1: \documentclass[pss,fleqn]{w-art}
2: \usepackage{times}
3: \usepackage{w-thm}
4: \usepackage{graphicx}
5: \begin{document}
6: \newcommand {\bea}{\begin{eqnarray}}
7: \newcommand {\eea}{\end{eqnarray}}
8: \newcommand {\nn}{\nonumber}
9: \newcommand {\bb}{\bibitem}
10: %% The information for the title page will be placed between
11: %% \begin{document} and \maketitle. The order of most entries
12: %% is determined by the class file and can not be changed by
13: %% rearranging them. The maketitle command follows after the
14: %% abstract.
15: %%
16: %% Most of the following commands will be completed by the publisher.
17: %%
18: %% The copyrightyear is defined in the .clo file as the first argument
19: %% of the copyrightinfo command. If the copyrightyear differs from that
20: %% value it might be adjusted by the following definition:
21: %%
22: %% \renewcommand{\copyrightyear}{2003}% uncomment to change the copyrightyear.
23: %%
24: \DOIsuffix{theDOIsuffix}
25: %%
26: %% issueinfo for header and copyright line
27: \Volume{XX}
28: \Issue{1}
29: \Month{01}
30: \Year{2003}
31: %%
32: %% First and last pagenumber of the article. If the option
33: %% 'autolastpage' is set (default) the second argument may be left empty.
34: \pagespan{1}{}
35: %%
36: %% Dates will be filled in by the publisher. The 'reviseddate' and
37: %% 'dateposted' (Published online) entry may be left empty.
38: \Receiveddate{}
39: \Reviseddate{}
40: \Accepteddate{}
41: \Dateposted{}
42: %%
43: \keywords{cuprate, d-wave superconductivity, d-wave density wave}
44: \subjclass[pacs]{74.70.-b}
45: \title{Bottom-up approach to high-temperature superconductivity}
46:
47: %% Please do not enter footnotes or \inst{}-notes into the optional
48: %% argument of the author command. The optional argument will go into
49: %% the header. If there is only one address the marker \inst{x} may be
50: %% omitted.
51: %% Information for the third author
52: \author[H. Won]{Hyekyung Won\inst{1}}
53: \address[\inst{1}] {Department of Physics, Hallym
54: University, Chuncheon 200-702, South Korea}
55: \author[S. Haas]{Stephan Haas\inst{2}}
56: \address[\inst{2}]{Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Southern
57: California, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0484 USA}
58: \author[K. Maki]{Kazumi Maki\inst{2}}
59:
60:
61: %%
62: %% Information for the second author
63: %%
64:
65:
66: \begin{abstract}
67: Since the discovery of high-temperature superconductivity in the cuprates
68: a theoretical understanding of their phase diagram has remained one of the
69: major outstanding problems in condensed matter physics. Here we propose an
70: effective low-energy Hamiltonian which produces both d-wave density wave (dDW)
71: and d-wave superconducting (dSC) solutions within the BCS mean-field theory.
72: This model predicts that (a) the observed pseudogap phase is a dDW state,
73: (b) the superconducting phase is a d-wave BCS state, and (c) in the underdoped
74: regime there is a gossamer superconducting state, i.e. dSC in coexistence with
75: dDW. Moreover, this theory naturally explains
76: the Uemura relation, the reduction of
77: the quasiparticle density of states at the Fermi level, and the salient
78: features in the tunneling conductivity measured in underdoped Bi2212.
79: \end{abstract}
80: \maketitle % Produces the title.
81:
82:
83: \section{Introduction}
84:
85: In 1986,
86: the discovery of high-temperature superconductivity in the cuprates took
87: the physics community by surprise.\cite{1} This was the starting point of a
88: new era in condensed matter physics. Many practical
89: applications of these new compounds were envisioned, and at the same time
90: an intense debate arose regarding the origin and possible mechanisms leading to
91: this new phenomenon.
92: Enz recorded the often confusing discussions of the early days of
93: high-Tc research in his beautiful textbook.\cite{2} One of the most influential
94: contributions to the theory of these materials was provided by Anderson's
95: ``dogmas".\cite{3} He stated that the cuprate high-Tc phase diagram
96: arises from an inherent competition between a Mott insulator phase and
97: s-wave BCS superconductivity in these materials.
