1: %\documentstyle[preprint,aps,prb,epsf]{revtex}

2: \documentstyle[aps,prb,epsf]{revtex}

3: \begin{document}

4: \twocolumn[\hsize\textwidth\columnwidth\hsize\csname

5: @twocolumnfalse\endcsname

6: \title{Temperature dependences of the surface resistance and the diamagnetic shielding susceptibility

7:  at $T_c-T<< T_c$ for high-$T_c$ superconductors$^{\ast\ast}$}

8: \author{Hyun-Tak Kim $^{\ast}$, Kwang-Yong Kang, and Seok-Kil

9: Han}

10: \address{Telecom. Basic Research Lab., ETRI, Taejon 305-350, Korea\\}

11: \maketitle{}

12: \begin{abstract}

13: At $T_c-T<< T_c$ (i.e., near $T_c$), in order to demonstrate the

14: conduction mechanism and temperature dependencies of the

15: diamagnetic-shielding susceptibility and the penetration depth, we

16: fabricated Ba$_{1-x}$K$_x$BiO$_3$ (BKBO) thin films and measured

17: the energy gap by tunnel effect and shielding susceptibilities

18: which are compared with those measured for BKBO and YBCO single

19: crystals. The shielding susceptibilities for BKBO and YBCO

20: crystals well-fit $\chi(T)/\chi(0)=1-exp(-2\triangle(T)/k_BT)$,

21: while that for the BKBO film follows $\chi(T)/\chi(0)=(1-T/T_c)$

22: which may not be intrinsic. The exponential decrease of the

23: susceptibilities near $T_c$ indicates that the conduction

24: mechanism is hopping. The energy gaps are observed as

25: ${2{\triangle}(0)=(3.5{\pm}0.1) k_BT_c}$ for the BKBO film by the

26: tunnel effect, ${2{\triangle}(0)=(3.9{\pm}0.1) k_BT_c}$ for the

27: BKBO single crystal, and $2{\triangle}(0)=(8{\pm}0.2) k_BT_c$ for

28: the YBa$_{2}$Cu$_{3}$O$_{7}$ single crystal. Furthermore, for

29: microwave device applications of superconductors, at $T_c-T<<

30: T_c$, the surface resistance

31: $R_s(T){\approx}\sqrt{\frac{\omega\mu_0/2}{\sigma_n+(\sigma_s(0)-\sigma_n)f(T)}}$

32:  is derived from the surface impedance at $\omega\tau_{tr}<<$1,

33:  where $\sigma_s(0)$ and $\sigma_n$ are the

34: conductivities of the superconducting state and the normal state,

35: respectively, and

36: $f(T)=\chi(T)/\chi(0)=(1-exp(-2\triangle(T)/k_BT)$).

37: \\ \\ \\

38: \end{abstract}

39: ]

40: \newpage

41: %\narrowtext

42: \section{INTRODUCTION}

43: The shielding susceptibility, $\chi$, was suggested as a means of

44: observing the London penetration depth, $\lambda_L$.$^{1-3}$

45: $\lambda_L$ has been known as a direct measure of the superfluid

46: density and a probe of the pairing state of superconductors. For

47: experimental results for high-$T_c$ superconductors at $T<<T_c$,

48: ${\lambda}_L(T)$ has exhibited a $T^2$ temperature dependence$^4$,

49: as well as a linear $T$ dependence$^5$. The linear T dependence

50: has been predicted in $d$-wave superconductivity. Recently,

51: ${\lambda}_L(T)$, which is independent of temperature, was

52: demonstrated.$^3$

53: 

54: On the other hand, for the 3 dimensional(D) XY behavior which

55: enhances fluctuations in the order parameter $\Psi$ for

56: Ginzburg-Landau (GL) theory, the diamagnetic shielding

57: susceptibility was given by

58: $\chi(T)=-(kT/{\Phi}_0^2)(T-T_c)^{-0.67}$, while the GL result

59: $\chi(T)\approx (T-T_{co})^{-0.5}$ near $T_c$.$^6$. The GL result

60: was suggested to need modification [6]. The 3D XY behavior was

61: absent in the magnetic penetration depth of

62: YBa$_2$Cu$_3$O$_{7-\delta}$ (YBCO) films.$^7$ Moreover, at

63: $T_c-T<< T_c$, from the BCS picture $\chi(T)/\chi(0)=(1-T/T_{c})$

64: was derived and from the phenomenological model

65: $\chi(T)/\chi(0)=1 - exp(-\frac{2\triangle(T)}{k_BT})$ was

66: obtained.$^{3,8,9}$

67: 

68: Furthermore, since 1960's, it has been known that BCS calculations

69: deviate from experimental data of the electronic specific-heat

70: contribution $C_{es}$ for superconductive lead above the

71: condensation temperature [10]. This suggests that a conduction

72: mechanism instead of tunneling one needs at $T_c-T<< T_c$.

