| Literature DB >> 27158636 |
L Rettig1, S O Mariager1, A Ferrer, S Grübel1, J A Johnson1, J Rittmann, T Wolf2, S L Johnson3, G Ingold, P Beaud, U Staub1.
Abstract
Using femtosecond time-resolved hard x-ray diffraction, we investigate the structural dynamics of the orthorhombic distortion in the Fe-pnictide parent compound BaFe2As2. The orthorhombic distortion analyzed by the transient splitting of the (1 0 3) Bragg reflection is suppressed on an initial timescale of 35 ps, which is much slower than the suppression of magnetic and nematic order. This observation demonstrates a transient state with persistent structural distortion and suppressed magnetic/nematic order which are strongly linked in thermal equilibrium. We suggest a way of quantifying the coupling between structural and nematic degrees of freedom based on the dynamics of the respective order parameters.Entities:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27158636 PMCID: PMC4841800 DOI: 10.1063/1.4947250
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Struct Dyn ISSN: 2329-7778 Impact factor: 2.920
FIG. 1.Experimental setup and orthorhombic splitting. (a) Sketch of the experimental configuration of the femtosecond time-resolved x-ray diffraction experiments. (b) Sketch of the formation of orthorhombic twin domains in the low-temperature phase. The expansion of the orthorhombic a axis leads to two different domain configurations, which share a common diagonal along the orthorhombic (1 1 0)/ directions. (c) Temperature-dependent x-ray rocking curves of the (1 0 3) reflection, showing a splitting into two peaks below the structural transition. Error bars are determined by the shot noise distribution, and lines are fits of two Lorentzian-squared line shapes (see text). Inset: Peak splitting as a function of cryojet temperature. Error bars are 95% confidence intervals of the fittings, and the line is a power law function (see text).
FIG. 2.(a)–(c) Time-resolved rocking curves for various fluences as a function of rotation angle and pump-probe delay on a false colors scale. Markers denote peak positions obtained from peak fits (see text), and error bars are 95% confidence intervals. Colored arrows in (a) indicate the pump-probe delays of the rocking curves shown in (d)–(f). Note the strain-wave induced sidebands in panels (b) and (c) at early times after excitation. (d)–(f): Rocking curves (markers) and fits (lines) for selected pump-probe delays. Dashed vertical lines mark the peak positions before excitation determined from the fits. Error bars of the data are standard errors of the shot distribution.
FIG. 3.(a) Peak splitting as a function of pump-probe delay derived from the data of Fig. 2. Error bars are derived from the accuracy of the fits, and lines are exponential fits to the data (see text). (b) Normalized peak splitting at a pump-probe delay as a function of absorbed pump fluence (black dots). The fitted amplitudes of the peak splitting suppression (A in Eq. (1)) are shown as the red diamonds for comparison. Inset: Fluence dependence of the exponential time-constants of the peak splitting dynamics.
FIG. 4.(a) Time-dependent rocking scans of the (1 1 2) reflection, for different pump-probe delays on a nanosecond timescale. Lines are fits to the data (see text) and the arrow marks the position of the time-trace shown in (b). (b) Peak splitting (black squares) of the (1 1 2) reflection obtained from fits to the data in (a), and pump-induced change of diffraction intensity at a fixed angle between the split peaks (blue circles). Note the inverted scale of the right-hand axis. The line is a fit of a two-timescale excitation model to the intensity data (see text).