98: In order to model high-Tc superconductivity, he proposed a two-dimensional
99: one-band Hubbard model in combination with a resonant valence bond (RVB)
100: wave function. A great portion of the theoretical community in the field
101: has since embraced these dogmas. However, unfortunately we still remain
102: without a clear vision as to where these dogmas are leading us.\cite{4}
103: Around 1990, Scalapino and others\cite{5} pointed out that a perturbative
104: analysis of the 2D Hubbard model in the weak-coupling limit produces d-wave
105: superconductivity. Indeed, a d-wave superconducting order parameter was
106: experimentally established around 1994 for single crystal samples of
107: optimally doped Bi2212, YBCO and LSCO, using powerful angle resolved
108: photoemission spectroscopy (ARPES)\cite{6} and elegant Josephson
109: interferometry\cite{7,8}. These observations motivated us to investigate
110: d-wave superconductivity within the BCS framework.\cite{9,10,11}
111:
112: \begin{figure}[h]
113: \includegraphics[width=8cm]{fig1.eps}
114: \caption{The phase diagram for the high-T$_{c}$ cuprates. p denotes the hole
115: doping concentration. PG is the pseudogap region.}
116: \end{figure}
117:
118: Before elaborating further, let us first examine the generic phase diagram
119: of the hole doped high-Tc cuprate superconductors shown in Fig. 1. From the
120: beginning, this phase diagram has been hotly debated. Around the year 2000,
121: a few groups suggested that the pseudogap region can be described by a
122: d-wave density wave (dDW) phase. Indeed, the giant Nernst effect observed in
123: the underdoped Bi2212, YBCO and LSCO\cite{17,18,19} and the angle dependent
124: magnetoresistance in Y$_{0.68}$Pr$_{0.32}$CuO$_4$ \cite{20} have been
125: found to be fully consistent with dDW.\cite{21,22} In past work, we have shown
126: that these are consequences of the Landau quantization of the quasiparticle
127: spectrum in a magnetic field, analogous to earlier
128: considerations by Nersesyan et al.
129: \cite{23,24} Moreover, we note that the Fermi arcs (or pockets) in
130: the ($\pi,\pi$) directions, observed by ARPES, follow directly from dDW.
131: \cite{16,25,26} Furthermore, it is by now well established that the overdoped
132: regions of the cuprates
133: can also be described in terms of a d-wave BCS model.
134: \cite{11,15}
135:
136: Recently, Laughlin\cite{27}
137: pointed out that the Gutzwiller operator which is commonly
138: used in the RVB wave function is not mathematically tractable, and proposed
139: to replace it by a less constrained Jastrow operator. He named the resulting
140: coexistence phase
141: ``gossamer superconductivity", i.e. a condensate with a reduced
142: superfluid density and reduced density of states near the Fermi surface.
143: Such a reduction of the quasiparticle density of states has recently been
144: observed by Tallon et al\cite{28,29} by means of a thermodynamic analysis
145: and the effect of Zn impurities in YBCO over a wide doping range. In section 4
146: we will return to the characterization of gossamer superconductivity.
147: Note also that gossamer superconductivity emerges naturally from the phase
148: diagram in Fig. 1 as a coexistent phase of d-wave superconductivity in the
149: presence of a d-wave density wave.\cite{14,15,16} In the following we will
150: explore this gossamer superconductivity phenomenon in detail.
151:
152: \section{Effective Hamiltonian}
153:
154: In this section,
155: we construct an effective low-energy Hamiltonian that constitutes
156: the basis of
157: the bottom-up approach. This approach
158: should be viewed as an alternative
159: to the common top-down approaches originating from higher-energy
160: Hamiltonians, such as the t-J and Hubbard
161: models. Considering the energy scales of these models,
162: e.g. typically a Hubbard U of
163: the order of 10$^6$K, it turns out to be a rather difficult task to arrive
164: at superconducting phenomena that exist at scales of Tc$\sim 10^3$K.
