent experimental observations (e.g., impurity response, magnetic field dependence, or pressure experiments) could break the degeneracy.
  3. [§6.3, Eq. (10), Fig. 17] The quantitative extraction of λ_d/λ_s in Figure 17 relies on identifying the in-gap modes as BS modes and applying Eq. (10). The text notes that an explicit calculation for the stronger mode “acquired too much spectral weight for the coupling strength λ_d derived from the energy position [see Eq. (10)]” and that two sub-leading channels (α = 2, 3) had to be invoked to reconcile the spectra. This indicates that the single-channel relation (10) is not sufficient and that the quoted coupling ratios inherit a substantial model dependence. The authors should provide an error budget for λ_d/λ_s and discuss how the fRG/RPA comparison changes if only one of the two modes is a BS mode or if the mode assignment is revised.
  4. [§6.2, §7] The temperature-dependence argument used to support the BS-mode assignment is not unique. The review argues that BS modes scale as Δmax(T) while pair-breaking maxima also depend on the quasiparticle relaxation rate Γ_qp, but the same section describes a quadrupolar fluctuation mode in NaFe1-xCoxAs that becomes undamped inside the superconducting gap and whose energy does not follow Tc. Any collective mode protected from quasiparticle decay can inherit a BCS-like temperature dependence. Thus the observed BCS-like scaling of the BKFA modes and their 1−x doping dependence are consistent with BS modes but not diagnostic of them. The summary in Section 7 should acknowledge that the temperature and doping criteria do not eliminate particle-hole or Leggett-mode alternatives.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Eq. (1)] “Thompson electron radius” should be “Thomson electron radius.”
  2. [§4.9.1] “resepectively” should be “respectively” in the sentence describing the scattering geometries and sensitivity projections.
  3. [Fig. 4 caption] The caption contains an embedded passage beginning “FIG. 3: (color online) ...”, apparently copied from the source of Ref. [92]; the caption should be cleaned up so it is self-contained.
  4. [Fig. 11 caption (Sec. 5.3)] The caption contains a garbled, likely OCR-corrupted paragraph near the end (starting “n r se R s, he i tim Γ0 ...”); the authors should replace the figure and caption with a clean version.
  5. [§4.5] “week” should be “weak” in “if the momentum dependence is week.”
  6. [§7] “We focused on the the spin and charge degrees of freedom” contains a doubled article; it should read “the spin and charge degrees of freedom.”

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No circular derivation: the BS-mode interpretation is explicitly assumed, fRG/RPA predictions are external, and the review's central claim is conditional rather than constructed from its inputs.

full rationale

This is a review, not a first-principles derivation, and its central claim is conditional. The in-gap modes in BKFA are assigned to Bardasis-Schrieffer excitons on the basis of observable criteria (resolution-limited lines, BCS-like temperature dependence following the gap, spectral-weight transfer from the pair-breaking peak, and a 1−x doping trend). Section 6.3 explicitly states, “In what follows we assume that the modes observed below the maximal gap in BKFA are excitonic in origin [129]. This interpretation is not entirely accepted,” and Section 6.2 concedes that “From an experimental point of view a distinction is difficult or impossible” between particle-particle and particle-hole bound states. The load-bearing premise is therefore a transparently declared hypothesis, not an input disguised as a derived result. The comparison with fRG/RPA in Section 6.4 and Fig. 17 is not a fit to the Raman mode positions: the hierarchy with an s± ground state and two sub-leading dx2−y2 channels is computed from microscopic models, and the extracted gap parameters are cross-checked against ARPES, specific-heat, tunneling, and neutron data compiled in Table 2. The review leans heavily on Refs. [40,44,45], which share authorship with R. Hackl, and this gives the presentation a self-referential flavor; however, those cited calculations are external to this review, are independently falsifiable, and are not shown to reduce the conclusion to the fitted inputs. No equation in the paper is equal to its own input by construction; the main caveat is underdetermination, not circularity. Score 2 reflects the minor self-citation burden, not a circular derivation.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

This is a review, so the ledger records the assumptions and fitted quantities behind the review's interpretive conclusion rather than new parameters introduced by the paper. The fitted coupling ratios and gap values come from prior work by the same group (Refs. [40,45]), and the fRG/RPA comparison is the main external theoretical input. No new entities are postulated.

free parameters (2)
  • Sub-leading coupling ratio λ_d/λ_s = approximately 0.3 to 0.6 depending on doping (Fig. 17)
    Derived from the Bardasis-Schrieffer mode energies in BKFA using the phenomenological expression Eq. (10) in Ref. [45]; these fitted ratios are then compared with fRG/RPA predictions.
  • Superconducting gap magnitudes Δ_i = multiple values, e.g., 2Δ = 8.4 to 32.0 meV for BKFA x=0.4 (Table 2)
    Gap values are extracted by fitting the Raman spectra with the Tsuneto-Maki and phenomenology models; these fitted numbers underpin all comparisons of gap ratios with ARPES and specific heat.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption The Tsuneto-Maki response function (Eq. 7) describes the lowest-order Raman response of a superconductor at q=0.
    Used throughout Section 6.1 for extracting gap values; the paper notes lowest-order weak-coupling theory is insufficient for full spectra, so this is an approximation, not a proven exact description.
  • domain assumption Raman vertices in the effective-mass approximation (Eqs. 12-14) correctly project onto the relevant bands in the 1 Fe unit cell.
    Underlies all symmetry assignments of spectral features to electron and hole pockets; the paper uses this to interpret B1g and A1g spectra.
  • domain assumption The fRG and RPA hierarchies of pairing channels, as summarized in Section 6.4, provide a reliable description of the pairing tendencies in iron pnictides.
    The conclusion about competing sub-leading d-wave channels depends on these microscopic calculations; the paper notes that the Hubbard-Holstein model predicts a different s++ ground state, so the choice of theoretical framework is load-bearing.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Fluctuations and pairing in Fe-based superconductors: Light scattering experiments." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/74ZBHF2H

@misc{pith2026190900173,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Fluctuations and pairing in Fe-based superconductors: Light scattering experiments},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/74ZBHF2H}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1909.00173}
}
read the original abstract

