arxiv: v1 [cond-mat.supr-con] 13 Dec 2017

Transcription

1 arxiv:7.4656v [cond-mat.supr-con] 3 Dec 7 Cu hyperfine coupling constants of HgBa CaCu O 6+δ Yutaka Itoh, Takato Machi and Ayako Yamamoto 3 Department of Physics, Graduate School of Science, Kyoto Sangyo University, Kamigamo-Motoyama, Kika-ku, Kyoto , Japan AIST Tsukuba East, Research Institute for Energy Conservation, -- Namiki, Tsukuba, Ibaraki , Japan 3 Graduate School of Engineering and Science, Shibaura Institute of Technology, Toyosu, Koto-ku, Tokyo , Japan yitoh@cc.kyoto-su.ac.jp Abstract. We estimated the ratios of 63 Cu hyperfine coupling constants in the double-layer high-t c superconductor HgBa CaCu O 6+δ from the anisotropies in Cu nuclear spin-lattice relaxation rates and spin Knight shifts to study the nature of the ultraslow fluctuations causing the T anomaly in the Cu nuclear spin-echo decay. The ultraslow fluctuations may come from uniform magnetic fluctuations spread around the wave vector q =, otherwise the electric origins.. Introduction Spin polarized neutron scattering experiments indicate the emergence of an intra-unit-cell (IUC) q = magnetic moments in the pseudogap states of the high-t c cuprate superconductors, while no NMR and µsr experiment indicates any static ordering of local magnetic moments []. The IUC moments are associated with the loop current ordered state []. Recently discovered ultraslow fluctuations in the pseudogap states of HgBa CaCu O 6+δ (Hg) via 63 Cu nuclear spin-echo decay experiments [3] might reconcile an issue on the IUC moments. No wipeout effect on NMR spectra is characteristic of the ultraslow fluctuations of Hg, in contrast to the spin-charge stripe orderings [4, 5]. Knowledge of the hyperfine coupling constants helps us to clarify the nature of the local field fluctuations in NMR measurements [6]. In this paper, we report the estimation of the 63 Cu hyperfine coupling constants in the double-cuo -layer high-t c superconductors Hg from the anisotropies in 63 Cu nuclear spin-lattice relaxation rates and spin Knight shifts [7], and discuss the nature of the ultraslow fluctuations [3].. Estimations of 63 Cu hyperfine coupling constants The 63 Cu hyperfine coupling parameters (A hf cc and Ahf ab ) consist of the anisotropic on-site A cc (the c axis component) and A ab (the ab plane component) due to the 3d electrons and the isotropic supertransferred component B(> ) [6]. The ratios of the individual components in the three coupling constants can be estimated from the anisotropy data [7] of the 63 Cu Knight shifts( 63 K cc and 63 K ab )andthe 63 Cunuclear spin-lattice relaxation rates [(/T ) cc and(/t ) ab ] via the antiferromagnetic dynamical spin susceptibility [6, 8, 9,, ]. The subscript indices

