| Literature DB >> 29061996 |
J E Hamann-Borrero1, S Macke2,3, B Gray4, M Kareev5, E Schierle6, S Partzsch7, M Zwiebler7, U Treske7, A Koitzsch7, B Büchner7,8, J W Freeland9, J Chakhalian5, J Geck10.
Abstract
Combining dissimilar transition metal oxides (TMOs) into artificial heterostructures enables to create electronic interface systems with new electronic properties that do not exist in bulk. A detailed understanding of how such interfaces can be used to tailor physical properties requires characterization techniques capable to yield interface sensitive spectroscopic information with monolayer resolution. In this regard resonant x-ray reflectivity (RXR) provides a unique experimental tool to achieve exactly this. It yields the element specific electronic depth profiles in a non-destructive manner. Here, using a YBa2Cu3O7-δ (YBCO) thin film, we demonstrate that RXR is further capable to deliver site selectivity. By applying a new analysis scheme to RXR, which takes the atomic structure of the material into account, together with information of the local charge anisotropy of the resonant ions, we obtained spectroscopic information from the different Cu sites (e.g., chain and plane) throughout the film profile. While most of the film behaves bulk-like, we observe that the Cu-chains at the surface show characteristics of electron doping, whereas the Cu-planes closest to the surface exhibit an orbital reconstruction similar to that observed at La1-x Ca x MnO3/YBCO interfaces.Entities:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29061996 PMCID: PMC5653850 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-12642-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1(a) Crystal structure of YBa2Cu3O7− showing characteristic structural features such as the Cu chains and planes. (b) XAS geometry with respect to the YBCO structure and its different Cu sites (chain and plane). Note that in a twinned structure there is no clear difference between a and b directions. 2p XAS obtained from TFY (c), TEY (d) and PEY (e) measurements for in-plane (blue) and out-of-plane (red) polarized light. For clarity only the L 3 edge is shown.
Figure 2Experimental resonant x-ray reflectivities measured at energies close to the Cu L edges. The data was collected using σ (a) and π (b) polarized light. (c) Scattering geometry of a reflectivity experiment. For the data collection a set of θ–2θ scans has been measured using both polarizations at various photon energies across the Cu edge. White lines in (a,b) are guides to the eye and show the energy dependence of characteristic maxima. For clarity only the L 3 edge is shown.
Figure 3Real (f ′) and imaginary (f ″) part of the diagonal terms of the atomic scattering tensor for Cu2 (a,b) and Cu1 (c,d). (e,f) Shows those taken for the topmost plane (Cu2) and chain (Cu1) sites.
Figure 4Structural models and fitted reflectivities. The upper, middle and lower rows show the fits corresponding to the (a) “slab”, (b) “stacking 1” and (c) “stacking 2” structural models, respectively. The total film thickness is 6 u.c., i.e., 6 × (6 atomic layers) = 36 atomic layers. Black lines in (b,c,g,h,l,m) show experimental data. Color plots are Q vs. hν intensity maps calculated using the corresponding structural models. Greek letters indicate the polarization of the light used for the measurement/calculation.
Fit error χ 2 for different stackings, terminations (cf. Figs 4 and 5) and electronic models: Bulk-like, refers to the case where no changes in electronic properties with respect to the bulk are considered.
| Model |
|
|---|---|
| Stacking 1 CuO-Term + BaO-Term (mod. surf) | 9.11 |
| Stacking 1 CuO-Term + BaO-Term (Bulk-like) | 10.69 |
| Stacking 1 CuO-Term (mod. surf) | 10.84 |
| Stacking 1 CuO-Term (Bulk-like) | 12.10 |
| Stacking 1 BaO-Term (mod. surf) | 12.99 |
| Stacking 1 BaO-Term (Bulk-like) | 12.46 |
| Stacking 1 (Cu average) | 15.16 |
| Stacking 2 BaO-Term (Bulk-like) | 20.48 |
Modified surface (mod. surf) here the Cu1surf and Cu2surf have distinct but isotropic . Cu average refers to the case where .
Figure 5Structural models and fitted reflectivities. The upper row shows the fits using stacking 1 and an average Cu-scatterer “Cu average” (explanations in the text). Lower row show the fits for the stacking 1 including the modified surface. (f) Shows the two CuO and BaO terminations and the location of the reconstructed Cu sites at the surface. Note that for the model shown in (f) the total film thickness is still 6 u.c. Here we have 5 bulk-like unit cells and one surface u.c. which is reconstructed. So for CuO-Term there are 5 × (6 atomic layers) + 6 atomic layer = 36 atomic layers. Whereas for BaO-Term there are 5 × (6 atomic layers) + 5 atomic layers = 35 atomic layers. Black lines in (b,c,g,h) show experimental data. Color plots are Q vs. hν intensity maps calculated using the corresponding structural models. Greek letters indicate the polarization of the light used for the measurement/calculation (cf. Fig. 2(c)). White lines in (i,j) are a guide to the eye and show the energy dependence of the thickness oscillations maxima. These lines are exactly the same as in Fig. 2(a,b).