165: Based on the renormalization group analysis of 2D electron systems\cite{30}
166: we understand that the normal state is a Fermi liquid,
167: i.e. not a Luttinger liquid or bosonic liquid. Here we define the Fermi
168: liquid via a quasiparticle Green function which has simple poles, a definition
169: that is consistent with Shankar\cite{30} and Landau\cite{31}.
170: Furthermore, we know
171: that at sufficiently low temperatures the normal state becomes unstable against
172: infrared divergences in the 2-particle and/or 2-hole channels, implying
173: superconductivity, or unstable against
174: divergences in the particle-hole channel, implying
175: density wave phases.
176:
177: The effective low-energy Hamiltonian for such a system is given
178: by\cite{14,32,33}
179: \bea
180: H &=& \sum_{k,\sigma} \left( \epsilon_k - \mu \right) c^{\dagger}_{k,\sigma}
181: c_{k,\sigma} - \sum_{k,\sigma} \left( \Delta_1(k) c^{\dagger}_{k+Q,\sigma}
182: c_{k,\sigma} + \Delta^*_1(k) c^{\dagger}_{k,\sigma} c_{k+Q,\sigma} \right)
183: \nn \\
184: &-& \sum_{k} \left( \Delta_2(k) c^{\dagger}_{k,\uparrow}
185: c^{\dagger}_{-k,\downarrow} + \Delta^*_2(k) c_{-k,\downarrow}
186: c_{k,\uparrow} \right)
187: - g^{-1}_1 |\Delta_1(k)|^2 - g^{-1}_2 |\Delta_2(k)|^2,
188: \eea
189: where the amplitude and angular parts of the order parameters separate via
190: $\Delta_1(k) = \Delta_1 f(k)$ and $\Delta_2(k) = \Delta_2 f(k)$, and
191: $Q \sim (\pi,\pi )$ is the nesting vector.
192: Two self-consistent gap equations follow directly from this Hamiltonian:
193: \bea
194: \Delta^*_1 &=& \frac{g_1}{\langle f^2(k)\rangle } \sum{k,\sigma} f(k)
195: \langle c^{\dagger}_{k+Q,\sigma} c_{k,\sigma} \rangle ,
196: \\
197: \Delta^*_2 &=& \frac{g_2}{\langle f^2(k)\rangle } \sum{k,\sigma} f(k)
198: \langle c^{\dagger}_{k,\uparrow} c^{\dagger}_{-k,\downarrow} \rangle .
199: \eea
200: Here $\Delta_1$ and $\Delta_2$ are the order parameters of dDW and dSC
201: respectively. In the following,
202: we use $f(k) = \cos(2 \phi)$ as the angular
203: dependence.
204: A similar Hamiltonian has been considered in related work by
205: Thalmeier.\cite{32} However this study was limited to conventional DW and
206: conventional SC, and to the case of vanishing chemical potential $\mu$.
207: As we shall see here, $\mu$ is an important control parameter in the present
208: model.\cite{16} Moreover, when both DW and SC are conventional, there
209: is little room for their coexistence; instead phase separation is the rule.
210: \cite{32} On the other hand, when both order parameters are unconventional,
211: there
212: is ample opportunity for their coexistence.\cite{33} This fact will be exploited in the following.
213:
214: The Nambu-Gorkov Green function\cite{34} of this model is given by
215: \bea
216: G^{-1}(k,\omega_n)=i \omega_n - \epsilon_k \rho_3 \sigma_3 + \mu \sigma_3
217: + |\Delta_1|\exp(-i\phi_1 \rho_3 ) f(k) \rho_1 \sigma_3 +
218: |\Delta_2|\exp(-i\phi_2 \sigma_3 ) f(k) \sigma_1,
219: \eea
220: and the corresponding spinor field is
221: \bea
222: \Psi_k = \left( c^{\dagger}_{k,\sigma}, c_{-k,-\sigma} ,
223: c^{\dagger}_{k+Q,\sigma} , c_{-k-Q,-\sigma} \right).