2 63 Kcc (%) T c = 93 K (ov) T c = 7 K (op) T c = 3 K (un) 63 (/T ) ab / 63 (/T ) cc 4 3 T c = 3 K (un) T c = 7 K (op) T c = 93 K (ov) Kab (%).6.8 T (K) 3 Figure. 63 K cc versus 63 K ab with temperature as an implicit parameter for Hg from underdoped to overdoped [7]. The arrows indicate T c. Figure. Anisotropy ratio 63 (/T ) ab / 63 (/T ) cc against temperature for Hg from underdoped to overdoped [7]. of cc or ab of 63 K and /T indicate the direction of a static magnetic field applied along the c axis or in the ab plane. The procedure to estimate the coupling constant ratios is shown below Cu Knight shifts The 63 Cu Knight shifts 63 K cc,ab at a magnetic field along the c axis or in the ab plane are the sum of the spin shift K spin and the orbital shift K orb as 63 K cc,ab = K cc,ab spin (T) + Kcc,ab orb. The spin shift is K cc,ab spin (T) = Ahf cc,ab χcc,ab s (T) with the hyperfine coupling parameters A hf cc,ab and the uniform spin susceptibility χ cc,ab s (T). For a temperature-dependent isotropic spin susceptibility χ cc s = χ ab s, the ratio Kspin cc / Kab spin = (dkcc spin /dt)/(dkab spin /dt) is equal to the ratio Ahf cc /A hf ab. Figure shows 63 K cc plotted against 63 K ab with temperature as an implicit parameter for Hg from underdoped to overdoped, which are adopted from [7]. The sold straight lines are the least-squares fitting results. The dashed straight line for overdoped Hg is a visual guide with assuming the same slope as the optimally doped Hg. The straight lines show nearly parallel shift. Since the orbital shifts of Korb cc =.4.6 % and Kab orb =.9. % are estimated below T c, then the parallel shift indicates a constant spin component above T c. Similar parallel shift is found in the single crystal NMR for HgBa CuO 4+δ []. An easy plane magnetic anisotropy causes such a constant spin component in the paramagnetic spin susceptibility [3]. The anisotropic superexchange interaction in the S = / XXZ Heisenberg Hamiltonian yields the easy plane anisotropy in the paramagnetic state [4, 5]. The optimally hole doping makes the anisotropy weak [3, 6]. Although the multicomponents in the spin susceptibility are suggested from the anisotropic spin Knight shifts [, 7], we believe that the doped superconductors with a single spin component can show a finite anisotropy and that the constant spin component does not impede a single spin component analysis to estimate the Cu hyperfine coupling constants. The 63 Cu hyperfine coupling parameters A hf cc and A hf ab are expressed by A cc, A ab, and B as A hf cc = A cc + 4B and A hf ab = A ab + 4B [6, 8, 8]. Then, the anisotropy ratio r u of the

3 temperature-dependent K cc s and K ab s is given by r u Kcc s Ks ab = A cc +4B A ab +4B. () Figure shows r u =.3 for the underdoped and.34 for the optimally doped samples. The value of r u =.34 is assumed for the overdoped sample Cu nuclear spin-lattice relaxation rate Figure shows the ratio of 63 (/T ) ab / 63 (/T ) cc plotted against temperature for Hg from underdoped to overdoped (adopted from Ref. [7]). The anisotropy ratio r AF of (/T ) ab and (/T ) cc is given by r AF (/T ) ab { + (/T ) cc ( ) Acc 4B }, () A ab 4B for the leading term of the enhanced antiferromagnetic susceptibility []. For convenience, we introduce an alternative parameter of r A = r AF. We adopted the values of r AF (r A ) =.3 (.9),. (.73), and.8 (.6) from underdoped to overdoped (figure ) to estimate the coupling constant ratios Cu hyperfine coupling constant ratios From the constraints of A cc < [8] and A ab /4B < on () and (), we obtain the expressions of the ratios of the 63 Cu hyperfine coupling constants, and then A cc 4B r A +r u r A r u, r A r u (3) A ab 4B r A +r u, r A r u (4) A ab r A +r u. (5) A cc r A +r u r A r u Thus, (3)-(5) with a set of r u and r A enable us to estimate the ratios of the 63 Cu hyperfine coupling constants. Table. Anisotropies (r u and r AF ) of 63 K s and 63 T, and the ratios of 63 Cu hyperfine coupling constants (A cc, A ab, B) for underdoped (un), optimally doped (op) and overdoped (ov) Hg. T c is in kelvin. The value of r u for overdoped Hg is assumed after the optimally doped value in figure. T c r u r AF A cc /4B A ab /4B A ab /A cc un op ov

4 Table shows the estimated ratios of A cc /4B, A ab /4B and A ab /A cc for Hg from (3)-(5) with the experimental r u and r AF in figures and. The on-site coupling ratio A ab /A cc depends on the hole concentration in Hg. The 3d(x y ) orbital electron of Cu + in the tetragonal crystal field produces the on-site hyperfine fields. The ratio A ab /A cc is expressed as A ab κ+ 7 7 γ A cc κ (6) γ, where κ(> ) is the core polarization parameter, /7 and 4/7 are the spin-dipole field coefficients, and γ(< ) is the spin-orbit coupling parameter [9, 9, ]. The empirical values of κ =.5 and.35 were estimated for Cu + ions in the dilute copper salts []. The firstprinciples cluster calculations give κ =.89 for the density functional < /r 3 > and.455 for the Hartree-Fock < /r 3 > in La CuO 4 []. The value of κ =.4 is found in CuGeO 3 []. For Hg, A ab /A cc in Table through (6) leads to the core polarization parameter κ =.65 (un),.35 (op) and.387 (ov), assuming γ =.44 [9, 9] Cu hyperfine coupling constants of HgBa CuO 4+δ and Hg Let us show the 63 Cu hyperfine coupling constants of the optimally doped single-cuo -layer superconductorhgba CuO 4+δ (T c =98K).Fromtheuniformspinsusceptibilityχ s =.47 4 emu/mole-f.u. [3] and the in-plane 63 Cu Kspin ab =.48 % [4], we estimated the in-plane 63 Cu hyperfine coupling parameter A hf ab = A ab + 4B = (N A µ B /χ s )Kspin ab = 8 koe/µ B for HgBa CuO 4+δ (N A is Avogardro s number and µ B is the Bohr magneton). Substituting r u =.53 and r AF =.8 [4] into (3)-(5) and using A ab + 4B = 8 koe/µ B, we obtained the values of A cc = 65, A ab =, and B = 4 koe/µ B for the optimally doped HgBa CuO 4+δ. By adopting A ab + 4B = 8 koe/µ B for Hg after HgBa CuO 4+δ, we estimated the individual components of A cc, A ab, and B (Table ). Figure 3 shows A cc, A ab, and B (Table ) plotted against the hole concentration P sh [7] for Hg. In Table and figure 3, with increase in the hole concentration, the absolute value of the negative A cc increases, A ab shows a sign change, and the B term slightly increases. The reported B term is in the range from 36 to 55 koe/µ B in the other cuprate superconductors [, 5, 6, 7, 8], assuming a priori the fixed values of A cc = 7 and A ab = 37 koe/µ B [5, 7, 8]. The cation-cation supertransferred hyperfine field B between 3d and 4s orbitals depends on the strength of the p-d covalent bond parameter [9]. The doping dependent B term in Table indicates the development of the covalency with the hole concentration in Hg. Table. 63 Cu hyperfine coupling constants in units of koe/µ B for underdoped (un), optimally doped (op) and overdoped (ov) Hg, assuming A ab +4B = 8 koe/µ B. A cc A ab B un op ov

5 A cc, A ab, B (koe/µ B ) B A ab A cc...3 Hole concentration P sh.4 Figure Cu hyperfine coupling constants A cc, A ab, and B plotted against hole concentration P sh for Hg. The solid curves are visual guides. 3. Local field fluctuations in 63 Cu nuclear spin-echo decay rate /T L Cu nuclear spin-echo decay rate /T L Figures 4(a)-4(c) show the 63 Cu nuclear spin-echo decay rates (/T L ) ab,cc s for Hg from underdoped (a), optimally doped (b) and overdoped (c) [3]. The notations conform to those in [3]. The enhancements in (/T L ) ab, cc at 4 K indicate the ultraslow fluctuations [3]. The peak temperature of (/T L ) cc is nearly independent of the doping level, but the enhancement is suppressed by overdoping. Figure 4(d) shows the anisotropy ratio of the local field fluctuations J cc / J ab [(/T L ) cc (/T R ) cc ]/[(/T L ) ab (/T R ) ab ] derived from /T L and /T (Redfield s /T R ) [3]. J γγ (γγ = cc and ab) expresses the additional fluctuations causing the enhancement in /T L. One should note that J cc / J ab < is characteristic of the ultraslow fluctuations. Figure 4(e) shows the phase diagram of Hg, where the superconducting transition temperature T c, the pseudo spin-gap temperature defined by the maximum temperature of (/T L ) cc, ab (ms ) (/T L ) cc, ab (ms ) (/T L ) cc, ab (ms ) underdoped T c = 3 K optimally doped T c = 7 K overdoped T c = 93 K T (K) (a) (b) (c) 3 (d) DJ cc / DJ ab (e) 3 Temperature (K). T* T p Pseudogap state T c T (K) Superconducting state T c 3 K 7 K 93 K 3 Nearly AF...3 Hole concentration P sh Figure 4. (a) (c) T dependences of (/T L ) cc (closed symbols) and (/T L ) ab (open symbols) from underdoped to overdoped Hg [3]. Each dashed line indicates T c. (d) T dependences of J cc / J ab [3]. (e) Phase diagram of Hg: T c (closed circles), the pseudo spin-gap temperature defined by the maximum temperature of /T T [7] (closed squares), T p defined by the peak temperature of (/T L ) cc [3] (open triangles) against hole concentration P sh. The dotted curve with a shaded region is a visual guide for the onset temperature T of decrease in 63 Cu Knight shift [7]. Nearly AF stands for the Curie-Weiss law in Cu /T T [7].

6 /T T, T p defined by the peak temperature of (/T L ) cc, and the onset temperature T of the decrease in the Cu Knight shift are plotted against the hole concentration P sh in Cu +P sh [3, 7]. With hole doping, T decreases, while T p is nearly independent of the hole concentration P sh. The ultraslow fluctuations emerge in the underdoped regime and diminish in the overdoped regime. 3.. Local field fluctuations LocalfieldfluctuationsofJ ab (B caxis)andj cc (B caxis)causingthenuclearspinrelaxations of T and T are defined by J γγ = q F γγ (q)s(q,ν n ), (7) F γγ (q) (4B) f γγ (q) = [A γγ +B{cos(q x )+cos(q y )}], (8) where γγ = ab and cc, and ν n is an NMR frequency [3]. The electron spin-spin correlation function S(q, ν) (a frequency ν) is related to the dynamical spin susceptibility χ (q, ν) through the fluctuation-dissipation theorem. F γγ (q) is called the form factor of the wave vector q dependent hyperfine coupling constant, whose filtering effects in the q space play a significant role in the anisotropy and the site differentiation on NMR [8, 9, ]. J γγ expresses the additional fluctuations to J γγ [3]. Figure 5 shows the q dependence of f ab, cc (q) for Hg along the diagonal q = (q, q) in the first Brillouin zone, using the estimated coupling constant ratios in Table. Since f cc (π, π) > f ab (π, π), the antiferromagnetic spin fluctuation χ (q) localized around q = [π, π] leads to the anisotropy J cc /J ab 3 in contrast to the experimental ratio J cc / J ab < in figure 4(d) [3]. J γγ expresses the development of the ultraslow fluctuations [3]. Thus, the antiferromagnetic fluctuations are excluded from the ultraslow fluctuations. Let us assume a toy model of χ (q, ν n ) = χ Θ(q c q x )Θ(q c q y ) (Θ(x) is the Heaviside step function). q c is a cut-off wave number. χ (q) S(q, ν n ) takes a constant value χ over 3 (π, ) (π, π) 3 f cc (q) F(q) / (4B) f ab (q) (, ) (, π) J cc / J ab q in q = (q, q) 3 π q c 3 π Figure Cu hyperfinecoupling form factors f cc (q) and f ab (q) as functions of q in the wave vector q = (q, q) [(, ) (π, π)]. Inset shows the diagonal in the first Brillouin zone. Figure 6. J cc / J ab as a function of thecutoffq c inatoy modeluponastatic spin susceptibility χ (q) = χ ( q x,y < q c ) and ( q x,y > q c ). Experimental constraint leads to q c <.3.

7 q x,y < q c. For this toy model, the ratio J cc / J ab is calculated as J cc J ab = q x,y <q c f cc (q) q x,y <q c f ab (q). (9) Figure 6 shows the numerical J cc / J ab as a function of q c. The experimental J cc / J ab <.9 in figure 4(d) imposes on the function in figure 6 and then leads to q c <.3. The magnetic ultraslow fluctuations must be confined within q c <.3. If the magnetic ultraslow fluctuations have the easy plane anisotropy, the upper limit of the cut-off value q c will be smaller than.3. Thus, we obtained a model constraint on the magnetic ultraslow fluctuations, using the anisotropic hyperfine coupling constants. Although the step function χ (q) with q c <.3 is not localized at q =, it is parallel to the IUC q = magnetic moments observed by the spin polarized neutron scattering method []. The ultraslow fluctuations may be associated with the IUC q = magnetic moments. However, if the enhancement in /T L is due to quadrupole fluctuations, one should explore the alternative fluctuations of charge or lattice for the electric ultraslow fluctuations. 4. Conculsions The systematic hole doping dependences of the 63 Cu hyperfine coupling constants (A cc, A ab and B) were found for Hg from underdoped to overdoped. A model constraint on the magnetic ultraslow fluctuations in Hg was derived from the anisotropy ratios of the 63 Cu hyperfine coupling constants. The model expresses the magnetic fluctuations spread around q =. Possible electric ultraslow fluctuations causing the T anomaly remain to be explored. Acknowledgments We thank Jun Kikuchi for fruitful discussions on the hyperfine coupling constants. References [] Bourges P and Sidis Y C. R. Physique 46 [] Varma C M 4 J. Phys.: Condens. Matter [3] Itoh Y, Machi T and Yamamoto A 7 Phys. Rev. B [4] Singer P M, Hunt A W, Cederström A F and Imai T 999 Phys. Rev. B [5] Hunt A W, Singer P M, Cederström A F and Imai T Phys. Rev. B [6] Mila F and Rice T M 989 Physica C [7] Itoh Y, Tokiwa-Yamamoto A, Machi T and Tanabe K 998 J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 67 [8] Millis A J, Monien H and Pines D 99 Phys. Rev. B 4 67 [9] Monien H, Pines D and Slichter C P 99 Phys. Rev. B 4 [] Imai T 99 J. Phys. Soc. Jpn [] Itoh Y, Hayashi A and Ueda Y 995 J. Phys. Soc. Jpn [] Rybicki D, Kohlrautz J, Haase J, Greven M, Zhao X, Chan M K, Dorow C J and Veit M J 5 Phys. Rev. B 9 85 [3] Shimizu T, Aoki H, Yasuoka H, Tsuda T, Ueda Y, Yoshimura K and Kosuge K 993 J. Phys. Soc. Jpn [4] Hanzawa K 994 J. Phys. Soc. Jpn [5] Okabe Y and Kikuchi M 988 J. Phys. Soc. Jpn [6] Terasaki I, Hase M, Maeda A, Uchinokura K, Kimura T, Kishio K, Tanaka I and Kojima H 99 Physica C [7] Haase J, Jurkutat M, Kohlrautz J 7 Condense. Matter 6 [8] Takigawa M, Hammel P C, Heffner R H, Fisk Z, Smith J L and Schwarz R B 989 Phys. Rev. B 39 3 [9] Pennington C H, Durand D J, Slichter C P, Rice J P, Bukowski E D and Ginsberg D M 989 Phys. Rev. B 39 9 [] Bleaney B, Bowers K D and Pryce M H L 955 Proc. Roy. Soc. London, Ser. A 8 66 [] Hüsser P, Suter H U, Stoll E P and Meier P F Phys. Rev. B 6 567

8 [] Itoh M, Sugahara M, Yamauchi T and Ueda Y 996 Phys. Rev. B [3] Itoh Y, Machi T and Yamamoto A [arxiv:955] [4] Itoh Y, Machi T, Adachi S, Fukuoka A, Tanabe K and Yasuoka H 998 J. Phys. Soc. Jpn [5] Kitaoka Y, Fujiwara K, Ishida K, Asayama K, Shimakawa Y, Manako T and Kubo Y 99 Physica C 79 7 [6] Kambe S, Yasuoka H, Hayashi A and Ueda Y 993 Phys. Rev. B [7] Ishida K, Kitaoka Y, Asayama K, Kadowaki K and Mochiku T 994 J. Phys. Soc. Jpn [8] Shimizu S, Iwai S, Tabata S-I, Mukuda H, Kitaoka Y, Shirage P M, Kito H and Iyo A Phys. Rev. B [9] Huang N L, Orbach R, Šimánek E, Owen J and Taylor D R 967 Phys. Rev

9 reserved for figure