physica status solidi

Fermi liquid breakdown andevidence for superconductivity inYFe2Ge2

Y. Zou1, Z. Feng2, P. W. Logg1, J. Chen1, G. Lampronti3, F. M. Grosche*1

1 Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, J J Thomson Ave, Cambridge CB3 0HE, UK2 London Centre of Nanotechnology, University College London, Gordon Street, London WC1H 0AH, UK3 Dept. of Earth Sciences, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3EQ

Received XXXX, revised XXXX, accepted XXXXPublished online XXXX

Key words: Non-Fermi liquid, superconductivity, transition metal compounds

∗ Corresponding author: e-mail fmg12@cam.ac.uk, Phone: +44-1223-337392

In the d-electron system YFe2Ge2, an unusually high andtemperature dependent Sommerfeld ratio of the specificheat capacity C/T ∼ 100 mJ/(molK2) and an anoma-lous power law temperature dependence of the electricalresistivity ρ ' ρ0 + AT 3/2 signal Fermi liquid break-down, probably connected to a close-by quantum criticalpoint.

Full resistive transitions, accompanied by DC diamag-netic screening fractions of up to 80% suggest that puresamples of YFe2Ge2 superconduct below 1.8 K.

Copyright line will be provided by the publisher

The threshold of magnetism in transition metal com-pounds is frequently associated with anomalous low tem-perature properties, such as the robust T 3/2 power-law re-sistivity observed in MnSi [1], ZrZn2 [2,3] and NbFe2 [4].Quantum critical phenomena associated with incipient an-tiferromagnetic or spin density wave order remain compar-atively underexplored in this material class. The close as-sociation of superconductivity with the border of antiferro-magnetism in a large number of iron pnictide and chalco-genide compounds further motivates the search for suitablecandidate materials among transition metal intermetallics.

The (Y/Lu)Fe2Ge2 system offers such an opportunityto study a spin density wave quantum phase transition ina transition metal composition series. LuFe2Ge2 crystal-lizes in the ThCr2Si2 structure (I4/mmm) and exhibitsspin density wave order below TN = 9 K [5,6]. Electroncounting places Fe in (Y/Lu)Fe2Ge2 at the same valenceas in the isostructural superconductors (K, Rb, Cs)Fe2As2,but the magnetic order in LuFe2Ge2 differs from that ofthe iron arsenides: the Fe moments align ferromagneticallywithin the basal plane and couple antiferromagnetically totheir neighbours along the crystallographic c direction, cor-

responding to an ordering wavevector Q = (0 0 1) [7]. Ap-plied hydrostatic pressure raises TN [7]. Partial substitutionof Lu by Y expands the unit cell and suppresses TN [8] ata critical composition of Lu0.8Y0.2Fe2Ge2.

Here, we concentrate on the end member of the series,YFe2Ge2, which is paramagnetic at ambient pressure anddisplays an unusually high Sommerfeld coefficient of thespecific heat capacity C/T ∼ 100 mJ/molK2 [5]. Ourlow temperature measurements reveal hallmarks of Fermiliquid breakdown, such as an anomalous T 3/2 power lawform of the electrical resistivity and a strongly tempera-ture dependent C/T at low T , as well as full resistive su-perconducting transitions and large diamagnetic screeningfractions consistent with bulk superconductivity below anonset Tc ' 1.8 K.

Single crystals of YFe2Ge2 were grown from tin fluxfollowing published methods [5], and polycrystals wereobtained by radio frequency melting of the elements (Y3N, Fe 4N, Ge 6N) on a water-cooled copper boat, fol-lowed by annealing in vacuum at 800 C for 7 days. Theresidual resistivity ratios (RRR = ρ(300 K)/ρ(2 K)) ob-tained from flux growth were typically about 10, whereas

Copyright line will be provided by the publisher

arX

iv:1

311.