73: 

74: For microwave device applications of superconductors, the

75: measurement and the physical analysis of the surface impedance are

76: very important.$^{11}$ In particular, its temperature dependence

77: is still controversial at $T_c-T<< T_c$,$^{12}$, since the

78: conduction mechanism with respect to conduction carriers has not

79: been clearly understood at $T_c-T<< T_c$.

80: 

81: In this paper, we demonstrate experimentally the unclear

82: temperature dependencies of $\chi(T)$ and ${\lambda}_L(T)$ at

83: $T_c-T<< T_c$ for shielding susceptibilities measured for a BKBO

84: film, high quality Ba$_{1-x}$K$_{x}$BiO$_3$ (BKBO) and YBCO

85: crystals. The energy gap of the BKBO film is obtained from the

86: tunnel effect, while energy gaps of BKBO and YBCO crystals are

87: obtained from the fitting parameter of shielding susceptibilities.

88: For microwave device applications of superconductors, the

89: temperature dependence of the surface resistance is derived.\\

90: 

91: \section{THEORETICAL CONSIDERATION}

92: The superconducting state as Meissner state is a condensed state.

93: With increasing temperature, Cooper pairs surpass the

94: superconducting energy gap to the excited state by the excitation

95: of thermal phonons; this means pair-breaking which characterizes

96: a superconductor-metal transition. In assuming that the

97: diamagnetic-shielding susceptibility is proportional to the

98: superfluid density in the superconducting

99: state~($\chi{\propto}n_{sup}$), in the microscopic theory

100: ,$^{3,8}$ the susceptibility was given by,

101: 

102: at $T<<T_c$,

103: \begin{eqnarray}

104: {\chi(T)/\chi(0)} \approx 1 -

105: \sqrt{(2\pi\triangle(0)/k_BT)}e^{-\triangle(0)/k_BT} ,

106: \end{eqnarray}

107: 

108: and, at $T_c-T<< T_c$,

109: \begin{eqnarray}

110: \chi(T)/\chi(0)=(1-T/T_{c}).

111: \end{eqnarray}

112: 

113: Furthermore, at $T_c-T<<T_c$, another susceptibility was given by

114: \begin{eqnarray}

115: \chi(T)= \chi(0){(1 - exp (-\frac{2\triangle(T)}{k_BT}))}.

116: \end{eqnarray}

117: 

118: Equation (3) was obtained from the simple phenomenological model

119: based on the classical limit of Fermi-Dirac(FD) statistics

120: ($i.e.$, Maxwell-Boltzman statistics) because the system is far

121: from condensation; in the system the fluid density is very small

122: and temperature is high relatively to $T_c$. Eq. (3) is the

123: hopping one of the conduction mechanism for semiconductors and was

124: given elsewhere.$^{3,9}$

125: 

126: The susceptibility as a function of the penetration depth has

127: been defined by

128: \begin{eqnarray}

129: {{\chi}(T)/{\chi}(0)=({\lambda}_L(0)/{\lambda}_L(T))^2}.

130: \end{eqnarray}\\

131: In addition, Eq (1) was demonstrated in a previous paper$^3$.

132: 

133: \begin{figure}

134: \vspace{0.1cm} \centerline{\epsfxsize=8.0cm\epsfbox{Fig1.eps}}

135: \vspace{0.1cm} \caption{Temperature dependence of the conductance

136: measured by the tunnel effect for the BKBO25 thin film; from 4 to

137: 24 K.}

138: \end{figure}

139: 

140: \section{EXPERIMENT}

141: BKBO thin films were fabricated on (100)SrTiO$_3$ substrates in

142: the argon atmosphere of 1 Torr at the substrate temperature of

143: 520$^{\circ}$ by laser ablation. The deposition method and

144: conditions were shown in a previous paper$^{13,14}$. The magnetic

145: shielding susceptibilities corresponding to the zero field cooled

146: (ZFC) susceptibility were measured at 10 Oe//c-axis by using

147: Quantum Design SQUID. The superconducting magnet of the SQUID was

148: quenched by perfect evaporation of liquid helium before the

149: measurement. Moreover the ZFC susceptibilies for BKBO and YBCO

150: single crystals were measured by the same method as that for the

151: BKBO film.

152: 

153: In order to measure the temperature dependence of the

154: superconducting energy gap for BKBO films, the conductances were

155: measured by the point-contact method through the

156: metal-superconductor-metal junction. The measurement temperatures

157: were from 4.2 K to 24 K.

158: 

159: \begin{figure}

160: \vspace{0.1cm} \centerline{\epsfxsize=8.5cm\epsfbox{Fig2.eps}}

161: \vspace{0.1cm} \caption{Comparison of the energy gap measured for

162: the BKBO25 film with the empirical energy gap of the BCS one,

163: ${\triangle}(T)/{\triangle}(0){\approx}

164: {\sqrt{cos[({\pi}/2)(T/T_c)^2]}}$ and $2{\triangle}(0)=bk_BT_c$.

165: Here $b{\approx}3.5$.}

166: \end{figure}

167: 

168: \section{RESULTS and DISCUSSION}

169: In order to check the validity of the linear T dependence in Eq.

170: (2), the temperature dependence of the conductance (or energy

171: gap), measured by the tunnel effect for a BKBO thin film (named

172: BKBO25) with $T_c\approx$25 K, is shown in Fig. 1. The

173: conductance at 4 K has a clean U shape which is known as the

174: energy gap with $\triangle$(4 K)$\approx$3.6 meV. U curve begins

175: to be deformed at 6 K, is observed up to 12 K, and is not seen

176: from 16 to 24 K. This indicates that the energy gap forms below

177: 14 K. Fig. 2 shows the comparison of the measured energy gap with

178: the BCS gap with $b\approx3.5$. The measured gap deviates from

179: the BCS gap with increasing temperature. The deviation may arise

180: from the pinning effect or vortices due to impurity phases in the

181: film. Fig. 3 shows temperature dependencies of the susceptibility

182: obtained from both Eq. (3) and $\triangle$(T) determined from the

183: tunnel effect in Fig. 2, (called the "tunnel susceptibility"),

184: the susceptibility obtained from both Eq. (3) and the BCS gap,

185: (called the "BCS susceptibility"), and the ZFC susceptibility

186: data measured for the BKBO25 film at 10 Oe. Below 14 K, the

187: normalized susceptibilities agree closely. The figure shows that

188: the ZFC susceptibility data with linear T dependence at $T_c-T<<

189: T_c$ follow the tunnel susceptibility and deviate from the BCS

190: susceptibility. This indicates that crystals or films with an

191: energy gap which does not follow the BCS gap at $T_c-T<< T_c$

192: exhibit a linear $T$ dependence in the susceptibility, and that

193: Eq. (2) is not intrinsic.

194: 

195: \begin{figure}

196: \vspace{0.1cm} \centerline{\epsfxsize=8.5cm\epsfbox{Fig3.eps}}

197: \vspace{0.1cm} \caption{Temperature dependencies of the

198: susceptibility (${\circ}$) obtained from Eq. (3) using the energy

199: gap determined from the tunnel effect in Fig. 1; the

200: susceptibility (${\triangle}$) obtained from Eq. (3) using the

201: empirical gap; and the ZFC susceptibility data (${\bullet}$)

202: measured directly at 10 Oe for the BKBO25 film. At $T_c-T<< T_c$,

203: the linear is Eq. (2).}

204: \end{figure}

205: 

206: 

207: At $T_c-T<< T_c$, the susceptibility data measured for the BKBO

208: single crystal are well fitted by Eq. (3) using the empirical gap

209: (${\triangle}(T)/{\triangle}(0){\approx}{\sqrt{cos[({\pi}/2)(T/T_c)^2]}}$)

210: of the BCS gap, as shown by the thick line in Fig. 4. The energy

211: gap is obtained from the fitting parameter

212: ($2{\triangle}(0)=bk_BT_c$)as well and is given as

213: $2{\triangle}(0)=(3.9{\pm}0.1) k_BT_c$. The energy gap of the

214: single crystal agrees well with ${2{\triangle}(0){\approx}3.8

215: k_BT_c}$ which is determined by the tunnel effect [15]. Here,

216: although Eq. (3) is well-fitted from low temperatures to $T_c$,

217: the fitting cannot be believed below a temperature ($T{\approx}$17

218: K) in which the energy gap deviate from the BCS gap, as shown in

219: the inset of Fig. 4.