Inelastic scattering of visible light (Raman effect) offers a window into properties of correlated metals such as spin, electron and lattice dynamics as well as their mutual interactions. In this review we focus on electronic and spin excitations in Fe-based pnictides and chalcogenides in particular, but not exclusively superconductors. After a general introduction to the basic theory including the selection rules for the various scattering processes we provide an overview over the major results. In the superconducting state below the transition temperature Tc the pair-breaking effect can be observed, and the energy gap can be derived. The energies can be associated with the gaps and their anisotropy on the electron and hole bands. In spite of the similarities of the overall band structures the results are strongly dependent on the family and may even change qualitatively within one family. In some of the compounds strong collective modes appear below Tc. In Ba1-xKxFe2As2, which has the most isotropic gap of all Fe-based superconductors, there are indications that these modes are exciton-like states appearing in the presence of a hierarchy of pairing tendencies. The strong in-gap modes observed in Co-doped NaFeAs are interpreted in terms of quadrupolar orbital excitations which become undamped in the superconducting state. The doping dependence of the scattering intensity in Ba(Fe1-xCox)2As2 is associated with a nematic resonance above a quantum critical point and interpreted in terms of a critical enhancement at the maximal Tc. In the normal state the response from particle-hole excitations reflects the resistivity. In addition, there are contributions from presumably critical fluctuations in the energy range of kBT which can be compared to the elastic properties. Currently it is not settled whether the fluctuations observed by light scattering are related to spin or charge.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1909.00173 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Crystal structure and phase diagram. (a) Crystal structure of BaFe2As2. Thin grey lines indicate the edges of the unit cell (2 Fe per layer). Grey connecting lines between Fe and As illustrate covalent Fe-As bonds. (b) Phase diagram. The spin density wave (SDW) and the superconducting (SC) ranges are indicated in grey and blue, respectively. The dashed pink and grey line indicates a simultaneous structural transitio… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Schematic representation of a Raman experiment. The polarized monochromatic incident photons hit the sample at a large angle of incidence. The scattered photons are collected along the surface normal. Before entering the spectrometer the scattered photons pass an analyzer. Inset: Side view of a Raman pressure cell. The laser beam (LB) enters from the right, the scattered light (SL) is collected along the normal of t… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Feynman diagrams for (non-resonant) light scattering. (a) Raman response of particle-hole excitations in the presence of interactions and (b) scattering processes involving one and two fluctuations. Wavy lines represent incident and scattered photons whereas solid lines are electronic propagators. The bosonic fluctuation propagators are represented by dashed lines. The bare and renormalized Raman vertices γ and, res… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (14 more)
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: (color online) Top panels: colour plot of the Raman response in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Scattering geometry and symmetries for the ab plane of an FeBCs. Incoming and scattered photons are indicated as blue and green arrows. In backscattering configuration, the arrows corresponding to R and L polarization of the scattered light should be interchanged. The …
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Symmetry properties and momentum dependences of the Raman vertices γµ. Shown are the first and second order vertices for polarization orientations transforming as µ = A1g, B1g and B2g for the D4h space group. The zeroth order A1g vertex is just a constant and is entire…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: (Color online) Effect of SDW formation on the Raman response of BFA. (a) High- and low-temperature Raman response in x 0y 0 configuration. The spectra show two spectral features at and ∆0 SDW. (b) If one electron band and two hole bands anti-cross ∆SDW is much larger t…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: (Color online) Effect of SDW order in the Raman spectra of CaFe2As2 and EuFe2As2. The unit cell on the right to which the polarizations in the panels refer is added to the original figure for clarity. (a1)-(a4) Spectra CaFe2As2 measured with 647 nm laser excitation in …
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: (Color online) (a) Low-energy Raman spectra of BaFe2As2 at temperatures as indicated. The pictograms displaying the unit cell and the polarizations are added to the original figure for clarity. The two central panels (xx) and (ab [≡ x 0y 0 ] show contributions from flu…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: (Color online) Light scattering in FeSe. (a)-(c) Symmetry-dependent Raman spectra of FeSe above Ts=87 K using photons at 2.33 eV. The sharp peaks superimposed on the electronic continuum are due to Raman active optical phonons. The insets display the Raman form factor…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: (Color online) Polarization-resolved Raman results for Ba(Fe0.975Co0.025)2As2. (a)(c) Response Rχ00(Ω, T) (raw data after division by the BoseEinstein factor) at temperatures as indicated. (a) B1g spectra above and (b) below TS and (c) A1g symmetry. The initial slopes…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: (Color online) Symmetry-resolved Raman response of Ba(Fe1−xCox)2As2 (x = 0.061) for in-plane light polarizations. (a) Here, the 2 Fe unit cell was used for the symmetry assignment implying that the out-of-phase Fe phonon at 214 cm−1 is observed in the proper B1g symme…
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: (Color online). Raman susceptibilities χ 00 XX(ω)-χ 00 xy(ω) and χ 00 XY (ω) in the superconducting state for excitation in the blue (476 nm). From [47]. The polarizations are indicated on the right by NL and RH. (a) χ 00 XX(ω)-χ 00 xy(ω) (top row) and χ 00 XY (ω) (bo…
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: (Color online) Doping dependence of the Raman spectra of Ba(Fe1−xCox)2As2. (a) Evolution of the B1g Raman conductivity χ 00/ω across Tc for x = 0.065. (b) B1g Raman response well below (blue) and right above Tc (black) as a function of Co doping as indicated. (c) Inte…
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: (Color online) Temperature dependence of the Raman spectra of Ba0.6K0.4Fe2As2 in B1g symmetry. (a) The spectra measured above 8 K are consecutively shifted up by 0.2 units. The pair-breaking features (open symbols) and the collective mode (full circles) depend differe…
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: B1g Raman spectra of BKFA for doping levels as indicated. (a)-(d) Raw data (after dividing by the Bose￾Einsten factor) slightly above (red) and well below Tc (blue). (e) Difference spectra ∆Rχ00(Ω) = Rχ00(Ω, T ≈ 8 K) − Rχ00(Ω, T & Tc). Here all temperature independent…
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Doping dependence of the pairing strength in BKFA. (a) The positions of the pair-breaking maxima scale approximately as Tc whereas the energies of the BS modes decrease monotonously with increasing doping in the range 0.35 < x0.48 indicating increasing coupling in the…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

215 extracted references · 80 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Kamihara Y, Hiramatsu H, Hirano M, Kawamura R, Yanagi H, Kamiya T and Hosono H 2006 J. Am. Chem. Soc.. 128 10012

    2006

  2. [2]

    Kamihara Y, Watanabe T, Hirano M and Hosono H 2008 J. Am. Chem. Soc. 130 3296

    2008

  3. [3]

    Paglione J and Greene R L 2010 Nature Phys. 6 645

    2010

  4. [4]

    Johnston D C 2010 Adv. Phys. 59 803

    2010

  5. [5]

    switched on

    for x = 0 .4. Three peaks were observed in B1g symmetry at 50, 120, and 168 cm −1 and at 70, 140, and 172 cm −1 for the first and the second cleave, respectively, of one crystal. Sample-dependent differences at optimal doping were also observed by Kretzschmar and collaborators [44] but the variations were much smaller, in particular the peak energies were n...

  6. [6]

    Superconductivity The identification of the pairing mechanism remains one of the major challenges in all unconventional superconductors. The momentum dependence of the gap magnitude (and phase, if possible) is among the important observables for addressing this question since ∆ k and the pairing potential Vk,k′ are interrelated via the BCS gap equation [16...

  7. [7]

    We focused on the the spin and charge degrees of freedom in this review

    Conclusions Raman scattering in iron pnictides and chalcogenides has provided a host of information on the electronic, magnetic and lattice properties of these systems. We focused on the the spin and charge degrees of freedom in this review. In all cases the spectra consist of a superposition of several types of excitations. To which extent luminescence (...