0247

v2 [

cond

-mat

.str

-el]

26

Sep

2014

2 Y. Zou et al.: Fermi liquid breakdown in YFe2Ge2

annealed polycrystals reached resistivity ratios of up to50. The electrical resistivity and the magnetic susceptibil-ity were measured in an adiabatic demagnetisation refrig-erator to below 0.1 K, and the specific heat capacity wasmeasured in a Quantum Design Physical Properties Mea-surement System with a 3He insert to below 0.4 K. Themagnetisation data was acquired in a Cryogenic SQUIDmagnetometer with a 3He insert to below 0.3 K. X-raystudies confirmed the quality and composition of our sam-ples, giving the lattice parameters a = 3.964(6) A, c =10.457(4) A and the conventional unit cell volume V =164.37(2) A3. Our samples were found to be at least 99%phase pure, and the only impurity phase which could beidentified in some of the polycrystals is a ferromagneticFe/Ge alloy.

At elevated temperatures T > 2 K, our findingsare consistent with those reported previously [5]: Themagnetic susceptibility is small and weakly temperaturedependent, the resistivity is metallic (inset of Fig. 1),and the Sommerfeld coefficient of the specific heat ca-pacity, C/T is surprisingly high, reaching values near' 100 mJ/molK2 at 2 K (Fig. 1).

1 1090

100

110

120

0 3000

100

[µΩ

cm]

T [K]

C/T

[mJ/

(mol

K2 )]

Temperature T [K]

YFe2Ge

2

Figure 1 Sommerfeld ratio of the specific heat capac-ity, C/T , vs. temperature T in polycrystalline YFe2Ge2.The Sommerfeld ratio rises with decreasing temperatureT < 4 K and reaches values exceeding 100 mJ/(molK2).Higher resolution, lower temperature data will be requiredto distinguish between a logarithmic T -dependence and theγ0 − a

√T form predicted near a 3D spin density wave

quantum critical point. (inset) Electrical resistivity of poly-crystalline YFe2Ge2 versus temperature.

Figure 2 Resistivity of polycrystalline YFe2Ge2 withRRR=41, showing full resistive superconducting transi-tions at T < 1.8 K and a T 3/2 temperature dependence ofthe normal state resistivity. The superconducting transitionis suppressed by moderate magnetic fields. (inset) Tem-perature dependence of the superconducting upper criticalfield, obtained from a partial transition criterion. The ini-tial slope is B′c2 ' 2.4 T/K (inset) and the extrapolatedzero-temperature critical field is Hc2 = 1.7 T.

Extending the measurements to lower T reveals a grad-ual further increase of C/T (Fig. 1), and the electrical re-sistivity displays an unusual power-law temperature depen-dence of the form ρ(T ) ' ρ0 + AT 3/2 up to temperaturesof the order of 10 K (Fig. 2). These findings suggest Fermiliquid breakdown similar to that observed in other transi-tion metal compounds, such as MnSi, ZrZn2 and NbFe2[1,2,3,4]. In contrast to the latter, which are close to thethreshold of ferromagnetism, the weak T -dependence andcomparatively small magnitude of the magnetic suscepti-bility in YFe2Ge2 [5] suggests a different scenario. Elec-tronic structure calculations [9,10] indicate that ferromag-netism and various antiferromagnetic states compete inYFe2Ge2. However, they find a significant energy advan-tage for Q = (0 0 1) order, which is indeed observedin LuFe2Ge2. This would be consistent with the inter-pretation that the low temperature properties of YFe2Ge2are affected by a nearby antiferromagnetic (or spin den-sity wave) quantum critical point. Proximity to a mag-netic quantum critical point could also explain one of thecentral puzzles in YFe2Ge2, namely the 10-fold enhance-ment of the heat capacity over the band structure valueof ∼ 10 mJ/(molK2) [9,10]. However, stoichiometric

Copyright line will be provided by the publisher

pss header will be provided by the publisher 3

YFe2Ge2 is sufficiently far removed from the critical com-position found in the (Y/Lu)Fe2Ge2 composition series [8]to leave open alternative possibilities.

Below 2 K, superconducting transitions are apparent inthe electrical resistivity (Fig. 2) as well as in the DC mag-netisation (Fig. 3). While the onset of the resistive transi-tion is observed at T ρc ' 1.8 K (50% point at' 1.4 K), theonset of superconductivity is apparent in DC magnetisationmeasurements only below Tmag

c ' 1.5 K. This suggeststhat Tc varies across the sample. For the sample shown, thesuperconducting volume fraction extracted from the mag-netisation measurement (Fig. 3) amounts to at least 80%.

Comparing polycrystals with different residual resis-tance ratios, we find a clear correlation between samplepurity and both the size of the superconducting jump andthe value of Tc observed in resistivity measurements. Fullsuperconducting transitions are obtained in polycrystallinesamples with RRR ' 30 − 50, while unannealed poly-crystals with lower RRR as well as the flux-grown singlecrystals with RRR ' 10 only show partial transitions.

Heat capacity measurements down to 400 mK have notrevealed a clear anomaly associated with the superconduct-ing transition. This might result from an intrinsically inter-esting mechanism, such as an anomalously reduced super-conducting gap. However, at this stage it could equally beattributed to the broad nature of the transition, or it could

5.3. Results 71

Fig. 5.11: A diamagnetic signal is observed in the dc magnetisation of YFe2Ge2 polycrys-

tals below 1.5 K. The size and position of the diamagnetic signature shifts with increasing

magnetic field. The inset shows a zero field cool and a field cool superconducting transition.

saturate at the lowest temperature of 0.28 K. With increasing magnetic field the

size and position of the diamagnetic signature shifts to lower values. The supercon-

ducting fraction is calculated to be above 80 %, which is usually interpreted as bulk

superconductivity [Rau84]. The inset shows the Meissner flux repulsion (field cool),

which is about 4 % of the diamagnetic signal (zero field cool). A large discrepancy

between zero field cool and field cool data is often seen in type-II superconductors,

such as in the copper oxide superconductors. During the field cool, magnetic flux is

trapped at pinning centres, thus reducing the Meissner flux repulsion in the field coll

data [Wei05]. Magnetic hysteresis is caused by this same mechanism, since the mag-

netisation strongly depends on the history of the sample [Cle88, Cle93]. It should be

noted that the superconducting fraction determined by magnetisation measurements

vary within di!erent samples. We measured several samples showing superconduct-

Figure 3 DC magnetisation data in YFe2Ge2. A strongdiamagnetic signal is observed in zero-field cooled mea-surements below 1.5 K. The size and position of the dia-magnetic signature shifts with increasing magnetic field,suggesting that the lower critical field is around 2 mT. (in-set) Zero-field cooled and field cooled magnetic responseat very low applied field.

suggest that despite the large diamagnetic screening sig-nal superconductivity is confined to small fractions of thesample. A comprehensive study on high quality flux-growncrystals [11] also remarked on the absence of a heat capac-ity anomaly near Tc, whereas a superconducting heat ca-pacity anomaly was reported by a third group [12]. Thisindicates that if alien phases can be ruled out, slight varia-tions in the stoichiometry might play a role in establishingbulk superconductivity in YFe2Ge2.

The initial slope of the resistive upper critical field is|dBc2/dT | ' 2.4 T/K (inset of Fig. 2). This correspondsto an extrapolated clean-limit weak-coupling orbital-limited critical field B(o)

c2 ' 0.73 Tc |dBc2/dT | ' 2.8 T[13]. This value significantly exceeds the observed criticalfield in the low temperature limit of ' 1.7 T, suggestingthat the low temperature critical field is Pauli limited. Inthe standard treatment (e.g. [14]), the extrapolated orbital-limited critical field corresponds to a superconducting co-

herence length ξ0 =(Φ0/(2πB

(o)c2

)1/2

' 108 A, whereΦ0 = h/(2e) is the quantum of flux. Such a short co-herence length is roughly consistent with the enhancedquasiparticle mass and consequently low Fermi velocityindicated by the high Sommerfeld coefficient of the spe-cific heat capacity: we estimate the BCS coherence lengthfrom ξBCS = (hvF )/(π∆) [14,15], where vF is theFermi velocity and ∆ is the superconducting gap, approx-imated as 1.76kBTc. Representing the electronic structureof YFe2Ge2 by one or two spherical Fermi surface sheetswith radius kF = 0.7 A−1 (corresponding to half-filledbands) in order to extract vF from γ, we would expectξBCS ' 130 A for a single sheet or 260 A for two sheets,in rough agreement with ξ0 obtained above. The meanfree path in our samples can likewise be estimated (e.g.[15]) from ` ' 1200 A(A−2/k2

F)(µΩcm/ρ0), where ρ0is the residual resistivity, to be about 800 A (400 A) forthe highest quality samples, when one (two) Fermi surfacesheets are assumed. This indicates that ` indeed exceedsξ0, so that an anisotropic order parameters is not ruled outby disorder scattering.

We thank C. Geibel, P. Niklowitz, S. Friedemann, M.Gamza and G. G. Lonzarich for helpful discussions. Thiswork was supported by EPSRC UK and Trinity CollegeCambridge.

References[1] C. Pfleiderer, S. R. Julian, and G. G. Lonzarich, Nature

414(6862), 427–430 (2001).[2] S. Takashima, M. Nohara, H. Ueda, N. Takeshita, C. Ter-

akura, F. Sakai, and H. Takagi, Journal of the Physical So-ciety of Japan 76(4), 043704 (2007).

[3] R. P. Smith, M. Sutherland, G. G. Lonzarich, S. S. Saxena,N. Kimura, S. Takashima, M. Nohara, and H. Takagi, Na-ture 455(7217), 1220–1223 (2008).

[4] M. Brando, W. J. Duncan, D. Moroni-Klementowicz,C. Albrecht, D. Gruener, R. Ballou, and F. M. Grosche,Physical Review Letters 101(2), 026401 (2008).

Copyright line will be provided by the publisher

4 Y. Zou et al.: Fermi liquid breakdown in YFe2Ge2

[5] M. Avila, S. Bud’ko, and P. Canfield, J. Magn. Magn.Mater. 270(1-2), 51–76 (2004).

[6] J. Ferstl, H. Rosner, and C. Geibel, Physica B 378-80, 744–745 (2006).

[7] T. Fujiwara, N. Aso, H. Yamamoto, M. Hedo, Y. Saiga,M. Nishi, Y. Uwatoko, and K. Hirota, Journal of the Phys-ical Society of Japan Supplement 76, 60–61 (2007).

[8] S. Ran, S. L. Bud’ko, and P. C. Canfield, PhilosophicalMagazine 91(34), 4388–4400 (2011).

[9] A. Subedi, Physical Review B - Condensed Matter and Ma-terials Physics 89(2), 024504 (2014).

[10] D. J. Singh, Physical Review B - Condensed Matter andMaterials Physics 89(2), 024505 (2014).

[11] H. Kim, S. Ran, E. D. Mun, H. Hodovanets, M. A.Tanatar, R. Prozorov, S. L. Bud’ko, and P. C. Canfield,arXiv:1408.3319 (2014).

[12] A. M. Strydom and D. Britz, proceedings of SCES 2014,to be published.

[13] E. Helfand and N. R. Werthamer, Physical Review 147(1),288–294 (1966).

[14] M. Tinkham, Introduction to Superconductivity (DoverPublications, 2004).

[15] T. P. Orlando, E. J. McNiff, S. Foner, and M. R. Beasley,Physical Review B 19(9), 4545–4561 (1979).

Copyright line will be provided by the publisher