Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

Journal of Superconductivity

Flux Phase and Its Competition with Superconductivity in the t–J Model

E. Cappelluti, R. Zeyher

Published Feb 1, 1999• 0 citations
Publisher
DOI
10.1023/a:1007799804340

Related papers

Competition of an incommensurate flux phase and superconductivity in a t–J model with Coulomb interactions

E. Cappelluti, R. Zeyher

Physica C Superconductivity•Feb 1, 1999•5 citations

27a-L-9 Superconducting Flux phase of the t-J model

源 多々良, 哲生 松居

春の分科会講演予稿集•Mar 11, 1991•0 citations

Commensurate flux phase of the Heisenberg model and anyonic superconductivity

Asim Gangopadhyaya, Prasanta Kumar Panigrahi

•Jan 1, 1991•0 citations

Superconducting instability of staggered-flux phase in the t-J model

Fu‐Chun Zhang

We use a renormalized mean-field theory to study competitions between the flux phase and the resonating-valence-bond d-wave states in the t-J model. The staggered (antiferromagnetic) flux phase is unstable against infinitesimal electron-pairing amplitude at all non-half fillings. This instability finally leads to a pure d-wave resonating-valence-bond state. The hole-hole repulsive Coulomb interaction tends to stabilize the flux phase.

Physical Review Letters•Feb 1, 1990•74 citations

Superconductivity in the Two-Dimensional t-J Model.

幸則 太田, R. Eder, 禎通 前川

日本物理學會誌•Jan 1, 1995•3 citations

Interplay between superconductivity and flux phase in the t−J model

E. Cappelluti, R. Zeyher

We study the phase diagram of the $t\ensuremath{-}J$ model using a mean field type approximation within the Baym-Kadanoff perturbation expansion for Hubbard X operators. The line separating the normal state from a d-wave flux or bond-order state starts near optimal doping at $T=0$ and rises quickly with decreasing doping. The transition temperature ${T}_{c}$ for d-wave superconductivity increases monotonically in the overdoped region towards optimal doping. Near optimal doping a strong competition between the two d-wave order parameters sets in leading to a strong suppression of ${T}_{c}$ in the underdoped region. Treating for simplicity the flux phase as commensurate the superconducting and flux phases coexist in the underdoped region below ${T}_{c},$ whereas a pure flux phase exists above ${T}_{c}$ with a pseudogap of d-wave symmetry in the excitation spectrum. We also find that incommensurate charge-density-wave ground states due to Coulomb interactions do not modify strongly the above phase diagram near the superconducting phase, at least, as long as the latter exists at all.

arXiv:cond-mat/9808201•Physical review. B, Condensed matter•Mar 1, 1999•104 citations
We study the phase diagram of the $t\ensuremath{-}J$ model using a mean field type approximation within the Baym-Kadanoff perturbation expansion for Hubbard X operators. The line separating the normal state from a d-wave flux or bond-order state starts near optimal doping at T=0T=0T=0 and rises quickly with decreasing doping. The transition temperature Tc{T}_{c}Tc​ for d-wave superconductivity increases monotonically in the overdoped region towards optimal doping. Near optimal doping a strong competition between the two d-wave order parameters sets in leading to a strong suppression of Tc{T}_{c}Tc​ in the underdoped region. Treating for simplicity the flux phase as commensurate the superconducting and flux phases coexist in the underdoped region below Tc,{T}_{c},Tc​, whereas a pure flux phase exists above Tc{T}_{c}Tc​ with a pseudogap of d-wave symmetry in the excitation spectrum. We also find that incommensurate charge-density-wave ground states due to Coulomb interactions do not modify strongly the above phase diagram near the superconducting phase, at least, as long as the latter exists at all.