Anisotropy and Penetration Depth of MgB$_{2}$ from ${}^{11}$B NMR

0.2 MB·English

by  Bo Chen

Anisotropy and Penetration Depth of MgB from 11B NMR
2
Bo Chen1, Pratim Sengupta1, W. P. Halperin1, E. E. Sigmund2, V. F. Mitrovi´c3,
M. H. Lee4, K. H. Kang4, B. J. Mean4, J. Y. Kim5, B. K. Cho5
1Department of Physics and Astronomy, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois 60208
2Department of Radiology, New York University, New York, New York 10016
7 3Department of Physics, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, 02912
0 4Department of Physics, Konkuk University, Seoul 143-701, Korea
0 5Center for Frontier Materials, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, KJ-IST 500-712, Korea
2
(Dated: Version February 6, 2008)

n
a The11BNMRspectrainpolycrystallineMgB2 weremeasuredforseveralmagneticfields(1.97 T
J and 3.15 T) as a function of temperature from 5 K to 40 K. The composite spectra in the super-
4 conducting state can be understood in terms of anisotropy of the upper critical field, γH, which is
2 determined to be 5.4 at low temperature. Using Brandt’s algorithm1 the full spectrum, including
satellites, was simulated for the temperature 8 K and a magnetic field of 1.97 T. The penetration
] depth λ was determined to be 1,152±50 ˚A, and the anisotropy of the penetration depth, γλ, was
n estimated to be close to one at low temperature. Therefore, our findings establish that there are
o two different anisotropies for uppercritical field and penetration depth at low temperatures.
c
-
r
p The discoveryofunusually highsuperconductivetran-
u sition temperatures of MgB , a simple bimetallic com- 70
2
s pound superconductor2, has attracted considerable in- 60
.
at terest from both theory and experiment. Reconsidera- 50
m tion and extension of BCS theory to two-band super-
conductivity hassuccessfully accountedfor experimental 40 T
d- observations3,4,5,6,7,8. Nonetheless, the relation between (K
30
)
n anisotropyof the upper criticalfield andthe penetration
o 20
depth is still a controversial issue. Generally there are
c
[ two points of view. One holds that there exist two dif- 10
ferent anisotropies at low temperatures, γ and γ , for
2 upper critical field and penetration depthHrespectλively. 26.60 26.80 27.0042.8 43.0 43.02
v
They have different temperature dependence and merge Frequency (MHz)
3
at a common value at T 3,9,10. The other perspective
7 c
4 is that there is only one anisotropy parameter, and it FIG. 1: 11B NMR spectra of the central transition in mag-
1 is field dependent5,11,12. Moreover, small angle neutron neticfieldsof1.97T(left)and3.15T(right)obtainedfroma
1 scattering (SANS) gives different results on the penetra- frequency sweep described in the text. The (±3/2 ↔ ±1/2)
6 tiondepthanisotropyonsinglecrystalandpowderMgB satellites areabout 340 kHzaway from thecentraltransition
2
0 samples4,13,14. Ingeneral,itismoreofachallengeto de- and, although they are not shown here, they are shown in
/ Fig.6.
t termine the absolute value of the penetration depth as
a
compared with its temperature dependence. Although
m
muon spin resonance (µSR)15 and nuclear magnetic res-
- onance(NMR)methods16 haveoftenbeenusedtoobtain
d perature range from 5 K to 40 K on a powder sample of
n an absolute value of the penetration depth, the applica- MgB attwomagneticfields,1.97Tand3.15T.We find
o tion of these resonance techniques to determine the pen- 2
that on cooling the spectra acquire a broad asymmetric
c etration depth for an anisotropic superconductor with
linebelowthesuperconductivetransitiontemperatureas
v: a sample consisting of a randomly oriented powder has shownin Fig.1. The shape ofthe broadline suggeststhe
i never been attempted until now.