220: 

221: Figure 5 shows the susceptibility measured at 10 Oe//c-axis for a

222: YBCO single crystal like cube with the size of

223: $1.3{\times}1.1{\times}1~mm^3$ and $T_c{\approx}$93.2 K, grown by

224: a melting method. Eq. (1) and Eq. (3) are well applied to the

225: susceptibility data below 45 K and above 80 K, respectively, as

226: shown in Fig. 5 and its inset. The susceptibility in the

227: intermediate temperature range from 45 to 80 K is not explained by

228: the combined Eqs. (1) and (3), which is different from the BKBO

229: case. The 45 K is regarded as the condensation temperature.

230: 

231: \begin{figure}

232: \vspace{0.1cm} \centerline{\epsfxsize=8.5cm\epsfbox{Fig4.eps}}

233: \vspace{0.5cm} \caption{The ZFC susceptibility measured at 10

234: Oe//c-axis for the BKBO single crystal. The open circles ($\circ$)

235: are experimental data. The thick line and solid circles

236: (${\bullet}$) indicates the fitting of Eq. (3) using the empirical

237: energy gap. In the inset, the approximated BCS gap is

238: ${\triangle}(T)=3.2k_BT_c{\sqrt{1-T/T_c}}$ near $T_c$ and

239: $2{\triangle}(0)=bk_BT_c$ at $T$=0 K; the empirical gap is

240: ${\triangle}(T)/{\triangle}(0){\approx}{\sqrt{cos[({\pi}/2)(T/T_c)^2]}}$;

241: the experimental gap is deduced from Eq. (3) and is

242: ${\triangle}(T)= -(k_BT/2)ln(1-\chi(T)/\chi(0))$ where

243: $\chi(T)/\chi(0)$ uses the experimental susceptibility data. Here,

244: $b$=3.9.}

245: \end{figure}

246: 

247: 

248: \begin{figure}

249: \vspace{0.1cm} \centerline{\epsfxsize=8.5cm\epsfbox{Fig5.eps}}

250: \vspace{0.5cm} \caption{Temperature dependence of the ZFC

251: susceptibility measured at 10 Oe//c-axis and its fitting for the

252: YBCO single crystal with  $2{\triangle}(0) {\approx}8 k_BT_c$ and

253: $T_c{\approx}$93.2 K. The susceptibility data (${\circ})$; Eq. (1)

254: (thin line); and Eq. (3) (thick line and solid circles

255: (${\bullet}$)). The inset shows the empirical gap and the

256: experimental one.}

257: \end{figure}

258: 

259: 

260: \section{SURFACE RESISTANCE}

261: The temperature dependence of the surface resistance, $R_s(T)$,

262: can be calculated by using the above results, which is necessary

263: for microwave device applications of superconductors. Eq. (3) was

264: derived by assuming $\chi(T)/\chi(0)=n_{sup}(T)/n_{tot}=f(T)$ and

265: ${exp(-2\triangle(T)/k_BT)=n_{th}/n_{tot}}$,$^{3,8,9}$, where

266: $n_{tot}=n_{sup}+n_{th}$, $n_{tot}$ is the total number of pairs,

267: $n_{sup}$ denotes the number of Cooper pairs, and $n_{th}$ stands

268: for the number of thermally excited pairs ($i.e.$, carriers in the

269: normal state). Eq. (1) was also given by

270: $\chi(T)/\chi(0)=n_{sup}(T)/n_{tot}=f(T)$. The temperature

271: dependence of $\chi(T)$ corresponds to that of Cooper pairs. The

272: above consideration is similar to the two fluid model.

273: 

274: From the London equation, the conductivity of the superconducting

275: state is given by

276: $\sigma_{s}=\frac{(n_{sup}(\omega,T)/n_{tot})}{j{\mu}{\omega}{\lambda}^2(0)}$

277: at $0<{\omega}<{\omega}_s=2{\triangle}(0)/{\hbar}$, by using Eq.

278: (4). Here, $n_{sup}(\omega,T){\approx}n_{sup}(T)$, because Eq.

279: (3) is valid at $\omega<<\omega_s$. The temperature dependence of

280: $\sigma_s (T)$ is given by, at $T<<T_c$,

281: \begin{eqnarray}

282: {\sigma}_s(0)=\frac{1}{j{\mu_0}{\omega}{\lambda}^2(0)},

283: \end{eqnarray}

284: because of $n_{th}{\approx}$0 and

285: $f(T)=(n_{sup}(T)/n_{tot}){\approx}1$ in Eq. (1), while, at

286: $T_c-T<< T_c$,

287: \begin{eqnarray}

288: {\sigma}_s(T)=f(T){\sigma}_s(0)=\frac{f(T)}{j{\mu_0}{\omega}{\lambda}^2(0)},

289: \end{eqnarray}

290: where $f(T)=1-exp(-2\triangle(T)/k_BT)$. Moreover, because

291: $n_{th}$ is large at $T_c-T<< T_c$, the normal conductivity,

292: $\sigma_n$, occurring by $n_{th}$ cannot be ignored. Thus the

293: total conductivity is given by

294: \begin{eqnarray}

295: {\sigma}_T(T)&=&(\frac{n_{sup}}{n_{tot}}){\sigma}_s(0)+(\frac{n_{th}}{n_{tot}}){\sigma_n},

296: \noindent \\ &=&f(T){\sigma}_s(0)+(1-f(T)){\sigma_n},

297: \end{eqnarray}

298: 

299: where ${\sigma}_n={\sigma}_0/(1+j{\omega}{\tau}_{tr})$ [12].

300: 

301: In order to obtain the surface impedance

302: $Z_s=\sqrt{j\omega\mu_0/\sigma_T}$ for high quality

303: superconductors below the condensation temperature, $T_s$, $Z_s$

304: is important for microwave device application; $T_s{\approx}$17K

305: for BKBO and $T_s{\approx}$80K for YBCO, as shown in Figs. (4) and

306: (5). The total conductivity is approximated by

307: ${\sigma}_T{\approx}{\sigma_s}$, since $n_{th}$ can be ignored

308: below $T_s$ because it is very small. The surface impedance is

309: given by, at $T<<T_c$,

310: \begin{eqnarray}

311: Z_s=\sqrt{j\omega\mu_0/\sigma_s}{\approx}j\mu_0\omega\lambda(0),

312: \end{eqnarray}

313: 

314: while, at $T_c-T<< T_c$,

315: \begin{eqnarray}

316: Z_s{\approx}\sqrt{j\omega\mu_0/(f(T){\sigma}_s(0)+(1-f(T)){\sigma_n})},

317: \end{eqnarray}

318:  by using Eq. 8. At $T<<T_c$, $Z_s$ is called the surface reactance $X_s$. At

319: $T_c-T<< T_c$, $Z_s$ can be expressed as $Z_s=R_s +jX_s$ and the

320: surface resistance is given by

321: \begin{eqnarray}

322: R_s(T){\approx}\sqrt{\frac{\omega\mu_0/2}{\sigma_n+(\sigma_s(0)-\sigma_n)f(T)}}.

323: \end{eqnarray}

324: 

325: This $R_s$ is obtained by calculations of Eq. 10 at

326: $\omega\tau_{tr}<<$1, increases with increasing temperature up to

327: $T_c$, and depends upon $n_{sup}({\propto}f(T)$).

328: 

329: Furthermore, at the intermediate temperature range in which

330: $\chi(T)$ does not be explained by Eqs. (1) and (3), the

331: theoretical approach for $Z_s$ is beyond scope of this paper. More

332: detailed discussion with other models will be done in a separate

333: paper.\\

334: 

335: \section{CONCLUSION}

336: In conclusion, at $T_c-T<< T_c$ (above the condensation

337: temperature), the shielding susceptibilities for BKBO and YBCO

338: crystals well-fit $\chi(T)/\chi(0)=(1-exp(-2\triangle(T)/k_BT))$

339: instead of $\chi(T)/\chi(0)=(1-T/ T_c)$. The exponential decrease

340: of the susceptibility indicates that the conduction mechanism is

341: hopping. The calculated surface resistance depends upon the

342: temperature dependence of the number of Cooper pairs at $T_c-T<<

343: T_c$. Furthermore, we contend that the temperature dependence of

344: the diamagnetic shielding susceptibility is that of Cooper

345: pairs;$\chi(T){\propto}n_{sup}(T)$.

346: 

347: \begin{center}

348: \noindent{\bf ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS}

349: \end{center}

350: I would like to acknowledge Prof. J. W. Hodby and Dr. W.

351: Schmidbauer for providing high quality BKBO crystals for Fig. 4.

352: 

353: \begin{references}

354: \bibitem[\ast\ast]{} IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON APPLIED

355: SUPERCONDUCTIVITY VOL. 11, NO. 1, pp. 3415-3418, 2001.

356: \bibitem[\ast]{}kimht45@hotmail.com.

357: \bibitem[\ast]{}htkim@etri.re.kr..

358: \bibitem{1} D.Shoenberg, {\em "Superconductivity,"}

359:             Cambridge Univ. Press; Cambridge, United Kingdom, 1960.

360: 

361: \bibitem{2} J. R. Clem and V. G. Kogan,{\em "Theory of the

362: Magnetization of Granular Supercondctors: Application to High-Tc

363: Superconductors,"} Jpn. J. Appl. Phys., vol. 26, S26-3, pp.

364: 1161-3, 1987.

365: \bibitem{3} Hyun-Tak Kim and Kwang-Yong Kang,

366:             {\em "physical meaning of the temperature dependence of the

367: diamagnetic shielding susceptibility for BKBO and YBCO

368: superconductors,"} unpublished yet: htkim@etri.re.kr.

369: 

370: \bibitem{4} J. R. Cooper, C. T. Chu, L. W. Zhou, B. Dunn, G. Gruner,

371:            {\em "Determination of the magnetic field penetration depth in

372: superconducting YBCO: Deviations from the BCS laws,"}

373:             Phys. Rev. B, vol. 37, pp. 638-641, 1988.

374: 

375: \bibitem{5} W. N. Hardy, D. A. Bonn, D. C. Morgan, R. Liang,

376: and K. Zhang, {\em "Precision measurement of the temperature

377: dependence of $\lambda$ in YBCO strong evidence for nodes in the

378: gap function,"} Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 70, pp. 3999-4002, 1993.

379: 

380: \bibitem{6} C. J. Lobb,

381: {\em "Critical fluctuations in high-T$_c$ superconductors,"}

382: Phys. Rev. B, vol. 36, pp. 3930-3932, 1987.

383: 

384: \bibitem{7} K. M. Paget, B. R. Boyce, and T. R. Lemberger,

385: {\em "Absence of 3-D XY behavior in the magnetic penetration

386: depth of YBCO films,"} Phys. Rev. B, vol. 59, pp. 6545-6549, 1999.

387: 

388: \bibitem{8} A. A. Abricosov,

389: {\em Fundamentals of the Theory of Metals,} Chapter 16,

390: (North-Holland).

391: 

392: \bibitem{9} Hyun-Tak Kim,

393: {\em "Instability of the local charge-density-wave potential

394: energy for BaBiO$_3$,"} Phys. Rev. B, vol. 54, pp. 90-92, 1996.

395: 

396: \bibitem{10} P. H. Keesom and B. J. C. Van Der Hoven Jr.,

397: {\em "Specific heat of lead between 0.3 and 4 K,"} Phys. Lett.,

398: vol. 3, pp. 360-361, 1963.

399: 

400: \bibitem{11} D. E. Oates and Alfredo C. Anderson,

401: {\em "Surface impedance measurements of YBCO thin films in

402: stripline resonators,"} IEEE Trans. Magnetics, vol. 27,

403: pp.867-871, 1991.

404: 

405: \bibitem{12} Derek S. Linden, Terry P. Orlando, and W. Gregory Lyons,

406: {\em "Modified two-fluid model for superconductor surface

407: impedance calculation,"} IEEE Tran. Applied Superconductivity,

408: vol. 4, pp.136-142, 1994.

409: 

410: \bibitem{13} Hyun-Tak Kim, A. Sumi, H. Uwe, J. Fujita, and K. Oshima,

411: {\em "Synthesis of superconducting epitaxial films of BKBO by

412: laser ablation,"} Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. vol. 32, pp. 4529-4534,

413: 1993.

414: 

415: \bibitem{14} Gun Yong Sung and Jeong Dae Suh,

416: {\em "Nucleation and growth of b-axis oriented PBCO thin films on

417: LSGO(100) substrate,"} ETRI Journal vol. 18, pp. 339-345, 1997.

418: 

419: \bibitem{15} Q. Huang, J. F. Zasadzinski, N. Tralshawala, K. E. Gray, D. G. Hinks,

420: J. L. Peng and R. L. Greene, {\em "Tunneling evidence for

421: predominantly electron-phonon coupling in superconducting BKBO

422: and NCCO,"}

423: \end{references}

424: 

425: \end{document}

426: