1: %\input{tcilatex}
2: %\input{tcilatex}
3: %\input{tcilatex}
4:
5:
6: \documentclass[twocolumn,showpacs, preprintnumbers, ]{revtex4}
7: \usepackage{amssymb}
8:
9: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
10: \usepackage{graphicx}
11: \usepackage{dcolumn}
12: \usepackage{bm}
13:
14: %TCIDATA{OutputFilter=LATEX.DLL}
15: %TCIDATA{LastRevised=Wednesday, October 29, 2003 10:52:00}
16: %TCIDATA{<META NAME="GraphicsSave" CONTENT="32">}
17: %TCIDATA{Language=American English}
18: %TCIDATA{CSTFile=revtex4.cst}
19:
20: %\input{tcilatex}
21:
22: \begin{document}
23:
24: \preprint{APS/123-QED}
25: \title{Interplay between the magnetic fluctuations and superconductivity \\
26: in the lanthanum cuprates}
27: \author{G.\ B.\ Teitel'baum,\thanks{
28: E-mail: grteit@dionis.kfti.knc.ru} V.\ E.\ Kataev, E.\ L.\ Vavilova,}
29: %\affilation
30: \address{E.K.Zavoiskii Institute for Technical Physics of the RAS,\\
31: Sibirskii Trakt 10/7,\\
32: Kazan 420029, RUSSIA}
33: \author{P.\ L.\ Kuhns, A.\ P.\ Reyes, and W.\ G.\ Moulton}
34: %\affilation
35: \address{NHMFL, 1800 E P.Dirac Dr., \\
36: Tallahassee FL 32310, USA}
37:
38: \date{\today }
39:
40: \begin{abstract}
41: We report the analysis of the magnetic fluctuations in the superconducing $%
42: \mathrm{La_{2-x}Sr_xCuO_4}$ and the related lanthanum cuprates having the
43: different symmetry of the low temperature structure. The NMR and ESR
44: investigations revealed the dynamical coexistence of the superconductivity
45: and the antiferromagnetic correlations in the large part of
46: superconductivity region of the phase diagram. We show that for all
47: compounds, independent on their low temperature symmetry and on their
48: superconducting properties, the enhancement of the spin stiffness near 1/8
49: doping takes place.
50: \end{abstract}
51:
52: \pacs{ 74.25.Ha; 74.72.Dn; 76.30.-v; 76.60.-k}
53: \maketitle
54:
55: %\affilation
56: \address{E.K.Zavoiskii Institute for Technical Physics of the RAS,\\
57: Sibirskii Trakt 10/7,\\
58: Kazan 420029, RUSSIA}
59:
60: %\affilation
61: \address{NHMFL, 1800 E P.Dirac Dr., \\
62: Tallahassee FL 32310, USA}
63:
64: %\affilation
65: \address{E.K.Zavoiskii Institute for Technical Physics of the RAS,\\
66: Sibirskii Trakt 10/7,\\
67: Kazan 420029, RUSSIA}
68:
69: %\affilation
70: \address{NHMFL, 1800 E P.Dirac Dr., \\
71: Tallahassee FL 32310, USA}
72:
73: % Tel. (007/8432) 721154 ;
74: % Fax. (007/8432) 725075 ;
75:
76: % insert suggested PACS numbers in braces on next line
77: %
78: The interest to the microscopic phase separation in the high-$T_{c}$
79: superconducting materials has received a strong impetus after the discovery
80: of stripe correlations \cite{gb1}. They were observed only in the compounds
81: specially doped with the rare earth ions whose role is to induce the low
82: temperature tetragonal\textrm{\ (LTT)} phase favorable for the pinning of
83: the stripe fluctuations. Recent neutron scattering experiments \cite{gb2} in
84: the low temperature orthorhombic \textrm{(LTO)} phase of $\mathrm{%
85: La_{2-x}Sr_{x}CuO_{4}}$ with $x=0.12$ reveal the presence of modulated
86: antiferromagnetic order very similar to that found in \textrm{LTT} compound $%
87: \mathrm{{La_{1.6-x}Nd_{0.4}Sr_{x}CuO_{4}}}$. But on the larger time scale
88: the magnetic fluctuations in $\mathrm{La_{2-x}Sr_{x}CuO_{4}}$ are dynamical
89: especially for the superconducting state and their relevance to the stripe
90: structure is a matter of debate. In particular, the dynamical character of
91: the microscopic phase separation hinders the investigation of its properties
92: by means of low frequency local methods such as conventional NMR \cite%
93: {gb3,gb4}.
94:
95: The main aim of the present work is to analyze the phase diagram and the
96: properties of magnetic fluctuations for superconducting $\mathrm{%
97: La_{2-x}Sr_{x}CuO_{4}}$ and related compounds with a help of experiments
98: whose characteristic frequency is shifted to larger values in comparison
99: with the conventional NMR. We consider \textrm{ESR} ($\nu \backsim 10$ $%
100: \mathrm{GHz}$) and\ high field \textrm{NMR} ($\nu \backsim 0.1$ $\mathrm{GHz}
101: $) measurements which are focused on a comparative analysis of the magnetic
102: fluctuations for the different metalloxides. With this purpose we discuss
103: the ESR data obtained for such compounds as $\mathrm{La_{2-x}Sr_{x}CuO_{4}}$
104: \textrm{(LSCO)} \cite{gb5}, \ $\mathrm{La_{2-x}Ba_{x}CuO_{4}}$ \textrm{%
105: (LBCO) }\cite{ad3}, $\mathrm{La_{2-x-y}Eu_{y}Sr_{x}CuO_{4}}$ \textrm{(LESCO)
106: }\cite{ad4} together with the conventional NMR data for $\mathrm{%
107: La_{2-x-y}Nd_{y}Sr_{x}CuO_{4}}$ \textrm{(LNSCO) }\cite{gb8} and new high
108: field NMR data for superconducting \textrm{LSCO. }All the measurements were
109: carried out on powder samples with various hole doping. For \textrm{LSCO }%
110: the doping level covers the entire superconducting region of the phase
111: diagram, for\textrm{\ } \textrm{LBCO }we studied the doping region in the
112: vicinity of the well known $T_{c\text{ }}$dip, whereas the \textrm{LESCO}
113: and \textrm{LNSCO}\ series correspond to the nonsuperconducting \textrm{LTT }%
114: phase. The samples which were used for the \textrm{ESR} measurements were
115: doped with 1 at. \% of \textrm{Gd}, used as \textrm{ESR} probe \cite{gb5}.
116: Such tiny concentration of Gd ensured only the small suppression of $T_{c}$
117: via pair breaking.
118:
119: We analyzed the temperature and concentration dependence of the width of the
120: most intense component of multiline $\mathrm{Gd^{3+}}$ \textrm{ESR}
121: spectrum, corresponding to the fine splitting of the spin states $S=7/2$ in
122: the crystalline electric field \cite{gb5}. The typical temperature
123: dependence of the linewidth $\delta H$ is shown in Fig.\ref{Fig1}.
124:
125: The temperature behaviour for $T>T_{c}$ is qualitatively very similar for
126: all samples under study: a linear dependence of $\delta H$ \ on temperature
127: which is followed by the rapid growth of the linewidth at low $T$. \ But
128: after cooling below 40K the behaviour of superconducting and
129: nonsuperconducting samples becomes different: the linewidth of
130: superconducting \ \textrm{LSCO} exhibits the downturn starting at a
131: temperature $T_{m}$ dependent on $x$ whereas for other samples which are not
132: bulk superconductors the linewidth continues to grow upon further lowering
133: temperature (See Fig.1).
134:
135: This behaviour may be explained if to take into account that in addition to
136: the important but temperature independent residual inhomogeneous broadening
137: the linewidth is given by different homogeneous contributions linked to the
138: magnetic properties of $\mathrm{CuO_{2}}$ planes:
139:
140: i) the interaction of $\mathrm{Gd^{3+}}$ spins with the charge carriers,
141: i.e. the Korringa relaxation channel. The simplest Korringa term in the
142: linewidth is $\delta H=a+bT$ with $b=4\pi {(}JN_{F}{)}^{2}P_{M}$ (Ref.%
143: \onlinecite{gb6}), where $P_{M}=[S(S+1)-M(M+1)]$ - is the squared matrix
144: element of the \textrm{Gd }spin transitions between the $M$ and $M+1$
145: states, $\ N_{F}$ is the density of states at the Fermi level, $\ J$ is the
146: coupling constant between the \textrm{Gd }and charge carriers spins \cite%
147: {gb5}. The factor $P_{M}$ describes the Barnes-Plefka enhancement \cite{gb6}
148: of the relaxation with respect to the standard Korringa rate. Such an
149: enhancement occurs in exchange-coupled crystal field split systems where the
150: g-factors of localized and itinerant electrons are approximately equal but
151: the relaxation of conduction electrons towards the ''lattice'' is strong
152: enough to inhibit bottleneck effects. For the system under study it was
153: discussed in Ref.\onlinecite{gb5}. Note, that the enhancement of the linear
154: slope for \mbox{LESCO} compound relative to that for LSCO seen in Fig.1 is due to
155: the influence of the depopulation of the first excited magnetic \textrm{Eu }%
156: level \cite{ad4}.
157:
158: ii) the interaction of Gd with copper spins, giving rise to homogeneous
159: broadening of \textrm{Gd ESR} line (a close analogue of nuclear spin-lattice
160: relaxation):
161:
162: \begin{equation}
163: \delta H=\frac{1}{2}{(\gamma H)}^{2}P_{M}\left[ \left( \tau /3\right)
164: +\left( 2\tau /3\right) /(1+{(\omega \tau )}^{2})\right]
165: \label{eq}
166: \end{equation}%
167: where $\tau $ is the magnetic fluctuations life-time, $H$ is the internal
168: magnetic field at \textrm{Gd} site. Following Ref.\onlinecite{gb8} we assume
169: the activation law for the fluctuation lifetime temperature dependence $\tau
170: =\tau _{\infty }\exp (E_{a}/kT)$ with $\tau _{\infty }$ being the lifetime
171: at the infinite temperature and $E_{a}$ - the activation energy,
172: proportional to the spin stiffness $\rho _{s}$ $\left( E_{a}=2\pi \rho
173: _{s}\right) $.
174:
175: The second contribution describes the standard Bloembergen-Purcell-Pound
176: (BPP) behaviour: the broadening of the ESR line upon cooling with the
177: downturn at certain freezing temperature $T_{m}$ corresponding to $\omega
178: \tau =1$. Here $\omega $ is the resonant frequency. This expression is
179: written for the case when the fluctuating magnetic fields responsible for%
180: \textrm{\ Gd} spin relaxation are induced by local \textrm{Cu} moments. In
181: the polycrystalline samples the averaging over the random orientation of the
182: local \textrm{Cu} moments with respect to the external magnetic field yields
183: by a factor of 2 larger probability of their perpendicular orientation as
184: compared to the collinear one.
185:
186: \begin{figure}[h]
187: \includegraphics[width= 7 cm]{Fig_1}
188: \caption{The typical ESR linewidth temperature dependences for LTO
189: superconducting LSCO and LTT nonsuperconducting LESCO. }
190: \label{Fig1}
191: \end{figure}
192:
193: We observed that depending on the Sr content the linewidth behaviour
194: transforms from the \textrm{BPP}-like (with the maximum at $T_{m}$) to the
195: pure Korringa (linear) temperature dependence. Basing on the observation
196: that the relative weight of the \textrm{BPP}-contribution, compared with the
197: Korringa one, decreases with increasing \textrm{Sr} doping we conclude that
198: at low $x$ the \textrm{Gd} spin probes almost magnetically correlated state
199: and at the high $x$ end - almost nonmagnetic metal. Such a transformation
200: may be explained it terms of the microscopical phase separation to the
201: metallic and AF correlated phases. It is worth to remind that very soon
202: after the discovery of the high $T_{c}$ superconductivity in cuprates it was
203: suggested \cite{gb10}, that the microscopical phase coexistence is the
204: inherent feature of these materials. Note that according to the phase
205: diagram shown in Fig.\ref{Fig2} the obtained $T_{m}$ values are lower than
206: the respective $T_{c}$, although for certain hole doping they are lying
207: close to each other. The relative amount of the AF phase falls abruptly in
208: the vicinity of $x=0.20$ \ so that for $x=0.24$ any traces of it are absent.
209: One cannot exclude that this boundary is connected with the existence of the
210: widely discussed quantum critical point \cite{ad7} \ at this doping \ values.
211:
212: The different temperature dependences of the linewidths for the
213: superconducting and nonsuperconducting compounds may be consistently
214: explained assuming that for the superconducting samples the linewidth below $%
215: T_{c}$ is governed by fluctuating fields which are transversal to the
216: constant field responsible for the Zeeman splitting of the \textrm{Gd} spin
217: states (the second term in Eq.(\ref{eq}) for $\delta H$). Since these
218: fluctuations are induced by \textrm{Cu} moments lying in the \textrm{CuO}$_{%
219: \text{2}}$ planes, it means that \textrm{Gd} ions are subjected to
220: the constant magnetic field normal to these planes. This may
221: indicate that the magnetic flux lines penetrating in the layered
222: superconduting sample tend to orient normally to the basal planes
223: where the circulating superconducting currents flow (it is also
224: possible, that \textrm{Gd} ions pin the magnetic fluctuations
225: connected with the normal vortex cores). The important argument in
226: favor of the magnetic fluctuations contribution to the Gd ESR
227: linewidth is given by the fact that the BPP peak at
228: $T=T_{m}(x=0.10)\approx 16$ K is in a reasonable agreement with
229: that observed near 4 K in the $^{139}$La nuclear \ spin relaxation
230: rate temperature dependence for LSCO compound with $x=0.10$ at the
231: frequency of 140 MHz \cite{gb11}.
232:
233: In principle there might be also a second possibility of the different low
234: temperature behaviour of the linewidth for superconducting samples in
235: comparison with that for nonsuperconducting ones. The nonresonant field
236: dependent microwave absorption in the superconducting state may distort the
237: shape of the \textrm{ESR} spectrum. But these distortions should be
238: especially pronounced for the broad lines, typically for the samples with
239: the small amount of holes, whereas the temperature $T_{m}$, characteristic
240: for small $x$, is considerably lower than $T_{c}$. Thus the possible
241: distortion of \textrm{ESR} lineshape owing to the nonresonant microwave
242: absorption as the main reason for the apparent narrowing of the \textrm{ESR}
243: line below $T_{c}$ seems to be improbable.
244:
245: \begin{figure}[h]
246: \includegraphics[width= 7 cm]{Fig_2}
247: \caption{The phase diagram of the magnetic fluctuations of superconducting
248: LSCO. The triangles correspond to the magnetic transition temperature $%
249: T_{m}(x)$, squares - to the superconducting transition temperature $T_{c}(x)$
250: and the circles to the magnetic fluctuations activation energy $E_{a}(x)$.
251: The coexistence region is shown with a grey color.}
252: \label{Fig2}
253: \end{figure}
254:
255: Since the measurements were carried out at nonzero external field it is very
256: important to consider the flux lattice effects. At typical \textrm{ESR}
257: fields of approximately $0.3$ \textrm{T}, oriented normally to the \textrm{%
258: CuO}$_{\text{2}}$ layers, the period of lattice is 860 \textrm{\AA },
259: whereas the vortex cores sizes for \textrm{LSCO} are approximately 20
260: \textrm{\AA }. As the upper critical field amounts to 62 \textrm{T}, it is
261: clear that in the case of ESR the vortex cores occupy only 0.5\% of the
262: \textrm{CuO}$_{\text{2}}$ planes. According to Ref.\onlinecite{ad5,ad6} the
263: \textrm{Cu} spins in the vortex cores may be \textrm{AF} ordered. Therefore
264: the phase diagram in Fig.2 indicates that not only the spins in the normal
265: vortex cores are \textrm{AF} correlated, but the \textrm{AF} correlations
266: are spread over the distances of the order of magnetic correlation length
267: which at low doping reaches 600-700 \textrm{\AA } \cite{ad6}.
268:
269: Numerical simulations of the \textrm{Gd ESR} linewidths for the compounds
270: with the different Sr content enable us to estimate the values of the
271: parameters in the expression for the linewidth. For example the maximal
272: effective internal field $H$ in the rare earth positions is about
273: 200\thinspace\ \textrm{Oe}; the life time $\tau _{\infty }$, which was found
274: to be material dependent, for LSCO is equal to $\tau _{\infty }=0.3\cdot
275: 10^{-12}$ sec, and the activation energies $E_{a}$ for all investigated
276: compounds are shown in Figs.2, 3. Note that since the influence of the Nd
277: magnetic moments for the LNSCO compound hinders the ESR measurements the
278: activation energy for this compound was estimated from the measurements of
279: the nuclear spin relaxation on Cu and La nuclei.
280:
281: \begin{figure}[h]
282: \includegraphics[width= 7 cm]{Fig_3}
283: \caption{The activation energies $E_{a}(x)\ \ $for the magnetic fluctuations
284: in the different cuprates versus the hole doping $x$. \ Shadowed is the
285: boundary separating the \ $E_{a}(x)$ \ values corresponding to
286: nonsuperconducting and bulk superconducting phases. }
287: \label{Fig3}
288: \end{figure}
289:
290: The enhancement of $E_{a}$ (that is of a spin stiffness $\rho _{s}$) near $%
291: x=0.12$ shown in Fig.3 gives evidence of the developed antiferromagnetic
292: correlations for all investigated compounds and explains both the
293: anomalously narrow peak in inelastic neutron scattering \cite{gb7} and the
294: elastic incommensurate peak with a narrow q-width \cite{gb2} reported for
295: the superconducting $\mathrm{La_{2-x}Sr_{x}CuO_{4}}$ for this Sr doping.
296: This indicates the important role of the commensurability and gives evidence
297: of the plane character of the inhomogeneous spin and charge distributions.
298: The maximal activation energies are 80 K for \textrm{LSCO}, 144 \textrm{K}
299: for \textrm{LBCO}, 160 \textrm{K} for \textrm{LESCO} and 143 \textrm{K} for
300: \textrm{LNSCO}. Note that for \textrm{LBCO} and \textrm{LESCO} the
301: signatures of the bulk superconductivity \cite{ad3,ad4} become visible upon
302: the suppression (in course of the \textrm{Ba }or \textrm{Sr} doping) of the
303: activation energy down to 80-85 \textrm{K}. Therefore it is plausible to
304: assume that these values of the activation energy are probably the critical
305: ones for the realization of the bulk superconducting state. The
306: corresponding boundary is shown in Fig.\ref{Fig3}. Fluctuations with the
307: higher activation energies (spin stiffness) are effectively pinned and
308: suppress the superconductivity.
309:
310: To obtain the information about the ordered magnetic moments for the \
311: compounds with the enhanced spin stiffness the NMR measurements at
312: 20-25\thinspace\ T were carried out in a high homogeneity resistive magnet
313: of the NHMFL in Tallahassee FL. The temperature and doping dependencies of $%
314: ^{63,65}$Cu and $^{139}$La NMR field sweep spectra of the oriented powders $%
315: \mathrm{La_{2-x}Sr_{x}CuO_{4}}$ were studied. According to the previous La
316: NQR results \cite{gb3,gb11} the measurements of oriented powder samples in a
317: magnetic field perpendicular to \textbf{c} axis revealed that for Sr content
318: near 1/8 the central lines of the observed spectra both for Cu and La
319: exhibit the broadening upon cooling below 40-50\thinspace\ K (Fig.\ref{Fig4}%
320: ).
321:
322: \begin{figure}[h]
323: \includegraphics[width= 7 cm]{Fig_4}
324: \caption{The temperature dependence of the $^{63}$Cu and $^{139}$La NMR
325: linewidths for the superconducting LSCO with $x=0.12$. }
326: \label{Fig4}
327: \end{figure}
328:
329: Such a behaviour is connected with the slowing down of the magnetic
330: fluctuations, which are gradually slowing down upon ordering. The broadening
331: of the La NMR line allows us to estimate that the additional magnetic field
332: at La nucleus is 0.015\thinspace\ T. If we consider that for the
333: antiferromagnet $\mathrm{La_{2}CuO_{4}}$ the copper moment of 0.64$\mu _{B}$
334: induces at the La site the field of 0.1\thinspace \textrm{T} \cite{gb12},
335: then the effective magnetic moment in the present case is $\sim 0.09\mu _{B}$%
336: . Note that the manifestation of the magnetic order only in the vicinity of $%
337: x=1/8$, when the AF structure is commensurate with the lattice, indicates
338: that the magnetic inhomogeneities are of a plane character.
339:
340: In conclusion our investigation reveals that for all studied compounds
341: independent on the symmetry type (LTO or LTT) in the neighbourhood of $1/8$
342: doping the enhancement of the spin stiffness takes place. The compounds with
343: the spin stiffness larger than the certain critical value (See Fig.3) reveal
344: no bulk superconductivity.
345:
346: According to the phase diagram the inherent feature of the superconducting
347: state in cuprates is the presence of frozen antiferromagnetic correlations.
348: Such a coexistence seems to be a result of phase separation at the
349: microscopic scale as it was discussed in pioneering paper of Gor'kov and
350: Sokol \cite{gb10}.
351:
352: In the neighbourhood of $1/8$ doping this coexistence may be realized in a
353: form of dynamic stripes, since the corresponding enhancement of the
354: spin-stiffness reveals the plane character of the spin (and charge)
355: inhomogeneities.
356:
357: One of the authors (G.B.T.) is grateful to L.P.Gor'kov for the valuable
358: discussions of the phase separation specifics for the cuprates. This work is
359: partially supported through the RFFR Grant N 01-02-17533.
360:
361: \begin{references}
362: \bibitem{gb1} J.M.Tranquada B.J. Sternlieb B.J., J.D.Axe {\it et al}, Nature
363: {\bf 375,} 561 (1995).
364:
365: \bibitem{gb2} T.Suzuki, T.Goto., K.Chiba {\it et al}, Phys.Rev. B{\bf \ 57,}
366: R3229 (1998).
367:
368: \bibitem{gb3} S.Oshugi, Y. Kitaoka, H.Yamanaka {\it et al.}, J. Phys.
369: Soc.Jpn. {\bf 63, }2057 (1994).
370:
371: \bibitem{gb4} T.Goto, K.Chiba, M.Mori {\it et al}, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. {\bf %
372: 66,} 2870 (1997).
373:
374: \bibitem{gb5} V.Kataev, Yu. Greznev, E.Kukovitskii {\it et al}, JETP Lett.
375: {\bf 56,} 385 (1992); V.Kataev, Yu.Greznev, G.Teitel'baum {\it et al}, Phys.
376: Rev. B{\bf \ 48,} 13042 (1993).
377:
378: \bibitem{ad3} \ B.Z.Rameev, E.F.Kukovitskii, V.E.Kataev, G.B.Teitel'baum,
379: Physica C, {\bf 246}, 309 (1995).
380:
381: \bibitem{ad4} V.E.Kataev, B.Z.Rameev, B.Buechner, M.Huecker, R.Borowski,
382: Phys.Rev. B{\bf \ 55}, R3394 (1997); V.E.Kataev V.E., B.Z.Rameev, A.Validov
383: {\it et al}, Phys.Rev. B{\bf \ 58}, R11876 (1998).
384:
385: \bibitem{gb8} G.B.Teitel'baum, I.M.Abu-Schiekah I.M., O.Bakharev {\it et
386: al}, Phys.Rev. B{\bf \ 63,} 020507(R) (2001).
387:
388: \bibitem{gb6} S.E.Barnes, Adv. Phys. {\bf 30, }\ 801 (1981).
389:
390: \bibitem{gb10} L.P.Gor'kov, A.V.Sokol, JETP Lett. {\bf 46, }420 (1987).
391:
392: \bibitem{ad7} S.Sachdev, Rev. Mod. Phys., {\bf \ 75,} 913 (2003).
393:
394: \bibitem{gb11} M.-H.Julien, A.Campana, A.Rigamonti {\it et al.}, Phys.Rev.%
395: {\bf \ }B{\bf \ 63, }144508 (2001).
396:
397: \bibitem{ad5} D.P.Arovas, A.J.Berlinsky, C.Kallin, S.C.Zhang, Phys. Rev.
398: Lett. {\bf 79}, 2871 (1997).
399:
400: \bibitem{ad6} B.Lake, G.Aeppli, K.N.Clausen {\it et al}, Science, {\bf 291}, 832 (2001).
401:
402: \bibitem{gb7} K.Yamada, C.H.Lee, K.Kurahashi {\it et al}, Phys.Rev. B{\bf \
403: 57,} 6165 (1998).
404:
405: \bibitem{gb12} T.Tsuda, T.Shimizu, H.Yasuoka {\it et al}, \ J.Phys.Soc.Jpn.
406: {\bf 57, } 2908 (1988).
407:
408: \end{references}
409:
410: \end{document}
411: