Fermi surface evolution and collapse of the Mott pseudogap in Nd2-x-CexCuO4±δ

Physical Review B - Condensed Matter and Materials Physics

Volumn 66, Issue 14, 2002, Pages 1405131-1405134

  Kusko, C ^a   Markiewicz, R S ^a   Lindroos, M ^a,b   Bansil, A ^a  

^a NORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b TAMPERE UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Finland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CERIUM; COPPER DERIVATIVE; METAL OXIDE; NEODYMIUM;

ARTICLE; ELECTRON; ELEMENTARY PARTICLE; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS; MEASUREMENT; MODEL; MOLECULAR INTERACTION; TEMPERATURE;

EID: 0036813612     PISSN: 01631829     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. N.P. Armitage et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 147003 (2002).
2. A three-band model gives very similar results (Ref. 4).
3. T. Moriya, Spin Fluctuations in Electron Magnetism (Springer, Berlin, 1985).
4. R.S. Markiewicz (unpublished).
5. A. Bansil and M. Lindroos, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 5154 (1999); M. Lindroos and A. Bansil, ibid. 75, 1182 (1995).
6. A. Bansil and M. Lindroos, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 5154 (1999); M. Lindroos and A. Bansil, ibid. 75, 1182 (1995).
7. N.D. Mermin and H. Wagner, Phys. Rev. Lett. 17, 1133 (1966).
8. mf as a Mott pseudogap since it arises from correlation effects in the spirit of the Mott-Hubbard metal-insulator transition. We do not address disorder related localization effects away from half filling.
9. There are many other views on the origin of pseudogap in the cuprates (superconducting fluctuations, etc.). See, e. g., R.S. Markiewicz, cond-mat/0108075, Phys. Rev. Lett. (to be published); S. Andergassen et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 056401 (2001).
10. There are many other views on the origin of pseudogap in the cuprates (superconducting fluctuations, etc.). See, e. g., R.S. Markiewicz, cond-mat/0108075, Phys. Rev. Lett. (to be published); S. Andergassen et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 056401 (2001).
11. N. See, e. g., J. Brinkmann and P.A. Lee, Phys. Rev. B 65, 014502 (2001).
12. A. Singh and Z. Tešanović, Phys. Rev. B 41, 614 (1990); A.V. Chubukov and D.M. Frenkel, ibid. 46, 11 884 (1992); C. Zhou and H.J. Schulz, ibid. 52, 11 557 (1995).
13. A. Singh and Z. Tešanović, Phys. Rev. B 41, 614 (1990); A.V. Chubukov and D.M. Frenkel, ibid. 46, 11 884 (1992); C. Zhou and H.J. Schulz, ibid. 52, 11 557 (1995).
14. A. Singh and Z. Tešanović, Phys. Rev. B 41, 614 (1990); A.V. Chubukov and D.M. Frenkel, ibid. 46, 11 884 (1992); C. Zhou and H.J. Schulz, ibid. 52, 11 557 (1995).
15. R.S. Markiewicz and C. Kusko, Phys. Rev. B 65, 064520 (2002).
16. Even without including the small t″, we obtain quite good agreement with experiment.
17. R.S. Markiewicz, Phys. Rev. B 62, 1252 (2000).
18. C. Kim et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 4245 (1998).
19. Optimal values of t′, t″ differ slightly in t-U and t-J models [Tohyama et al., J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 69, 9 (2000)], former values are more relevant here.
20. J.R. Schrieffer et al., Phys. Rev. B 39, 11 663 (1989).
21. LHB yields the Zhang-Rice singlet in the three-band case.
22. R. Hlubina and T.M. Rice, Phys. Rev. B 51, 9253 (1995); N.P. Armitage et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 147003 (2001).
23. R. Hlubina and T.M. Rice, Phys. Rev. B 51, 9253 (1995); N.P. Armitage et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 147003 (2001).
24. (0,π), (π,0) pockets have been noted in the t-J model by T. Tohyama and S. Maekawa Phys. Rev. B 64, 212505 (2001).
25. M. Suzuki et al., Phys. Rev. B 50, 9434 (1994); W. Jiang et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 73, 1291 (1994).
26. M. Suzuki et al., Phys. Rev. B 50, 9434 (1994); W. Jiang et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 73, 1291 (1994).
27. M. Lindroos, S. Sahrakorpi, and A. Bansil, Phys. Rev. B 65, 054514 (2002); A. Bansil et al., ibid. 60, 13 396 (1999).
28. M. Lindroos, S. Sahrakorpi, and A. Bansil, Phys. Rev. B 65, 054514 (2002); A. Bansil et al., ibid. 60, 13 396 (1999).
29. J. Kanamori, Prog. Theor. Phys. 30, 275 (1963).
30. N. Bulut et al., Phys. Rev. B 47, 2742 (1993).
31. L. Chen et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 369 (1991).
32. 0 the bare susceptibility.
33. Q to zero, but there is still short-range magnetization and a (somewhat shifted) QCP, now associated with termination of the T=0 Neel order.
34. N.D. Mathur et al., Nature (London) 394, 39 (1998).
35. J.L. Tallon et al., Phys. Status Solidi B 215, 531 (1999).
36. A.V. Chubukov and D.K. Morr, Phys. Rep. 288, 355 (1997).
37. M. Ambai et al., J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 71, 538 (2002).
38. N. Harima et al., Phys. Rev. B 64, 220507 (2001).
39. N falls off so much faster with hole vs electron doping. This point will be taken up further elsewhere.
40. Note that in the t-J models the bands are inverted for treating electron doping, leading to a sign change of t' which is not needed in the t-U models.