| Literature DB >> 28496099 |
Svetlana V Postolova1,2, Alexey Yu Mironov1,2, Mikhail R Baklanov3, Valerii M Vinokur4, Tatyana I Baturina1,2,5.
Abstract
A reentrant temperature dependence of the normal state resistance often referred to as the N-shaped temperature dependence, is omnipresent in disordered superconductors - ranging from high-temperature cuprates to ultrathin superconducting films - that experience superconductor-to-insulator transition. Yet, despite the ubiquity of this phenomenon its origin still remains a subject of debate. Here we investigate strongly disordered superconducting TiN films and demonstrate universality of the reentrant behavior. We offer a quantitative description of the N-shaped resistance curve. We show that upon cooling down the resistance first decreases linearly with temperature and then passes through the minimum that marks the 3D-2D crossover in the system. In the 2D temperature range the resistance first grows with decreasing temperature due to quantum contributions and eventually drops to zero as the system falls into a superconducting state. Our findings demonstrate the prime importance of disorder in dimensional crossover effects.Entities:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28496099 PMCID: PMC5431868 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-01753-w
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Reentrant temperature dependence of the resistance and phase diagram. (a) Resistance per square vs. temperature for five TiN films with different thicknesses d and different resistances at room temperature R 300. (b,c) The enlarged areas from panel (a) for sample d = 7 nm. (b) Magnified representation of R(T) above the superconducting transition. All the samples exhibit the same behaviour. Arrows mark temperatures T* and T . Dashed line corresponds to R ∝ T. (c) Magnified representation of R(T) near the superconducting transition. Arrow marks the superconducting critical temperature T determined from the quantum contribution fits (see Fig. 3a and details in the text). (d) The phase diagram for low-T thin TiN films in conductance (G 300 = 1/R 300)-temperature (T) coordinates. Temperatures T*, T , T separate four distinct regimes of R(T). The five points at higher G correspond to films in (a). Three points for lower G (i.e. lower T ) corresponds to films from ref. 14, which have no T* value since in these films R(T) increases with cooling from room temperature.
Figure 3Superconducting critical temperature. (a) Determination of T from quantum contributions to the conductivity. Solid lines: experimental resistances per square vs. temperature for three TiN film with different thicknesses d and different resistances at room temperature R 300. Dashed lines are the same as in Fig. 2d, the fits account for all quantum contributions to conductivity. Arrows mark the respective superconducting critical temperatures T . (b) The superconducting critical temperature T vs. R 300 for the TiN films shown in Fig. 1a and published in refs 14, 46, 47. The solid line is the theoretical fitting by Eq. (9) with the adjustable parameter , where T = 3.4 K and τ = 7.3 · 10−15 s.
Figure 2Dimensional crossover and quantum contributions fits. (a) A sketch of the temperature dependence of thermal coherence length (solid line). The rectangle confines the region where L exceeds the film thickness d (dashed line). (b) The ratio of the film thickness to thermal coherence length d/L (T*) at the crossover temperature T* vs. resistance at room temperature R 300. (c) The dependence R(T) from Fig. 1a replotted as a dimensionless conductance G/G 00 as function of the temperature in the logarithmic scale for samples d = 10 nm and d = 7 nm. Dash-dotted lines correspond to G/G 00 ∝ ln T. (d) The reduced resistance R/R* vs reduced temperature T/T*, where T* and R* are the temperature and resistance at the local minimum. Symbols stand for experimental data, solid lines are fits by Eqs (7) and (8). Note, that three samples with lowest T did not show a R(T) minimum. Dashed lines are fits accounting for all the quantum contributions to conductivity (see Fig. 3a and the discussion in the text).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7 | 334 | 4.9 | 0.68 | 163.5 | 314.5 |
| 10 | 216 | 5.8 | 0.76 | 159 | 198.7 |
| 12 | 165 | 6.2 | 0.8 | 105 | 150.9 |
| 18 | 90 | 7.4 | 0.82 | 95 | 81.5 |
| 23 | 65 | 7.9 | 0.87 | 69 | 58.8 |