  8. [8]

    Korshunov M M 2018 Phys. Rev. B 98(10) 104510

    2018

Show all 215 references
  1. [9]

    Mazin I I, Singh D J, Johannes M D and Du M H 2008 Phys. Rev. Lett. 101 057003 (pages 4)

    2008

  2. [10]

    Supercond

    Kordyuk A A, Zabolotnyy V B, Evtushinsky D V, Yaresko A N, B¨ uchner B and Borisenko S V 2013J. Supercond. Nov. Magn. 26 2837–2841 ISSN 1557-1947

    1947

  3. [11]

    Graser S, Maier T, Hirschfeld P and Scalapino D 2009 New J. Phys. 11 025016

    2009

  4. [12]

    Stewart G R 2011 Rev. Mod. Phys. 83(4) 1589–1652

    2011

  5. [13]

    Hirschfeld P J, Korshunov M M and Mazin I I 2011 Rep. Prog. Phys. 74 125508

    2011

  6. [15]

    Massat P, Quan Y, Grasset R, M´ easson M A, Cazayous M, Sacuto A, Karlsson S, Strobel P, Toulemonde P, Yin Z and Gallais Y 2018 Phys. Rev. Lett. 121(7) 077001

    2018

  7. [16]

    Hadjiev V G, Iliev M N, Sasmal K, Sun Y Y and Chu C W 2008 Phys. Rev. B 77 220505 (pages 3)

    2008

  8. [17]

    Litvinchuk A P, Hadjiev V G, Iliev M N, Lv B, Guloy A M and Chu C W 2008 Phys. Rev. B 78 060503

    2008

  9. [18]

    Rahlenbeck M, Sun G L, Sun D L, Lin C T, Keimer B and Ulrich C 2009 Phys. Rev. B 80 064509

    2009

  10. [19]

    Thomale R, Platt C, Hanke W and Bernevig B A 2011 Phys. Rev. Lett. 106(18) 187003

    2011

  11. [20]

    thesis Technische Universit¨ at M¨ unchen

    B¨ ohm T 2017 The case for spin-fluctuation induced pairing in Ba1−xKxFe2As2 Ph.D. thesis Technische Universit¨ at M¨ unchen

    2017

  12. [21]

    Fernandes R M, Chubukov A V and Schmalian J 2014 Nature Phys. 10 97

    2014

  13. [22]

    Zhang A M, Liu K, Xiao J H, He J B, Wang D M, Chen G F, Normand B and Zhang Q M 2012 Phys. Rev. B 85(2) 024518

    2012

  14. [23]

    Rotter M, Tegel M and Johrendt D 2008 Phys. Rev. Lett. 101 107006 (pages 4)

    2008

  15. [24]

    Sefat A S, Jin R, McGuire M A, Sales B C, Singh D J and Mandrus D 2008 Phys. Rev. Lett. 101 117004 (pages 4)

    2008

  16. [25]

    Muschler B, Prestel W, Hackl R, Devereaux T P, Analytis J G, Chu J H and Fisher I R 2009 Phys. Rev. B 80 180510

    2009

  17. [26]

    Um Y J, Park J T, Min B H, Song Y J, Kwon Y S, Keimer B and Le Tacon M 2012 Phys. Rev. B 85(1) 012501

    2012

  18. [27]

    Lazarevi´ c N, Popovi´ c Z V, Hu R and Petrovic C 2011Phys. Rev. B 83 024302

  19. [28]

    Lazarevi´ c N, Abeykoon M, Stephens P W, Lei H, Bozin E S, Petrovic C and Popovi´ c Z V 2012 Phys. Rev. B 86(5) 054503

    2012

  20. [29]

    Phys.: Condens

    Choi K Y, Lemmens P, Eremin I, Zwicknagl G, Berger H, Sun G L, Sun D L and Lin C T 2010J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 22 115802

  21. [30]

    Gallais Y, Fernandes R M, Paul I, Chauvi` ere L, Yang Y X, M´ easson M A, Cazayous M, Sacuto A, Colson D and Forget A 2013 Phys. Rev. Lett. 111(26) 267001

    2013

  22. [31]

    Okazaki K, Sugai S, Niitaka S and Takagi H 2011 Phys. Rev. B 83(3) 035103

    2011

  23. [32]

    Sugai S, Mizuno Y, Watanabe R, Kawaguchi T, Takenaka K, Ikuta H, Kiho K, Nakajima M, Lee C H, Iyo A, Eisaki H and Uchida S 2013 Journal of Superconductivity and Novel Magnetism 26 1179–1183 ISSN 1557-1947

    2013

  24. [33]

    Chauvi` ere L, Gallais Y, Cazayous M, M´ easson M A, Sacuto A, Colson D and Forget A 2011 Phys. Rev. B 84(10) 104508

    2011

  25. [34]

    Sugai S, Mizuno Y, Watanabe R, Kawaguchi T, Takenaka K, Ikuta H, Takayanagi Y, Hayamizu N and Sone Y 2012 J. Phys. Soc. Japan 81 024718

    2012

  26. [35]

    The observed gap appears to be almost constant on the electron pockets, Raman scattering in Fe-based systems 19 Figure 13

    as reproduced in section 4.9. The observed gap appears to be almost constant on the electron pockets, Raman scattering in Fe-based systems 19 Figure 13. (Color online). Raman susceptibilities χ′′ XX (ω)-χ′′ xy(ω) and χ′′ XY (ω) in the superconducting state for excitation in th...

  27. [36]

    Chu J H, Analytis J G, Greve K D, McMahon P L, Islam Z, Yamamoto Y and Fisher I R 2010 Science 329 824

    2010

  28. [37]

    Chauvi` ere L, Gallais Y, Cazayous M, M´ easson M A, Sacuto A, Colson D and Forget A 2010 Phys. Rev. B 82 180521

    2010

  29. [38]

    Raman scattering in Fe-based systems 28 Rev

    Gallais Y, Paul I, Chauvi` ere L and Schmalian J 2016Phys. Raman scattering in Fe-based systems 28 Rev. Lett. 116(1) 017001

  30. [39]

    12 560–563

    Kretzschmar F, B¨ ohm T, Karahasanovi´ c U, Muschler B, Baum A, Jost D, Schmalian J, Caprara S, Grilli M, Di Castro C, Analytis J H, Chu J H, Fisher I R and Hackl R 2016 Nature Phys. 12 560–563

    2016

  31. [40]

    Zhang W L, Richard P, Ding H, Sefat A S, Gillett J, Sebastian S E, Khodas M and Blumberg G 2014 ArXiv e-prints, 1410.6452

    2014 arXiv

  32. [41]

    Zhang W L, Yin Z P, Ignatov A, Bukowski Z, Karpinski J, Sefat A S, Ding H, Richard P and Blumberg G 2016 Phys. Rev. B 93(20) 205106

    2016

  33. [42]

    Mazin I I, Devereaux T P, Analytis J G, Chu J H, Fisher I R, Muschler B and Hackl R 2010 Phys. Rev. B 82 180502

    2010

  34. [43]

    Sugai S, Mizuno Y, Kiho K, Nakajima M, Lee C H, Iyo A, Eisaki H and Uchida S 2010 Phys. Rev. B 82 140504

    2010

  35. [44]

    Since the hole-like Fermi surfaces are more extended in the Brillouin zone, the relevant electronic states may be sampled by all vertices

    as shown in Table 2. Since the hole-like Fermi surfaces are more extended in the Brillouin zone, the relevant electronic states may be sampled by all vertices. Additional support comes from simulations using the effective mass approximation and leading to a semi-quantitative ex...

  36. [45]

    B¨ ohm T, Kemper A F, Moritz B, Kretzschmar F, Muschler B, Eiter H M, Hackl R, Devereaux T P, Scalapino D J and Wen H H 2014 Phys. Rev. X 4(4) 041046

    2014

  37. [46]

    Wu S F, Richard P, Ding H, Wen H H, Tan G, Wang M, Zhang C, Dai P and Blumberg G 2017 Phys. Rev. B 95(8) 085125

    2017

  38. [47]

    B¨ ohm T, Kretzschmar F, Baum A, Rehm M, Jost D, Ahangharnejhad R H, Thomale R, Platt C, Maier T A, Hanke W, Moritz B, Devereaux T P, Scalapino D J, Maiti S, Hirschfeld P J, Adelmann P, Wolf T, Wen H H and Hackl R 2018 npj Quantum Materials 3 48

    2018

  39. [48]

    Kumar P, Muthu D V S, Harnagea L, Wurmehl S, Buchner B and Sood A K 2014 Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 26 305403

    2014

  40. [49]

    Yang Y X, Gallais Y, Rullier-Albenque F, M´ easson M A, Cazayous M, Sacuto A, Shi J, Colson D and Forget A 2014 Phys. Rev. B 89(12) 125130

    2014

  41. [50]

    Wu S F, Zhang W L, Li L, Cao H, Kung H H, Sefat A, Ding H, Richard P and Blumberg G 2017arXiv preprint arXiv:1712.06066

    arXiv

  42. [51]

    Kretzschmar F, Muschler B, B¨ ohm T, Baum A, Hackl R, Wen H H, Tsurkan V, Deisenhofer J and Loidl A 2013 Phys. Rev. Lett. 110(18) 187002

    2013

  43. [52]

    Glamazda A, Lemmens P, Ok J M, Kim J S and Choi K Y 2019 Phys. Rev. B 99(7) 075142

    2019

  44. [53]

    Baum A, Ruiz H N, Lazarevi´ c N, Wang Y, B¨ ohm T, Hosseinian Ahangharnejhad R, Adelmann P, Wolf T, Popovi´ c Z V, Moritz B, Devereaux T P and Hackl R 2019 Commun. Phys. 2 14 ISSN 2399-3650

    2019

  45. [54]

    Thorsmølle V K, Khodas M, Yin Z P, Zhang C, Carr S V, Dai P and Blumberg G 2016Phys. Rev. B 93(5) 054515

  46. [55]

    Jost D, Scholz J R, Zweck U, Meier W R, B¨ ohmer A E, Canfield P C, Lazarevi´ c N and Hackl R 2018Phys. Rev. B 98(2) 020504

  47. [57]

    Okazaki K, Sugai S, Niitaka S and Takagi H 2011 Phys. Rev. B 83 035103

    2011

  48. [58]

    Massat P, Farina D, Paul I, Karlsson S, Strobel P, Toulemonde P, M´ easson M A, Cazayous M, Sacuto A, Kasahara S, Shibauchi T, Matsuda Y and Gallais Y 2016 Proc. Nat. Acad. Sciences 113 9177–9181

    2016

  49. [59]

    Lyons K B, Sulewski P E, Fleury P A, Carter H L, Cooper A S, Espinosa G P, Fisk Z and Cheong S W 1989 Phys. Rev. B 39 9693

    1989

  50. [60]

    Fleury P A and Loudon R 1968 Phys. Rev. 166 514

    1968

  51. [61]

    150 557 ISSN 0038-1098

    Kumar P, Kumar A, Saha S, Muthu D, Prakash J, Patnaik S, Waghmare U, Ganguli A and Sood A 2010Solid State Commun. 150 557 ISSN 0038-1098

  52. [62]

    Zhang W L, Wu S F, Kasahara S, Shibauchi T, Matsuda Y and Blumberg G 2017 ArXiv e-prints

    2017

  53. [63]

    Khodas M, Chubukov A V and Blumberg G 2014 Phys. Rev. B 89(24) 245134

    2014

  54. [64]

    Zhang A M, Xiao J H, Li Y S, He J B, Wang D M, Chen G F, Normand B, Zhang Q M and Xiang T 2012 Phys. Rev. B 85(21) 214508

    2012

  55. [65]

    Fleury P A, Porto S P S, Cheesman L E and Guggenheim H J 1966 Phys. Rev. Lett. 17(2) 84–87

    1966

  56. [66]

    Dierker S B, Klein M V, Webb G W and Fisk Z 1983 Phys. Rev. Lett. 50 853

    1983

  57. [67]

    Hackl R, Kaiser R and Schicktanz S 1983 J. Phys. C: Solid State Phys. 16 1729

    1983

  58. [68]

    Devereaux T P and Hackl R 2007 Rev. Mod. Phys. 79 175

    2007

  59. [69]

    Chen C C, Jia C J, Kemper A F, Singh R R P and Devereaux T P 2011 Phys. Rev. Lett. 106 067002

    2011

  60. [70]

    Baum A, Milosavljevi´ c A, Lazarevi´ c N, Radonji´ c M M, Nikoli´ c B, Mitschek M, Maranloo Z I, ˇS´ cepanovi´ c M, Gruji´ c-Brojˇ cin M, Stojilovi´ c N, Opel M, Wang A, Petrovic C, Popovi´ c Z V and Hackl R 2018Phys. Rev. B 97(5) 054306

  61. [71]

    Abrikosov A A and Fal’kovskii L A 1961 Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 40 262 [Sov. Phys. JETP 13, 179 (1961)]

    1961

  62. [72]

    Sooryakumar R and Klein M V 1980 Phys. Rev. Lett. 45(8) 660–662

    1980

  63. [73]

    Chandrasekhar M, Cardona M and Kane E O 1977 Phys. Rev. B 16(8) 3579–3595

    1977

  64. [74]

    37 893 – 895 ISSN 0038-1098

    Ipatova I, Subashiev A and Voitenko V 1981 Solid State Commun. 37 893 – 895 ISSN 0038-1098

    1981

  65. [75]

    Cooper S L, Klein M V, Pazol B G, Rice J P and Ginsberg D M 1988 Phys. Rev. B 37(10) 5920–5923

    1988

  66. [76]

    Hackl R, Gl¨ aser W, M¨ uller P, Einzel D and Andres K 1988 Phys. Rev. B 38 7133

    1988

  67. [77]

    Abrikosov A and Genkin V 1973 Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 65 842 [Sov. Phys. JETP 38, 417 (1974)]

    1974

  68. [78]

    Klein M V and Dierker S B 1984 Phys. Rev. B 29 4976

    1984

  69. [79]

    Devereaux T P, Einzel D, Stadlober B, Hackl R, Leach D H and Neumeier J J 1994 Phys. Rev. Lett. 72 396

    1994

  70. [80]

    Raman Spectrosc

    Einzel D and Hackl R 1996 J. Raman Spectrosc. 27 307– 319 ISSN 1097-4555

    1996

  71. [81]

    Zawadowski A, Ruvalds J and Solana J 1972 Phys. Rev. A 5 399–421

    1972

  72. [82]

    Zawadowski A and Cardona M 1990 Phys. Rev. B 42 10732

    1990

  73. [83]

    Staufer T, Hackl R and M¨ uller P 1990 Solid State Commun. 75 975

    1990

  74. [84]

    Slakey F, Klein M V, Rice J P and Ginsberg D M 1991 Phys. Rev. B 43 3764

    1991

  75. [85]

    Low Temp

    Hackl R, Opel M, M¨ uller P F, Krug G, Stadlober B, Nemetschek R, Berger H and Forr´ o L 1996 J. Low Temp. Phys. 105 733–742 ISSN 1573-7357

    1996

  76. [86]

    Opel M, Nemetschek R, Hoffmann C, Philipp R, M¨ uller P F, Hackl R, T¨ utt˝ o I, Erb A, Revaz B, Walker E, Berger H and Forr´ o L 2000Phys. Rev. B 61(14) 9752– 9774

  77. [87]

    Littlewood P B and Varma C M 1982 Phys. Rev. B 26(9) 4883–4893

    1982

  78. [88]

    Leggett A J 1966 Prog. Theor. Phys. 36 901

    1966

  79. [89]

    Monien H and Zawadowski A 1990 Phys. Rev. B 41(13) 8798–8810

    1990

  80. [90]

    Chubukov A V, Eremin I and Korshunov M M 2009 Phys. Rev. B 79 220501 (pages 4)

    2009

  81. [91]

    Scalapino D J and Devereaux T P 2009 Phys. Rev. B 80 140512 (pages 4)

    2009

  82. [92]

    Maiti S, Maier T A, B¨ ohm T, Hackl R and Hirschfeld P J 2016 Phys. Rev. Lett. 117(25) 257001

    2016

  83. [93]

    Littlewood P B and Varma C M 1981 Phys. Rev. Lett. 47 811–814

    1981

  84. [94]

    M´ easson M A, Gallais Y, Cazayous M, Clair B, Rodi` ere P, Cario L and Sacuto A 2014 Phys. Rev. B 89(6) 060503

    2014

  85. [95]

    Pekker D and Varma C 2015 Ann. Rev. Cond. Mat. Phys. 6 269–297

    2015

  86. [96]

    Blumberg G, Mialitsin A, Dennis B S, Klein M V, Zhigadlo N D and Karpinski J 2007 Phys. Rev. Lett. 99 227002

    2007

  87. [97]

    Klein M V 2010 Phys. Rev. B 82 014507

    2010

  88. [98]

    Burnell F J, Hu J, Parish M M and Bernevig B A 2010 Phys. Rev. B 82(14) 144506

    2010

  89. [99]

    Cea T and Benfatto L 2016 Phys. Rev. B 94(6) 064512

    2016

  90. [100]

    Huang W, Sigrist M and Weng Z Y 2018 Phys. Rev. B 97(14) 144507

    2018

  91. [101]

    Munnikes N, Muschler B, Venturini F, Tassini L, Prestel W, Ono S, Ando Y, Peets D C, Hardy W N, Liang R, Bonn D A, Damascelli A, Eisaki H, Greven M, Erb A and Hackl R 2011 Phys. Rev. B 84(14) 144523

    2011

  92. [102]

    Li Y, Le Tacon M, Matiks Y, Boris A V, Loew T, Lin C T, Chen L, Chan M K, Dorow C, Ji L, Bariˇ si´ c N, Zhao X, Greven M and Keimer B 2013 Phys. Rev. Lett. 111(18) 187001

    2013

  93. [103]

    Hackl R, Kaiser R and Gl¨ aser W 1989 Physica C (Amsterdam) 162-164 431

    1989

  94. [104]

    Kendziora C and Rosenberg A 1995 Phys. Rev. B 52 9867

    1995

  95. [105]

    Chen X K, Naeini J G, Hewitt K C, Irwin J C, Liang R and Hardy W N 1997 Phys. Rev. B 56 R513

    1997

  96. [106]

    Sugai S and Hosokawa T 2000 Phys. Rev. Lett. 85 1112 Raman scattering in Fe-based systems 29

    2000

  97. [107]

    Le Tacon M, Sacuto A, Georges A, Kotliar G, Gallais Y, Colson D and Forget A 2006 Nature Phys. 2 537

    2006

  98. [108]

    Caprara S, Colonna M, Di Castro C, Hackl R, Muschler B, Tassini L and Grilli M 2015 Phys. Rev. B 91(20) 205115

    2015

  99. [109]

    Karahasanovic U, Kretzschmar F, B¨ ohm T, Hackl R, Paul I, Gallais Y and Schmalian J 2015 Phys. Rev. B 92(7) 075134

    2015

  100. [110]

    Devereaux T P 1992 Phys. Rev. B 45 12965

    1992

  101. [111]

    Devereaux T P 1993 Phys. Rev. B 47(9) 5230–5238

    1993

  102. [112]

    Devereaux T P 1995 Phys. Rev. Lett. 74 4313

    1995

  103. [113]

    Manske D 2004 Theory of Unconventional Superconduc- tors vol 202 (Springer Tracts in Modern Physics)

    2004

  104. [114]

    Caprara S, Di Castro C, Grilli M and Suppa D 2005 Phys. Rev. Lett. 95(11) 117004

    2005

  105. [115]

    Maiti S, Chubukov A V and Hirschfeld P J 2017 Phys. Rev. B 96(1) 014503

    2017

  106. [116]

    Platzman P M 1965 Phys. Rev. 139 A379

    1965

  107. [117]

    Gallais Y and Paul I 2016 C. R. Physique 17 113 – 139

    2016

  108. [118]

    Boyd G R, Devereaux T P, Hirschfeld P J, Mishra V and Scalapino D J 2009 Phys. Rev. B 79 174521

    2009

  109. [119]

    Khodas M and Levchenko A 2015 Phys. Rev. B 91(23) 235119

    2015

  110. [120]

    Pines D and Nozi` eres P 1966 The Theory of Quantum Liquids: Normal Fermi Liquids (Benjamin, Reading, MA)

    1966

  111. [121]

    Devereaux T P and Einzel D 1995 Phys. Rev. B 51 16336

    1995

  112. [122]

    Inosov D S, Borisenko S V, Eremin I, Kordyuk A A, Zabolotnyy V B, Geck J, Koitzsch A, Fink J, Knupfer M, B¨ uchner B, Berger H and Follath R 2007Phys. Rev. B 75 172505

  113. [123]

    Prestel W, Venturini F, Muschler B, T¨ utt˝ o I, Hackl R, Lambacher M, Erb A, Komiya S, Ono S, Ando Y, Inosov D, Zabolotnyy V B and Borisenko S V 2010 Eur. Phys. J. Special Topics 188 163

    2010

  114. [124]

    Kostur V N 1992 Z. Phys. B: Condensed Matter 89 149– 159 ISSN 1431-584X

    1992

  115. [125]

    Devereaux T P, Virosztek A and Zawadowski A 1996Phys. Rev. B 54 12523

  116. [126]

    Muschler B, Prestel W, Tassini L, Hackl R, Lambacher M, Erb A, Komiya S, Ando Y, Peets D, Hardy W, Liang R and Bonn D 2010 Eur. Phys. J. Special Topics 188 131

    2010

  117. [127]

    Hackl R and Kaiser R 1988 J. Phys. C: Solid State Physics 21 L453

    1988

  118. [128]

    Cuk T, Lu D H, Zhou X J, Shen Z X, Devereaux T P and Nagaosa N 2005 Phys. Stat. Sol. (b) 242 11

    2005

  119. [129]

    Bardasis A and Schrieffer J R 1961 Phys. Rev. 121 1050– 1062

    1961

  120. [130]

    Greytak T J and Yan J 1969 Phys. Rev. Lett. 22(19) 987– 990

    1969

  121. [131]

    Tsuneto T 1960 Phys. Rev. 118(4) 1029–1035

    1960

  122. [132]

    Mattis D C and Bardeen J 1958 Phys. Rev. 111(2) 412– 417

    1958

  123. [133]

    Eiter H M, Lavagnini M, Hackl R, Nowadnick E A, Kemper A F, Devereaux T P, Chu J H, Analytis J G, Fisher I R and Degiorgi L 2013 Proc. Nat. Acad. Sciences 110 64– 69

    2013

  124. [134]

    Shastry B S and Shraiman B I 1990 Phys. Rev. Lett. 65 1068

    1990

  125. [135]

    Low Temp

    Varma C M 2002 J. Low Temp. Phys. 126(3/4) 901

    2002

  126. [136]

    5 3314 ISSN 2041-1723

    Jia C J, Nowadnick E A, Wohlfeld K, Kung Y F, Chen C C, Johnston S, Tohyama T, Moritz B and Devereaux T P 2014 Nature Commun. 5 3314 ISSN 2041-1723

    2014

  127. [137]

    10 932–935 ISSN 1476-1122

    Yin Z P, Haule K and Kotliar G 2011 Nature Mater. 10 932–935 ISSN 1476-1122

    2011

  128. [138]

    Suhl H, Matthias B T and Walker L R 1959 Phys. Rev. Lett. 3(12) 552–554

    1959

  129. [139]

    Kontani H and Onari S 2010 Phys. Rev. Lett. 104(15) 157001

    2010

  130. [140]

    Weidinger S A and Zwerger W 2015 Eur. Phys. B 88 237

    2015

  131. [141]

    Devereaux T P and Kampf A P 1999 Phys. Rev. B 59(9) 6411–6420

    1999

  132. [142]

    Moritz B, Johnston S, Devereaux T P, Muschler B, Prestel W, Hackl R, Lambacher M, Erb A, Komiya S and Ando Y 2011 Phys. Rev. B 84(23) 235114

    2011

  133. [143]

    Venturini F, Michelucci U, Devereaux T P and Kampf A P 2000 Phys. Rev. B 62 15204–15207

    2000

  134. [144]

    Aslamasov L G and Larkin A I 1968 Sov. Phys. Solid State 10 875

    1968

  135. [145]

    Georges A, de’ Medici L and Mravlje J 2013 Annu. Rev. Cond. Mat. Phys. 4 137–178

    2013

  136. [146]

    Si Q, Yu R and Abrahams E 2016 Nat. Rev. Mater. 1 16017

    2016

  137. [147]

    Wang Q, Shen Y, Pan B, Zhang X, Ikeuchi K, Iida K, Christianson A D, Walker H C, Adroja D T, Abdel- Hafiez M, Chen X, Chareev D A, Vasiliev A N and Zhao J 2016 Nature Commun. 7 12182

    2016

  138. [148]

    Skornyakov S L, Anisimov V I, Vollhardt D and Leonov I 2017 Phys. Rev. B 96(3) 035137

    2017

  139. [149]

    Sulewski P E, Fleury P A, Lyons K B and Cheong S W 1991 Phys. Rev. Lett. 67 3864

    1991

  140. [150]

    11 953–958 ISSN 1745-2473

    Glasbrenner J K, Mazin I I, Jeschke H O, Hirschfeld P J, Fernandes R M and Valent´ ı R 2015 Nature Phys. 11 953–958 ISSN 1745-2473

    2015

  141. [151]

    Knoll P, Thomsen C, Cardona M and Murugaraj P 1990 Phys. Rev. B 42(7) 4842–4845

    1990

  142. [152]

    Fernandes R M and Schmalian J 2012 Supercond. Sci. Technol. 25 084005

    2012

  143. [153]

    Hayes W and Loudon R 2005 Scattering of Light by Crystals (New York: Dover)

    2005

  144. [154]

    Allen P B 1976 Phys. Rev. B 13(4) 1416–1427

    1976

  145. [155]

    14 210–214

    Baek S H, Efremov D V, Ok J M, Kim J S, van den Brink J and B¨ uchner B 2014Nature Mater. 14 210–214

  146. [156]

    Yi M, Lu D, Chu J H, Analytis J G, Sorini A P, Kemper A F, Moritz B, Mo S K, Moore R G, Hashimoto M, Lee W S, Hussain Z, Devereaux T P, Fisher I R and Shen Z X 2011 Proc. Nat. Acad. Sciences 108 6878–6883

    2011

  147. [157]

    Wu S F, Zhang W L, Hu D, Kung H H, Lee A, Mao H C, Dai P C, Ding H, Richard P and Blumberg G 2016 arXiv preprint arXiv:1607.06575

    2016 arXiv

  148. [158]

    Yamase H and Zeyher R 2011 Phys. Rev. B 83 115116

    2011

  149. [159]

    Ruiz H, Wang Y, Moritz B, Baum A, Hackl R and Devereaux T P 2019 Phys. Rev. B 99(12) 125130

    2019

  150. [160]

    Baum A, Li Y, Tomi´ c M, Lazarevi´ c N, Jost D, L¨ offler F, Muschler B, B¨ ohm T, Chu J H, Fisher I R, Valent´ ı R, Mazin I I and Hackl R 2018 Phys. Rev. B 98(7) 075113

    2018

  151. [161]

    Fernandes R M, Chubukov A V, Knolle J, Eremin I and Schmalian J 2012 Phys. Rev. B 85(2) 024534

    2012

  152. [162]

    Kontani H, Saito T and Onari S 2011 Phys. Rev. B 84(2) 024528

    2011

  153. [163]

    Gnezdilov V, Pashkevich Y G, Lemmens P, Wulferding D, Shevtsova T, Gusev A, Chareev D and Vasiliev A 2013 Phys. Rev. B 87(14) 144508

    2013

  154. [164]

    Chu J H, Analytis J G, Kucharczyk C and Fisher I R 2009 Phys. Rev. B 79 014506 (pages 6)

    2009

  155. [165]

    6 7777 ISSN 2041-1733

    Yi M, Liu Z K, Zhang Y, Yu R, Zhu J X, Lee J, Moore R, Schmitt F, Li W, Riggs S, Chu J H, Lv B, Hu J, Hashimoto M, Mo S K, Hussain Z, Mao Z, Chu C, Fisher I, Si Q, Shen Z X and Lu D 2015 Nature Commun. 6 7777 ISSN 2041-1733

    2015

  156. [166]

    Yamase H and Zeyher R 2013 Phys. Rev. B 88(12) 125120

    2013

  157. [167]

    Yoshizawa M, Kimura D, Chiba T, Simayi S, Nakanishi Y, Kihou K, Lee C H, Iyo A, Eisaki H, Nakajima M and Uchida S i 2012 J. Phys. Soc. Japan 81 024604

    2012

  158. [168]

    status solidi (b) 254 1600308 Raman scattering in Fe-based systems 30

    B¨ ohm T, Ahangharnejhad R H, Jost D, Baum A, Muschler B, Kretzschmar F, Adelmann P, Wolf T, Wen H H, Chu J H, Fisher I R and Hackl R 2017 phys. status solidi (b) 254 1600308 Raman scattering in Fe-based systems 30

    2017

  159. [169]

    Sun J P, Matsuura K, Ye G Z, Mizukami Y, Shimozawa M, Matsubayashi K, Yamashita M, Watashige T, Kasahara S, Matsuda Y, Yan J Q, Sales B C, Uwatoko Y, Cheng J G and Shibauchi T 2016 Nature Commun. 7 12146

    2016

  160. [170]

    Doping dependence of the pairing strength in BKFA

    or in the presence of impurities [207, 208] by 0 2 4 6 8 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.0 0.4 0.8 0.0 0.4 0.8 BS(1) BS(2) PB Ωpeak/kBTc a fRG K-content x λd(i) /λs RPA c d(1) λd(i) /λs b d(2) d(1) d(2) Figure 17. Doping dependence of the pairing strength in BKFA. (a) The positions of the p...

  161. [171]

    More pieces need to be added to solve the puzzle and clarify the type of pairing in the ground state

    supported unconventional order parameters in Fe(Se,Te) and BKFA, respectively. More pieces need to be added to solve the puzzle and clarify the type of pairing in the ground state. Further complication arises since the gaps vary strongly between the families and with elemental...

  162. [172]

    de la Cruz C, Huang Q, Lynn J, Li J, II W R, Zarestky J, Mook H, Chen G, Luo J, Wang N and Dai P 2008 Nature 453 899

    2008

  163. [173]

    4 2 ISSN 2397-4648

    Coldea A I, Blake S F, Kasahara S, Haghighirad A A, Watson M D, Knafo W, Choi E S, McCollam A, Reiss P, Yamashita T, Bruma M, Speller S C, Matsuda Y, Wolf T, Shibauchi T and Schofield A J 2019 npj Quantum Mater. 4 2 ISSN 2397-4648

    2019

  164. [174]

    2 57 ISSN 2397-4648

    Yi M, Zhang Y, Shen Z X and Lu D 2017 npj Quantum Mater. 2 57 ISSN 2397-4648

    2017

  165. [175]

    Bardeen J, Cooper L N and Schrieffer J R 1957 Phys. Rev. 106 162

    1957

  166. [176]

    Hirschfeld P J 2016 C. R. Physique 17 197 – 231 ISSN 1631-0705

    2016

  167. [177]

    Hanaguri T, Niitaka S, Kuroki K and Takagi H 2010 Science 328 474

    2010

  168. [178]

    Christianson A D, Goremychkin E A, Osborn R, Rosenkranz S, Lumsden M D, Malliakas C D, Todorov I S, Claus H, Chung D Y, Kanatzidis M G, Bewley R I and Guidi T 2008 Nature 456 930

    2008

  169. [179]

    Magnetism and Magnetic Materials 440 133 – 135 ISSN 0304-8853

    Korshunov M M, Shestakov V A and N T Y 2017 J. Magnetism and Magnetic Materials 440 133 – 135 ISSN 0304-8853

    2017

  170. [180]

    Yin Y, Zech M, Williams T L, Wang X F, Wu G, Chen X H and Hoffman J E 2009 Phys. Rev. Lett. 102 097002 (pages 4)

    2009

  171. [181]

    Wang M, Yi M, Sun H L, Valdivia P, Kim M G, Xu Z J, Berlijn T, Christianson A D, Chi S, Hashimoto M, Lu D H, Li X D, Bourret-Courchesne E, Dai P, Lee D H, Maier T A and Birgeneau R J 2016Phys. Rev. B 93(20) 205149

  172. [182]

    Hardy F, Burger P, Wolf T, Fisher R A, Schweiss P, Adelmann P, Heid R, Fromknecht R, Eder R, Ernst D, von L¨ ohneysen H and Meingast C 2010Europhys. Lett. 91 47008

  173. [183]

    Terashima K, Sekiba Y, Bowen J H, Nakayama K, Kawahara T, Sato T, Richard P, Xu Y M, Li L J, Cao G H, Xu Z A, Ding H and Takahashi T 2009PNAS 106 7330

  174. [184]

    Nakayama K, Sato T, Richard P, Xu Y M, Kawahara T, Umezawa K, Qian T, Neupane M, Chen G F, Ding H and Takahashi T 2011 Phys. Rev. B 83 020501

    2011

  175. [185]

    Hardy F, B¨ ohmer A E, de’ Medici L, Capone M, Giovannetti G, Eder R, Wang L, He M, Wolf T, Schweiss P, Heid R, Herbig A, Adelmann P, Fisher R A and Meingast C 2016 Phys. Rev. B 94(20) 205113

    2016

  176. [186]

    Xu B, Dai Y M, Xiao H, Shen B, Wen H H, Qiu X G and Lobo R P S M 2017 Phys. Rev. B 96(11) 115125

    2017

  177. [187]

    Ding H, Richard P, Nakayama K, Sugawara K, Arakane T, Sekiba Y, Takayama A, Souma S, Sato T, Takahashi T, Wang Z, Dai X, Fang Z, Chen G F, Luo J L and Wang N L 2008 Europhys. Lett. 83 47001

    2008

  178. [188]

    Zhang Y, Yang L X, Chen F, Zhou B, Wang X F, Chen X H, Arita M, Shimada K, Namatame H, Taniguchi M, Hu J P, Xie B P and Feng D L 2010 Phys. Rev. Lett. 105 117003

    2010

  179. [189]

    Evtushinsky D V, Zabolotnyy V B, Kim T K, Kordyuk A A, Yaresko A N, Maletz J, Aswartham S, Wurmehl S, Boris A V, Sun D L, Lin C T, Shen B, Wen H H, Varykhalov A, Follath R, B¨ uchner B and Borisenko S V 2014 Phys. Rev. B 89(6) 064514

    2014

  180. [190]

    Wray L, Qian D, Hsieh D, Xia Y, Li L, Checkelsky J G, Pasupathy A, Gomes K K, Parker C V, Fedorov A V, Chen G F, Luo J L, Yazdani A, Ong N P, Wang N L and Hasan M Z 2008 Phys. Rev. B 78 184508

    2008

  181. [191]

    Mou D, Kong T, Meier W R, Lochner F, Wang L L, Lin Q, Wu Y, Bud’ko S L, Eremin I, Johnson D D, Canfield P C and Kaminski A 2016 Phys. Rev. Lett. 117(27) 277001

    2016

  182. [192]

    Shimojima T, Sakaguchi F, Ishizaka K, Ishida Y, Kiss T, Okawa M, Togashi T, Chen C T, Watanabe S, Arita M, Shimada K, Namatame H, Taniguchi M, Ohgushi K, Kasahara S, Terashima T, Shibauchi T, Matsuda Y, Chainani A and Shin S 2011 Science 332 564–567 ISSN 0036-8075

    2011

  183. [193]

    Physics 8 371

    Zhang Y, Ye Z R, Ge Q Q, Chen F, Jiang J, Xu M, Xie B P and Feng D L 2012 Nat. Physics 8 371

    2012

  184. [194]

    Diao Z, Campanini D, Fang L, Kwok W K, Welp U and Rydh A 2016 Phys. Rev. B 93(1) 014509

    2016

  185. [195]

    Kasahara S, Watashige T, Hanaguri T, Kohsaka Y, Yamashita T, Shimoyama Y, Mizukami Y, Endo R, Ikeda H, Aoyama K, Terashima T, Uji S, Wolf T, von L¨ ohneysen H, Shibauchi T and Matsuda Y 2014 Proc. Nat. Acad. Sciences 111 16309–16313 ISSN 0027-8424

    2014

  186. [196]

    Thomale R, Platt C, Hu J, Honerkamp C and Bernevig B A 2009 Phys. Rev. B 80 180505

    2009

  187. [197]

    Thomale R, Platt C, Hanke W, Hu J and Bernevig B A 2011 Phys. Rev. Lett. 107(11) 117001

    2011

  188. [198]

    Evtushinsky D V, Inosov D S, Zabolotnyy V B, Koitzsch A, Knupfer M, B¨ uchner B, Viazovska M S, Sun G L, Hinkov V, Boris A V, Lin C T, Keimer B, Varykhalov A, Kordyuk A A and Borisenko S V 2009 Phys. Rev. B 79 054517 (pages 13)

    2009

  189. [199]

    Tanatar M A, Ni N, Martin C, Gordon R T, Kim H, Kogan V G, Samolyuk G D, Bud’ko S L, Canfield P C and Prozorov R 2009 Phys. Rev. B 79 094507 (pages 10)

    2009

  190. [200]

    Tanatar M A, Ni N, Thaler A, Bud’ko S L, Canfield P C and Prozorov R 2010 Phys. Rev. B 82 134528

    2010

  191. [201]

    Hirschfeld P J 2009 Physics 2 100

    2009

  192. [202]

    Muschler B 2012 Carrier dynamics of Ba(Fe1−xCox)2As2 as a function of doping Dissertation Technical Univer- sity Munich

    2012

  193. [203]

    Tanatar M A, Reid J P, Shakeripour H, Luo X G, Doiron- Leyraud N, Ni N, Bud’ko S L, Canfield P C, Prozorov R and Taillefer L 2010 Phys. Rev. Lett. 104 067002

    2010

  194. [204]

    Boeri L, Dolgov O V and Golubov A A 2008 Phys. Rev. Lett. 101 026403

    2008

  195. [205]

    Liu C, Palczewski A D, Dhaka R S, Kondo T, Fernandes R M, Mun E D, Hodovanets H, Thaler A N, Schmalian J, Bud’ko S L, Canfield P C and Kaminski A 2011Phys. Rev. B 84(2) 020509

  196. [206]

    Ge Q Q, Ye Z R, Xu M, Zhang Y, Jiang J, Xie B P, Song Y, Zhang C L, Dai P and Feng D L 2013 Phys. Rev. X 3(1) 011020

    2013

  197. [207]

    Zhang W L, Meier W R, Kong T, Canfield P C and Blumberg G 2018 Phys. Rev. B 98(14) 140501

    2018

  198. [208]

    Colombier E, Bud’ko S L, Ni N and Canfield P C 2009 Phys. Rev. B 79 224518 (pages 9)

    2009

  199. [209]

    Analytis J G, Kuo H H, McDonald R D, Wartenbe M, Rourke P M C, Hussey N E and Fisher I R 2014 Nature Phys. 10 194

    2014

  200. [210]

    Xu N, Richard P, Shi X, van Roekeghem A, Qian T, Razzoli E, Rienks E, Chen G F, Ieki E, Nakayama K, Sato T, Takahashi T, Shi M and Ding H 2013 Phys. Rev. B 88(22) 220508

    2013

  201. [211]

    Maier T A, Graser S, Scalapino D J and Hirschfeld P J 2009 Phys. Rev. B 79 224510 (pages 6)

    2009

  202. [212]

    Chubukov A V, Efremov D V and Eremin I 2008 Phys. Rev. B 78(13) 134512 Raman scattering in Fe-based systems 31

    2008

  203. [213]

    Platt C, Hanke W and Thomale R 2014 Adv. Phys. 62(4-

    2014

  204. [214]

    Hirschfeld P J, Altenfeld D, Eremin I and Mazin I I 2015 Phys. Rev. B 92(18) 184513

    2015

  205. [215]

    B¨ oker J, Volkov P A, Hirschfeld P J and Eremin I 2019 New Journal of Physics

    2019

  206. [216]

    B¨ ohmer A E and Meingast C 2016 C. R. Physique 17 90 – 112 ISSN 1631-0705

    2016

  207. [217]

    Chu J H, Kuo H H, Analytis J G and Fisher I R 2012 Science 337 710–712

    2012

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.