224: \eea
225: One notes that unlike in Ref. \cite{14}, the present $G^{-1}(k,\omega_n)$
226: possesses two Abelian gauge transformations associated with $\phi_1$
227: (sliding motion of dDW) and $\phi_2$ (supercurrent in dSC). The determinant
228: of $G^{-1}(k,\omega_n)$ is given by
229: \bea
230: D = det| G^{-1}(k,\omega_n) | = \left(
231: \omega_n^2 + \epsilon_k^2 + \mu^2 + |\Delta_1(k)|^2 + |\Delta_2(k)|^2 \right)^2
232: - 4\mu^2 \left( \epsilon_k^2 + |\Delta_1(k)|^2 \right).
233: \eea
234: Using this result, the quasiparticle energy is found to be
235: \bea
236: E = \pm \sqrt{ \left( \sqrt{\epsilon_k^2 + |\Delta_1(k)|^2 } \mp \mu \right)^2
237: + |\Delta_2(k)|^2 },
238: \eea
239: which agrees with earlier results.\cite{12,30}
240: Finally, the quasiparticle density of states is given by
241: \bea
242: \frac{N(E)}{N_0} =\left< \left| Re \frac{E}
243: {\sqrt{ \left( \sqrt{\epsilon_k^2 - \Delta_2^2 f(k)^2 } \mp \mu \right)^2
244: - \Delta_1^2 f(k)^2}}
245: \left( 1 \mp \frac{\mu}{\sqrt{E^2 - \Delta_2^2 f(k)^2 }} \right)
246: \right| \right>,
247: \eea
248: where + and - stand for the positive-energy and negative-energy solutions
249: respectively.
250:
251: \begin{figure}[h!]
252: \includegraphics[width=8cm,angle=270]{fig2.ps}
253: \caption{Quasiparticle density of states in a gossamer superconductor
254: with the energy scale set by the superconducting energy gap $\Delta_2 = 1$.}
255: \end{figure}
256:
257: In Fig. 2 the quasiparticle density of states is shown for a particular
258: set of parameters. For these parameters, we observe clear dips in the
259: vicinity of E=0 , as well as a quasi-linear dependence on energy.
260: In the regime $\Delta_1 - \mu <\Delta_2$ one of the peaks splits into
261: two peaks. Although such a split peak has not yet been observed
262: experimentally, except in
263: the presence of Ni impurities,\cite{35} the present result is
264: consistent with recent measurements on underdoped Bi2212.\cite{36} Moreoever,
265: this result is rather different from earlier work by Zeyher and Greco \cite{37}
266: who assumed $\mu$ = 0.
267:
268: \section{D-Wave Density Wave Phase}
269:
270: Equations 2 and 3 can be transformed to\cite{33}
271: \bea
272: \lambda^{-1}_1 &=& 4\pi T \sum_n Re \langle f(k)^2 d^{-1} \rangle \\
273: \lambda^{-1}_2 &=& 4\pi T \sum_n Re \langle f(k)^2 Re \left[ \left(
274: 1 - \frac{i \mu}{\sqrt{\omega_n^2 + \Delta_2^2 f(k)^2 }} \right) d^{-1} \right]
275: \rangle ,
276: \eea
277: where $ d = [ ( \sqrt{\omega_n^2 + \Delta_2^2 f(k)^2 } - \mu)^2
278: + \Delta_1^2 f(k)^2 ]^{1/2}$. Here $\lambda_1 = g_1 N_0$ and
279: $\lambda_2 = g_2 N_0$ are dimensionless coupling constants, and $N_0 =
280: N(0)$ is the quasiparticle density of states in the normal state.
281:
282: First, the phase diagram of the pure dDW states
283: is easily obtained by setting $\Delta_2 =0$.
284: \cite{16} In this case, Eq. 10 reduces in the limit $\Delta_1 \rightarrow 0$ to
285: \bea
286: -ln \left( \frac{T_{c1}}{T_{c10}} \right) = Re \psi \left( \frac{1}{2}
287: - \frac{i \mu}{2\pi T_{c1}} \right) - \psi \left( \frac{1}{2} \right),
288: \eea
289: where $T_{c1}$ is the transition temperature for dDW and $\psi (z)$ is the
290: di-gamma function. Using $T_{c10}$=800K \cite{38}, one arrives at the phase
291: diagram shown in Fig. 3. Note that Eq. 13 is the same for s-wave and
292: d-wave superconductors\cite{39,40,41} in the limit
293: when the Pauli term dominates over the orbital term.
