Pairing symmetry of monolayer FeSe on SrTiO_3 · revision history

Revision 2

Accepted · core change · record

Changes against revision 1:

Title · changed
Revision 1: Pairing symmetry of monolayer FeSe on SrTiO3
Revision 2: Pairing symmetry of monolayer FeSe on $\mathrm{SrTiO_3}$
Plain
Monolayer FeSe lacks the hole pocket that standard theories of iron-based superconductors rely on, so it is unclear whether the superconducting gap changes sign between its electron pockets.
Precise · changed · core
Revision 1: With only electron pockets at M, candidate states are plain s-wave (phonon-assisted), nodeless d-wave (sign change between the two electron pockets), incipient $s\pm$ (pairing involving a hole band below $E_F$) and states with interband pairing. Determine the relative sign of the gap on the two electron pockets and whether it varies between the two Fe sublattices.
Revision 2: With only electron pockets at $M$, candidate states are plain s-wave (phonon-assisted), nodeless d-wave (sign change between the two electron pockets), incipient $s\pm$ (pairing involving a hole band below $E_F$) and states with interband pairing. Determine the relative sign of the gap on the two electron pockets and whether it varies between the two Fe sublattices.
Settled by
A phase-sensitive measurement (phase-referenced quasiparticle interference, impurity bound-state spectroscopy, or Josephson interferometry) giving the relative gap sign on the two electron pockets.
Kind
well-posed
Answer type
classification
References
(empty)
Literature status
contested
Status note
Scanning tunneling spectroscopy found coherence peaks that differ between the two Fe sublattices, interpreted as $\eta$-pairing between $k$ and $-k+Q$ (Ding et al., Physical Review Letters 136, 066502, 2026, arXiv 2406.15239).
Posed since
(empty)

Decisions