X expected lineshape from an inhomogeneous field distri-
NMR and electron spin resonance (ESR) have been bution from vortices in their solid state. However, as we
r
a used previously to investigate the anisotropy of MgB2. willsee,thisinterpretationistoosimplistic. Therelative
Two different components of the resonance signal have weightofthisbroadline,comparedtothenarrownormal
been identified in the superconductive state in a re- component, increases with decreasing temperature. We
strictedrangeofmagneticfield17,18,19 andtheanisotropy associate this with the temperature and angular depen-
of the upper critical field has been deduced. Addition- dence of the upper critical field. From this behavior we
ally,anattemptwasmadeto determinethe temperature obtainthe uppercriticalfieldanisotropytobe 5.4atlow
dependent penetrationdepth fromthe NMR linewidth18 temperature. We have also simulated the full spectrum
assumingthatMgB2 isisotropic,whichisclearlynotthe at8 K in a field of1.97 T using this value for anisotropy
case. and, by comparing with experiment, we have obtained
Here we report 11B NMR measurements in the tem- thepenetrationdepthλ=1,152±50˚A.Furthermore,we
2
field has a temperature and angular dependence:
20
Hacb2 Hc2(θ,T)=Hca2b(T)/q1+(γH2 −1)cos2θ (1)
15
where θ is the angle between the applied magnetic field
andthec−axisofacrystal. Thetemperaturedependence
H (T) 10 bofelHowcc2Tacn(dH)H,act2bheisuspkpetecrhcerditiicnalFfiige.ld2H. cF2owritllembepeerqautaulrteos
the applied magnetic field for crystals oriented at a cer-
tainangleθ (T). Thecrystalswithθ largerthanθ (T)
cr cr
5 Hcc2 havetheir Hc2 greaterthanthe appliedfield, andare su-
perconductive. Due to the random distribution of the
orientation of the crystals, the superconductive fraction
0 in the sample simply equals cos θ (T). As the tempera-
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 cr
turedecreasesfurther,Hc increasesand,ifitcrossesthe
T (K) c2
appliedmagnetic field, the whole sample becomes super-
conductive. In Fig. 1, for H = 1.97 T, the narrow line
FIG. 2: Schematic Hc2 diagram of MgB2. The upper dotted
disappearsbelow17Kleavingonly the broadline. How-
linedenotes3.15T,andthelowerlinecorrespondsto1.97T.
The valuefor Hc2(0) is taken from Bud’ko and Canfield20. ever, in H = 3.15 T the c−axis upper critical field, Hcc2,
is always smaller than the applied field. Therefore, part
of the sample remains in the normal state in this field
andcontributes to the narrowline in the spectrum, even
at the lowest temperatures.
findthatthepenetrationdepthis isotropicforT <10 K
In Fig. 1, the position of the narrow peak is al-
even though the upper critical field and the coherence
mosttemperatureindependentandhasagaussianshape.
lengtharenot. Ourresults supportthe theoreticalclaim
Therefore,thecontributionofcrystalsinthenormalstate
that there are two different anisotropy parameters for
upper critical field and penetration depth3,7,9. can be deconvolvedfrom the composite spectra. The ra-
tio of the remaining area to the whole spectrum gives
The polycrystalline MgB2 sample was prepared by the superconductive fraction cos θcr(T), plotted in Fig.
solidstatereactiontechniquesusingamixtureofmagne- 3. Furthermore, with Hab(0) taken to be 16 T from
c2
siumandboronpowders. Thesuperconductivetransition Bud’ko and Canfield20, and the upper critical field at
temperature was measured to be 39.5 K for the onset of θ at 5 K equal to 3.15 T, the external applied mag-
cr
diamagnetism in a magnetic field of 1.0 mT and 39 K netic field, the upper critical field anisotropy γ can
H
for zero resistance. A sample of 0.2 gram randomly ori- be obtained from Eq. 1 and we find this to be 5.4 at
ented MgB2 powder was used in our experiments. NMR low temperature. This value is consistent with previous
measurementswerecarriedoutinthe temperaturerange reports3,4,5,7,9,10,11,12,17,21,22.
between 5 K and 40 K in magnetic fields of 1.97 T and Assuming γ to be temperature independent, Hab at
H c2
3.15Tinasuperconductivemagnet. Broadspectrawere eachtemperature point canbe obtainedfollowingEq. 1.
obtained by summing Fourier transforms of echo signals The temperature dependence for this analysis is plotted
for a suite of different frequencies that cover the NMR in Fig. 4 where it is compared with results for Hab from
c2
spectrum. other groups19,20. The discrepancy grows with increas-
ing temperature. However, it is now accepted that γ
The spectra displayed in Fig. 1 are the central tran- H
decreases with increasing temperature3,7. Therefore, in
sition (−1/2↔1/2) of 11B. At high temperature, the
ourderivationathightemperatureswehaveusedavalue
sample is metallic in the normalstate and this spectrum
for γ that is too large which will produce a larger Hab
consists of a single narrow and symmetric line. As the H c2
and consequently an overestimate of the transition tem-
temperatureis lowered,a broadandasymmetricline ap-
perature in a given field. In contrast, Fig. 4 shows that
pears. We associate this with the inhomogeneous field
the critical field curve deduced from our data and Eq. 1
distributionfromvorticesinthesuperconductivestatein
is too low. In fact, it extrapolates to a zero field transi-
addition to diamagnetic screening currents1. The weight
tion temperature around 30 K. The principal reason for
of the broad line increases with decreasing temperature,
this discrepancy is vortex dynamics. At high tempera-
while that of the narrow line decreases. The two lines
tures vortices are in a liquid state16,23 and their dynam-
coexist to a temperature of 5 K at 3.15 T, whereas only
icsontheNMRtimescaleaveragethelocalfieldstozero
the broad line survives below 17 K at 1.97 T. This can
at the 11B nucleus. This transfers spectral weight from
be explained by anisotropy of the upper critical field in
the broadline to the narrowline and reduces the appar-
MgB .
2
entsuperconductivefractionobtainedfromNMR.Atlow
Due to the temperature dependence and anisotropyof temperatures,inthevortexsolidstateouranalysisofthe
the two gap parameters in MgB 3,7,8, its upper critical superconductive fraction is reliable and, as can be seen
2
3
citations in different parts of the vortex structure as has
1.2
been reported25 for YBCO.However,our spin-lattice re-
laxationresultsserveasaguidetohelpusavoidselective
1.0 saturation,particularlyatlowfrequencieswheretherate
n
o is small, allowing us to obtain a faithful representation
cti 0.8 of the spectrum.
a
g fr The absolute value ofthe penetrationdepth λ is a key
uctin 0.6 pyeatraimt eisterdifffiorcuclhtartaoctmereiazsautrioenaocfcusruapteerlcyo.ndUuscintigvitaytaunnd-
nd nel diode oscillator technique Fletcher et al.10 found a
o 0.4
c penetration depth of MgB between 800 and 1,200 ˚A.
r 2
pe Finnemoreetal.26 determinedthatλabwas1,400˚Afrom
Su 0.2 transport measurements. Using ESR, Simon et al.19 re-
ported a value of the penetration depth between 1,100
˚A and 1,400 ˚A. From analysis of the second moment of
0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28
the measured NMR linewidth, Lee et al. calculated the
T (K)
penetration depth to be 2,100 ˚A. But, as we mentioned
earlier, the resonance methods cannot obtain a reliable
FIG.3: Temperaturedependenceofthefraction ofsupercon-
measureofthepenetrationdepth,ifitisassumedintheir
ductive crystallites in the sample determined from the com-
interpretationthatthe superconductoris isotropic. Here
positespectraplotted vstemperaturefor1.97 T(uptriangle)
and 3.15 T (downtriangle). wedeterminethepenetrationdepthbycomparisonofour
measured spectrum with a simulation of the local fields
in the mixed state for an anisotropic random powder at
in Fig. 4, our results match Hab(T) below 10 K. 8 K in a magnetic field of 1.97 T using the penetration
c2
depth as a variational parameter.
The NMR spectrum is a local magnetic field map.
1.0
At low temperature, the vortices are in the solid state
and contribute to the associated field distribution of the
0.8 NMRspectrum. Thefielddistributionofthemixedstate
can be calculated by solving the Ginzburg-Landau (GL)
abH (0)c2 0.6 eaqnuiatteiroant.ivFeo,rqtuhiicskplyurcpoonsveewrgeinadgomptetBhroadn.dtT’shaelgsoorliuthtimon1
abH (T) /c2 0.4 glianivtttehisceetshauenpdecrutchrorenedndituacmatniandggnfiseettlaidctefid.eiTsldthrsiebfrruoetqmiounisrcefrdreoeimnnipnutghtsecuavrroreerttnhetxes
externalfield,coherencelengthξ,andpenetrationdepth
0.2 λ. We calculate the coherence length, ξ = 108 ˚A from
ab
the upper criticalfield20 andwe take its anisotropyfrom
Eq. 1,
0.0
0 10 20 30 40
T (K)
ξ(θ)=ξ / 1+(γ2 −1)cos2θ (2)
ab q H
FIG. 4: Hac2b. The circles are results from F. Simon et al.19
(circle) and diamonds are from S. L. Bud’ko and Canfield20. Withtheseinputs,thefielddistributionforacrystalata
specificangleisgeneratedbyBrandt’salgorithm1includ-
Analysis of our data using Eq. 1 is plotted assuming a con-
stant γH = 5.4 for 1.97 T (uptriangle) and 3.15 T (downtri- ing the central transition and its quadrupolar satellites.
angle). We infer that our interpretation of the NMR signal We convolute the spectrum with a broadening function,
as a vortex-broadened, inhomogeneous magnetic field distri- exp−2(H/δ)2, which will also include the effect of the
bution, is valid only below 10 K. finite width of the NMR line in the normal state. In
a powder sample, which we assume to be composed of
We have found that the spin-lattice relaxation rate of single crystal ellipsoids of revolution, we must consider
the broad line is much slower than that of the narrow the shiftsofmagnetizationowingto demagnetizationac-
line. This agrees with a previous report24. Additionally, cording to the shape and orientation distribution of the
we have found that the rate increases smoothly with in- grains27. For simplicity we characterize this distribu-
creasingfrequencywithinthespectrum,risinginthehigh tion by an average demagnetization factor, D. This as-
frequency tail of the central transition. Owing to the sumptionwouldbepreciseifthegrainshapedistribution
inherent inhomogeneity of the field distribution, which is uncorrelated with the crystal structure. The demag-
we will discuss later, it is not possible to deconvolute netization effect gives a relative shift of the magnetiza-
spin-lattice relaxationsignals to searchfor electronic ex- tionwhichitselfdepends onthe orientationofthe grains
4
since the diamagnetic moment from screening currents of the first moment of the distribution, as can be seen
is strongly angular dependent. Simulations of spectra at in Fig. 5, must be correctly handled since it contributes
three different, but representative, angles are presented significantly to the overall lineshape. Earlier work on
in Fig. 5. The spectrum for the whole sample is then other superconductors analyzing the field distribution in
obtained as the integral of 91 spectra with orientation the mixedstate has been directedatthe moments of the
uniformly distributed between 0 and π/2, weighted by distribution, so we have calculated the first three mo-
a factor sin θ appropriate for a random distribution of ments for an anisotropic superconductor with randomly
grain orientations. oriented grains, as a function of the penetration depth,
restricted to the case of γ =5.4 and γ =1.
H λ
140
2500
120
2000
100
y
sit
n 80
e y 1500
Int 60 nsit
e
40 Int 1000
20
500
0
1.90 1.95 2.00 2.05
H (T) 0
1.90 1.95 2.00 2.05
H (T)
FIG. 5: Simulated spectra for crystals at different orienta-
tions. Thesolid, dashedand dottedcurvesare thespectraof
crystals with c−axis at π/2, π/4 and 0 angles to the applied FIG. 6: The spectrum at a temperature of 8 K and a mag-
field,respectively. Ademagnetization factor, D=1/3, anda netic field of 1.97 T. The blue solid line is the experimental
gaussian broadening parameter, δ=5.2 mT, were chosen for spectrum. The dotted line is the simulation described in the
these spectra. text.
The second moment of the magnetic field distribution
There are three variational parameters, λ, D, and δ.
of a spectrum from a vortex lattice can be related1 to
We then carry out a χ2 minimization of the difference
itspenetrationdepth λforlowmagneticfieldscompared
between the simulated spectrum and the experimental
to H by the Pincus’ formula1,16 where the second mo-
one, taking their areas to be equal. The simulated spec- c2
mentvariesastheinversefourthpowerofthepenetration
trum is shown in Fig. 6 together with the experimental
depth, B2 = (0.0609φ )2/λ4. In the present case the
spectrum. The numerical results provide an excellent (cid:10) (cid:11) 0
simulated spectrum is the superposition of spectra with
representation of the complex measured spectrum with
anisotropic coherence lengths and upper critical fields.
values for the variationalparameters for the penetration
Nonetheless, we find the 1st, 2nd and 3rd moments of
depthλ=1,152±50˚A,averagedemagnetizationfactor,
the spectrum can be similarly related to inverse, even
D=0.31±0.01andthegaussianbroadening,δ =5.2mT,
powers of the penetration depth in the following elegant
whichislargerthan,butofthesameorderas,thenormal
way:
state linewidth, 2 mT. The quoted accuracy is statisti-
cal. This value for D is rather close to that anticipated
for asphericalgeometry,Dsphere =1/3,anditis reason- hBi=−(1−D)·A /λ2 (3)
1
abletoexpectthisvaluefortheaveragedemagnetization
factor for a large ensemble of grains. Earlier reports for
the value of the penetration depth10,19,26,28 are similar B2 =δ2/4+A /λ4 (4)
2
to ours although our accuracy is higher. Our simulation (cid:10) (cid:11)
and its comparison with experiment, as represented in
Fig. 6, is the most precise such comparison obtained by B3 =A /λ6, (5)
3
(cid:10) (cid:11)
resonance methods and it is the first time that such a
simulationhasbeenattemptedforastronglyanisotropic where A , A , A are numerical constants. The gaus-
1 2 3
supercondcutor. We emphasize that previous work has sian broadening factor is δ and D is the demagne-
generallyfocusedonmomentsofthemeasuredspectrum, tization factor. We find A = 1.415 × 104 T ˚A2,
1
often restricting attention to the second moment. For A = 2.621 × 107 T2 ˚A4, A = 1.524 × 1011 T3 ˚A6.
2 3
an anisotropic superconductor the angular dependence Howeverwecautionthatanisotropyandfielddependence
5
2000 isthe inverseofH ,thereforethe penetrationdepthhas
c2
the inverse angular dependence of the coherence length,
γ = 1
λ
1000
λ(θ)=λ 1+(γ2−1)cos2θ (6)
abq λ
0 With the same approach as before we generate the
2000 spectrumforthepowdersamplewithγ largerthanone.
λ
The central transition is found to decrease with increase
y
ensit 1000 γ λ= 1.2 iolfluγsλtraanteds.theTshpisecsturaggbeesctosmtheamtoγrλeaastymlowmettermicpaesraFtiugr.e7s
nt should be close to one. Magnetization measurements
I
showthatγ isaround1.7between20and27K28. SANS
λ
experiments on a powder MgB sample13 give an upper
2
0
limitofγ tobearound1.5andessentiallymagneticfield
λ
2000
independent. Our result is consistent with these values.
However,SANS measurements on a single crystal4,14 in-
γ = 1.5
λ dicatethatγλ isclosetooneatT=2Kandatlowfiled,
1000 H<0.5T,andthatitincreaseswithexternalfieldreach-
ing ≈ 3.5 in a field of 0.8 T. The lower γ in the powder
λ
sample is believed to be caused by a limiting crystallite
size effect13. Further work will be required to elucidate
0
this phenomenon.
1.90 1.94 1.98 2.02
In conclusion, we measure the 11B NMR spectra of
H (T)
a random powder sample of MgB in magnetic fields
2
of 1.97 T and 3.15 T. The evolution of the spectra
FIG.7: Simulationwithdifferentγλplottedtogetherwithex- through the temperature range can be explained by the
perimentalspectrumatatemperatureof8Kandamagnetic
anisotropy of the upper critical field γ , which is deter-
field of 1.97 T. The dashed lines are simulations. It is clear H
mined to be 5.4 at low temperature. We find from our
thatthebestcomparisonbetweenexperimentandsimulation
holds for γλ ≈1. simulation that the penetration depth carries a differ-
ent anisotropy from the upper critical field and that at
lowtemperaturesitisalmostisotropicsimilartothatre-
of the local field distributions mean that these numeri- ported from SANS13 for a powder sample. The value of
calconstants hold only in a limited rangewhich we have thepenetrationdepththatwehaveobtainedforMgB2 is
explored for MgB with γ = 5.4, γ = 1 and H = 1.97 1,152±50˚Aat8Kinamagneticfieldof1.97T.Fromour
2 H λ
T. numerical studies we have found simple expressions for
We havealsoinvestigatedthe effect ofthe penetration thepenetrationdepthdependence ofthe momentsofthe
depth anisotropy γ at low temperature. In actuality, field distribution in a random powder of an anisotropic
λ
the vortex structure for arbitraryangle θ is found as the superconductor.
solution to the anisotropic GL equations29. However, as This work was supported by the DOE: DE-FG02-
areasonableapproximationforanalmostisotropicpene- 05ER46248. Twoofus(M.LeeandB.K.Cho)acknowl-
tration depth, we introduce another variational parame- edge financial support from the Korean Research Foun-
ter,γ ,andcontinuetoadoptthesolutionoftheisotropic dationthrough,respectively,Grant2003-015-C00161and
λ
GL equation for each crystallite. The anisotropy of H ABRL programat Ehwa Woman University.
c1
1 E. H. Brandt 1997 Phys. Rev. Lett. 78 2208 6 A. Rydhet al 2004 Phys. Rev.B 70 132503
2 J. Nagamatsu, N. Kakagawa, T. Muranaka, Y. Zenitani 7 V .G. Kogan and S. L. Bud’ko2003 Physica C 385 131
and J. Akimitsu 2001 Nature 410 63 8 H. J. Choi, D. Roundy, H. Sun, M. L. Cohen and S. G.
3 V. G. Kogan 2002 Phys. Rev. B66 020509 Louie 2002 Nature 418 758
4 R.Cubitt,M.R.Eskildsen,C.D.Dewhurst,J.Jun,S.M. 9 A.A.Golubov,A.Brinkman,O.V.Dolgov,J.Kortusand
KazakovandJ.Karpinski2003Phys.Rev.Lett.91047002 O. Jepsen 2002 Phys. Rev. B 66 054524
5 L. Lyard, P. Szab, T. Klein, J. Marcus, C. Marcenat, K. 10 J.D.Fletcher,A.Carrington,O.J.Taylor,S.M.Kazakov
H. Kim, B. W. Kang, H. S. Lee and S. I. Lee 2004 Phys. and J. Karpinski2005 Phys. Rev. Lett. 95 097005
Rev. Lett. 92 057001 11 M. Angst et al 2004 Phys. Rev. B 70 224513
6
12 M. Zehetmayer, M. Eisterer, J. Jun, S. M. Kazakov, J. 21 M.Angst,R.Puzniak,A.Wisniewski,J.Jun,S.M.Kaza-
Karpinski, A. Wisniewski and H. W. Weber 2004 Physica kov, J. Karpinski, J. Roos and H. Keller 2001 Phys. Rev.
C 408 111 Lett. 88 167004
13 R. Cubitt et al 2006 Journal of Physics and Chemistry of 22 M. R. Eskildsen, N. Jenkins, G. Levy, M. Kugler, φ. Fis-
Solids 67 493 cher, J. Jun, S. M. Kazakov and J. Karpinski 2003 Phys.
14 D. Pal, L. DeBeer-Schmitt, T. Bera, R. Cubitt, C. D. De- Rev. B68 100508(R)
whurst,J.Jun,N.D.Zhigadlo,J.Karpinski,V.G.Kogan, 23 M. B. Maple, B. J. Taylor, S. Li, N. A. Frederick, V. F.
and M. R.Eskildsen 2006 Phys. Rev. B 73 012513 Nesterenkoand S.S. Indrakanti2003 Physica C 387 131
15 J.E. Sonier, J.H. Brewer, and R.F. Kiefl 2000 Rev. Mod. 24 M. Karayanni, G. Papavassiliou, M. Pissas, M. Fardis, K.
Phys. 72 769 Papagelis, K. Prassides, T. Takenobu and Y. Iwasa 2005
16 A.P.Reyes,,X.P.Tang,H.N.Bachman,W.P.Halperin, Journal of superconductivity 18 521
J.A.MartindaleandP.C.Hammel1997Phys. Rev. B55 25 V.F. Mitrovic, E. E. Sigmund, M. Eschrig, H. N. Bach-
14737; H.N.Bachman, PhD thesis, Northwestern Univer- man,W.P.Halperin,A.P.Reyes,P.KuhnsPandW.G.
sity, 1999. Moulton 2001 Nature 413 501
17 G.Papavassiliou, M.Pissas, M.Fardis, M.Karayanniand 26 D.K.Finnemore, J.E.Ostenson,S.L.Bud’ko,G.Laper-
C. Christides 2002 Phys. Rev. B65 012510 tot and P. C. Canfield 2001 Phys. Rev. Lett. 86 2420
18 K. H. Lee, K. H. Kang, B. J. Mean, M. H. Lee and B. K. 27 L. E. Drain 1962 Proc. Phys. Soc. (Lond.) 80 1380
Cho 2004 Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials 28 H. J. Kim, B. Kang, H. S. Lee and S. I. Lee 2006 Physica
272 165 B 378-380 890
19 F. Simon et al 2001 Phys. Rev. Lett. 87 047002 29 I. G. de Oliveira, M. M. Doria and E. H. Brandt 2000
20 S. L. Bud’ko and P. C. Canfield 2002 Phys. Rev. B 65 Physica C 341 1069
212501