294:
295: \begin{figure}[h]
296: \includegraphics[width=8cm,angle=270]{fig3.eps}
297: \caption{The phase diagram of the high-T$_{c}$ cuprates. The shaded area
298: denotes $T_{c2}(\mu )$, whose determination from the present model will be
299: presented in a future publication.}
300: \end{figure}
301:
302: It is observed that $T_{c1}$ bends backwards in the region $\mu/\Delta_{10}
303: \leq 0.558$. A similar diagram has also been found in Ref. \cite{37}. However,
304: if we additionally allow a spatial variation of the dDW order parameter
305: $\Delta_1$, we obtain
306: \bea
307: -ln \left( \frac{T_{c1}}{T_{c10}} \right) = Re
308: \left< \left( 1 \pm \cos(4 \phi ) \right) \psi \left(\frac{1}{2} -
309: \frac{i \mu (1 - p \cos(\phi)}{2\pi T_{c1}}
310: \right) \right> - \psi \left(\frac{1}{2} \right),
311: \eea
312: where $p=v|q|/2\mu$. This yields the extended portion shown in
313: Fig. 3, analogous to the Fulde-Ferrell-Larkin-Ovchinnikov (FFLO)
314: \cite{42,43} state in d-wave superconductors.\cite{44} There is a further
315: transition when the q-vector is rotated from the [100] to the [110] direction.
316: Finally, the dDW regime terminates when $\mu/ \Delta_{10} =0.824$. We
317: call these
318: periodic dDW phases dDWII and dDWIII respectively.
319:
320: \section{Gossamer Superconductivity}
321:
322: Now we can ask how dSC appears on top of this dDW background. In the following,
323: we shall limit ourselves to the region $\Delta_1 \gg \Delta_2, \mu$. Then we
324: can deduce in the vicinity of the superconducting transition temperature,
325: $T_{c2}$, the quasiparticle density of states at the Fermi surface which is
326: given by
327: \bea
328: g(\mu ,0) = \langle g (0,k) \rangle = \frac{2}{\pi} x K(x),
329: \eea
330: with $x = \mu/\Delta_1(\mu )$ and $K(z)$ is the complete elliptic function
331: of the first kind. $g(\mu ,0)$ resembles the quasiparticle density of
332: states deduced from the analysis of Zn-impurities\cite{28}. The corresponding
333: low-temperature entropy is given by\cite{29}
334: \bea
335: \frac{S}{T} = \frac{27\zeta(3)}{2\pi^2} \gamma_N g(\mu ) \frac{T}{\Delta_2(\mu )},
336: \eea
337: where $\gamma_N = \pi^2 N_0/3$.
338: On the other hand, the superconducting transition temperature and free energy
339: are controlled by
340: \bea
341: g_1 (\mu , 0 ) = 2 \langle \cos^2(2 \phi) g( 0, k) \rangle =
342: \frac{4x}{\pi} (K(x) - E(x)),
343: \eea
344: as
345: \bea
346: T_c(\mu ) &=& 1.136 \Delta_1 (\mu ) \exp[-(\lambda^{-1}_1 - \lambda^{-1}_2)
347: g^{-1} (\mu , 0 )] , \\
348: U_0 &=& - \frac{1}{4} N_0 g_1 (\mu ) [\Delta_2 ( \mu, 0 )]^2.
349: \eea
350: Eq. (16) appears to somewhat
351: overestimate $T_c(\mu )$, and hence a more detailed
352: treatment needs to be developed in order to be more realistic.
353: The functions $\Delta_1 (\mu)/\Delta_{10}$, $g(\mu , 0)$ and $g_1(\mu, 0) $
354: are shown in Fig. 4. The dependence of the
355: functions $g(\mu , 0)$ and $g_1(\mu, 0) $ on $\mu / \Delta_{10}$ is in
356: agreement with available experimental data.\cite{28,29}
357:
358: \begin{figure}[h]
359: \includegraphics[width=8cm,angle=270]{fig4.eps}
360: \caption{Functions $\Delta_1 (\mu)/\Delta_{10}$, $g(\mu , 0)$ and
361: $g_1(\mu, 0)$,
362: controlling the low-doping region of the high-Tc superconductors.
