SciPost Submission Page
Pressure-dependent structural and electronic instabilities in LaSb2
by T. I. Weinberger, C. K. de Podesta, J. Chen, S. A. Hodgson, and F. M. Grosche
This Submission thread is now published as
Submission summary
| Authors (as registered SciPost users): | Theo Weinberger |
| Submission information | |
|---|---|
| Preprint Link: | scipost_202208_00062v1 (pdf) |
| Date accepted: | 2023-04-25 |
| Date submitted: | 2022-08-22 16:58 |
| Submitted by: | Weinberger, Theo |
| Submitted to: | SciPost Physics Proceedings |
| Proceedings issue: | International Conference on Strongly Correlated Electron Systems (SCES2022) |
| Ontological classification | |
|---|---|
| Academic field: | Physics |
| Specialties: |
|
| Approaches: | Experimental, Computational |
Abstract
LaSb2 exhibits a large, non-saturating, linear magnetoresistance at low temperatures, defying the expectations of Fermi liquid theory. This is thought to be caused by charge density wave order emerging below an abrupt, hysteretic anomaly in the resistivity at ∼ 355 K. We find that, under hydrostatic pressure, this anomaly becomes much more pronounced, develops strong hysteresis, and shifts rapidly towards lower temperatures. The anomaly is fully suppressed by only 6 kbar. Moreover, we observe a second transition anomaly at lower temperature, which likewise disappears under pressure. These findings are discussed in the context of a structural transition recently discovered in the sister material CeSb2 and of density functional theory calculations, which indicate that the SmSb2-type structure adopted by LaSb2 at ambient conditions is unstable at moderate applied pressures.
Published as SciPost Phys. Proc. 11, 018 (2023)
Reports on this Submission
Report #1 by Anonymous (Referee 1) on 2022-11-29 (Invited Report)
- Cite as: Anonymous, Report on arXiv:scipost_202208_00062v1, delivered 2022-11-29, doi: 10.21468/SciPost.Report.6228
Report
The manuscript by Weinberger et al. deals with LaSb2 under pressure. Transport measurements under pressure reveal the alpha anomaly is rapidly suppressed. A phase diagram, including a superconducting phase, is presented in Fig. 3. Electronic structure calculations predict a structural phase transition under pressure. A point of discussion in the paper is whether the observed phase transition is due to a CDW or purely structural.
This is a sound paper that deserved to be published in SciPost. I have two comments, but it is optional to take these into account in a revised version of the manuscript.
1. At the highest pressure, 6.27 kbar, the phase diagram suggests the alpha transition should still be present, but it is not. Could there be a structural transition between 4.69 and 6.27 kbar, such that the alpha transition (if a CDW) does not take place in the high-pressure structural phase?
2. I find it difficult to reconcile Fig. 5 (i) and (ii). Up to 5 kbar there is a clear difference between the red dots and green triangles, but between 5 and 10 kbar they seem to fall on top of each other.