363: }
364: \end{figure}
365:
366: By solving the coupled gap equations in the regime $\Delta_2, \mu \ll \Delta_1$
367: we find\cite{16}
368: \bea
369: \rho_s (0) &=& \simeq \frac{\Delta_2^2 (\mu , 0 )}{\Delta^2 (0)} ,\\
370: T_{c2} &=& \frac{1}{2 \ln 2} \frac{\Delta_2^2 (\mu , 0 )}{\Delta^2 (0)} ,\\
371: \lambda^{-2} (\mu, 0) &=& \frac{4\pi e^2}{m^*} p \rho_s (0).
372: \eea
373: These are essentially the Uemura relations.\cite{45}
374: Therefore, if we limit ourselves to the deeply underdoped region,
375: many experimentally observed
376: features of gossamer superconductivity follow naturally
377: from the present model.
378:
379: \section{Concluding Remarks}
380:
381: The model treated here is based on an effective low-energy Hamiltonian which
382: describes dDW and dSC states
383: with the chemical potential as a control parameter.
384: This theory accounts for the following
385: principle features of high-temperature cuprate
386: superconductors: (a) the normal state is a Fermi liquid, (b) the
387: pseudogap phase is a dDW (more recently a d-wave spin density wave has also
388: been
389: suggested\cite{46,47}), (c) the superconductivity in the optimal to overdoped
390: regime has a BCS d-wave order parameter, and (d) in the underdoped regime
391: there is gossamer superconductivity, i.e. dSC coexisting with dDW.
392:
393: Recent related studies on heavy fermion compounds, such as CeCoIn$_5$
394: under pressure\cite{48}, and organic conductors, such as
395: $\beta$''-(BEDT-TTF)$_4$[N$_3$O)M(C$_2$O$_4$]C$_5$H$_5$N with M = Ga and Cr
396: \cite{49,50}, have revealed many parallels between the high-Tc cuprates and
397: these systems. These include (a) a layered structure or
398: quasi-two-dimensionality, (b) d-wave superconductivity\cite{51,52}, and (c)
399: d-wave density wave phases\cite{47,53,54}. In the heavy fermion and
400: organic conductors the horizontal axis in Fig. 3 needs to be replaced by
401: the external pressure P, but otherwise their phase diagrams look very
402: similar. This suggest strongly that the present model is rather universal and
403: applies to many strongly correlated electron systems.
404:
405: Let us finally
406: note that gossamer superconductivity is not necessarily restricted to
407: dSC and dDW. For example, recent experiments on the Bechgaard salts
408: (TMTSF)$_2$PF$_6$ at ambient
409: pressure\cite{55,56,57} and measurements of the angle
410: dependent magnetothermal conductivity in URu$_2$Si$_2$\cite{58}
411: suggest that
412: there are other kinds of gossamer superconductivity, e.g.
413: f-wave superconductivity coexisting with a d-wave spin density wave.
414: Hence it will not be surprising if similar coexistence states will soon be
415: discovered in related strongly correlated electron systems.
416: \begin{acknowledgement}
417: We are grateful for inspiring and stimulating discussions with Dionys
418: Baeriswyl, Christian Bernhard, Amalia Coldea, Balasz Dora, Jeff Tallon,
419: Peter Thalmeier, Andras Vanyolos and Attila Virosztek. K.M. and H.W.
420: acknowledge the hospitality of the Max-Planck Institute f\"ur Physik
421: komplexer Systeme at Dresden
422: where most of this work was performed.
423: S.H. acknowledges financial support from the Petroleum Research Foundations,
424: grant ACS PRF\# 41757 -AC10.
425: \end{acknowledgement}
426:
427: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
428: \bb{1} J.G. Bednorz and K.A. M\"uller, Z. Phys. B {\bf 64}, 180 (1986).
429: \bb{2} C.P. Enz, A Course in Many-Body Theory Applied to Solid State Physics
430: (World Scientific, Singapore, 1992).
431: \bb{3} P.W. Anderson, Science {\bf 235}, 1196 (1987); The Theory of
432: High-T$_{c}$ Superconductivity (Princeton, 1998).
433: \bb{4} S. Maekawa {\it et al.}, (editors) ``Physics of Transition Metal
434: Oxides" (Springer, Berlin 2004).
435: \bb{5} D.J. Scalapino, Phys. Report {\bf 250}, 329 (1995).
436: \bb{6} A. Damascelli, Z. Houssain and Z.X. Shen, Rev. Mod. Phys. {\bf 72},
437: 969 (2000).
438: \bb{7} D.J. Van Harlingen, Rev. Mod. Phys. {\bf 67}, 515 (1995).
439: \bb{8} C.C. Tsuei and J.R. Kirtley, Rev. Mod. Phys. {\bf 72}, 969 (2000).
440: \bb{9} H. Won and K. Maki, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 49}, 1397 (1994).
441: \bb{10} K. Maki in ``Lectures on the Physics of Highly Correlated Electron
442: Systems", AIP Conference Proceedings 438 (Woodbuy 1998).
443: \bb{11} H. Won, S. Haas, K. Maki, D. Parker, S. Telang, and A. Vanyolos
444: in ``Lectures on the Physics of Highly Correlated Electron
445: Systems", AIP Conference Proceedings 789 (Melville 2005).
446: \bb{12} E. Capelutti and R. Zeyher, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 59}, 6475 (1999).
447: \bb{13} L. Benfatto, S. Caprara and C. Di Castro, Eur. Phys. J. B {\bf 17},
448: 95 (2000).
449: \bb{14} S. Chakraverty, R.B Laughlin, D.K. Morr and C. Nayak, Phys. Rev B
450: {\bf 63}, 094503 (2001).
451: \bb{15} H. Won, S. Haas, D. Parker and K. Maki, Phys. Stat. Sol. (b)
452: {\bf 242}, 363 (2005).
453: \bb{16} H. Won, S. Haas, K. Maki, D. Parker, B. Dora, and A. Virosztek,
454: Phys. Stat. Sol. (b) {\bf 243}, 37 (2006).
455: \bb{17} Y. Wang, Z.A. Xu, T. Kakeshita, S. Uchida, S. Ono, Y. Ando and N.P.
456: Ong, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 64}, 224519 (2001).
457: \bb{18} C. Capan, K. Behnia, J. Hinderer, A.G.M. Jansen, W. Lang, C. Marcenat,
458: C. Marin and J. Flouquet, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 88}, 056601 (2003).
459: \bb{19} Y. Wang, N.P. Ong, Z.A. Xu, T. Kakeshita, S. Uchida, D.A. Bonn,
460: R. Liang and W.N. Hardy, Phys. Rev Lett. {\bf 87}, 257003 (2002).
461: \bb{20} V. Sandu, E. Cimpoiasu, T. Katuwai, Shi Li,
462: M.B. Maple and C.C. Almasan, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 93}, 177005 (2004).
463: \bb{21} K. Maki, B. Dora, A. Vanyolos and A. Virosztek, Curr. Appl. Phys.
464: {\bf 4}, 693 (2004).
465: \bb{22} B. Dora, K. Maki, A. Virosztek, Europhys. Lett. {\bf 72}, 1 (2005).
466: \bb{23} A.A. Nersesyan and G.I. Vachnadze, J. Low Temp. Phys. {\bf 77},
467: 293 (1989).
468: \bb{24} A.A. Nersesyan, G.I. Japaridze and I.G. Kimeridze, J. Phys. Cond.
469: Matt. {\bf 3}, 3353 (1991).
470: \bb{25} H. Ding, T. Yokoya, J.C. Campuzano, T. Takahashi, M. Randeira,
471: M. Norman, T. Mochiku, K. Kadowaki, and J. Giapintzakis, Nature {\bf 302},
472: 51 (1996).
473: \bb{26} H. Ding, J.R. Engelbrecht, Z. Wang, J.C. Campuzano, S.-C. Wang,
474: H.-B. Wang, R. Ragan, T. Takajashi, K. Kadowaki, and D.G. Hinks, Phys.
475: Rev. Lett. {\bf 87}, 227001 (2001).
476: \bb{27} R.B. Laughlin, cond-mat/0209269.
477: \bb{28} J.L. Tallon and J.W. Loram, Physica C {\bf 349}, 53 (2001).
478: \bb{29} J.L. Tallon, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 58}, R5956 (1998).
479: \bb{30} R. Shankar, Rev. Mod. Phys. {\bf 66}, 129 (1994).
480: \bb{31} L.D. Landau, Soviet Phys. JETP {\bf 3}, 920 (1957).
481: \bb{32} P. Thalmeier, Z. Phys. B {\bf 95}, 39 (1994).
482: \bb{33} S. Haas, K. Maki, T. Dahm, and P. Thalmeier,
483: to be published in Curr. Appl. Phys. (2006).
484: \bb{34} Y. Nambu, Phys. Rev. {\bf 117}, 648 (1960).
485: \bb{35} E.W. Hudson et al, Nature {\bf 411}, 920 (2001).
486: \bb{36} K. McElroy, D.H. Lee, J.E. Hoffman, K.M. Lang, J. Lee, E.W. Hudson,
487: H. Eisaki, S. Uchida, and J.C. Davis, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 94},
488: 197005 (2005).
489: \bb{37} R. Zeyher and A. Greco, Phys. Stat. Sol. (b) {\bf 242}, 356 (2005).
490: \bb{38} A.V. Pimenov, A.V. Boris, L. Yu, V. Hinkov, T. Wolf, T.L. Tallon,
491: B. Keimer, and C. Bernhard, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 94}, 227003 (2005).
492: \bb{39} G. Sarma, J. Phys. Chem. Solids {\bf 24}, 1629 (1963).
493: \bb{40} K. Maki in ``Superconductivity" Vol. 2, edited by R.D. Parks
494: (Marcel-Dekker, New York 1969).
495: \bb{41} H. Won, H. Jang and K. Maki, cond-mat/9901252
496: \bb{42} P. Fulde and R.A. Ferrell, Phys. Rev. {\bf 135}, A550 (1964).
497: \bb{43} A.I. Larkin and Y.N. Ovchinnikov, Soviet Phys. JETP {\bf 20},
498: 762 (1965).
499: \bb{44} K. Maki and H. Won, Czech. J. Phys. {\bf 46}, 1033, (1996).
500: \bb{45} Y.J. Uemura, Physica B {\bf 169}, 99 (1991).
501: \bb{46} B. Dora, K. Maki, A. Virosztek and A. Vanyolos,
502: cond-mat/06067 (2002).
503: \bb{47} B. Dora, K. Maki, A. Vanyolos, A. Virosztek and H. Won, preprint.
504: \bb{48} C.F. Miclea, N. Nicklas, D. Parker, K. Maki,
505: J.L. Sarrao, J.D. Thompson, G. Sparn and F. Steglich, Phys. Rev.
506: Lett. {\bf 46}, 117001 (2006).
507: \bb{49} A.I. Coldea et al, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 69}, 085112 (2004).
508: \bb{50} A.F. Bangura et al, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 72}, 014543 (2005).
509: \bb{51} K. Izawa et al, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 87}, 57002 (2001).
510: \bb{52} K. Izawa et al, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 88}, 027002 (2003).
511: \bb{53} R. Bel et al, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 92}, 217002 (2004).
512: \bb{54} T. Hu et al, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 73}, 134509 (2006).
513: \bb{55} I.J. Lee, P.M. Chaikin and M.I. Naughton, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 63},
514: R180502 (2002).
515: \bb{56} J.I. Oh and M.I. Naughton, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 92}, 067001 (2004).
516: \bb{57} A.D. Folgueras and K. Maki, cond-mat/0601065.
517: \bb{58} Y. Kasahara et al (private communication).
518:
519: \end{thebibliography}
520:
521: \end{document} % End of document.
522:
523: \endinput
524: %%
525: %% End of file `pss-stpl.tex'.
526:
527: