Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-dwq4g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-26T15:38:14.415Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparison of the Hole Conductivities in Ceramic Cuprate Semiconductors and High-Tc Superconductors, as Reflected in the Difference between Oxygen and Copper Madelung Site Potentials

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 February 2011

Robert K. Metzger  and
Jerry B. Torrance
Robert K. Metzger
Affiliation:
Department of Chemistry, The University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, Alabama, 35487-0336, USA
Jerry B. Torrance
Affiliation:
IBM Research Divison, Almaden Research Center, 650 Harry Road, San Jose, CA 95120-6099, USA
Get access

Abstract

The Madelung energies of 18 cuprates and 1 nickelate with sheets or chains of Cu and O have been computed, along with the relevant Madelung site potentials for O and Cu. The difference between these site potentials has been shown to correlate extremely well with the conductivity of these cuprates: only if the site potential difference is intermediate can the holes (the presumed charge carriers) move more easily between Cu and O sites in the CuO2 sheets.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 156: Symposium M – High Temperature Superconductors: Relationships Between Properties, Structure, and Solid State Chemistry , 1989 , 377
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

[1] See, for example, articles by Raveau, B., Siegrist, T., Parkin, S. S. P., and Torardi, C. C. in High-Temperature Superconductivity: The First Two Years, edited by Metzger, R. M. (Gordon and Breach, New York, 1988).Google Scholar
[2] Whangbo, M.-H., Evain, M., Beno, M. A., Geiser, U., and Williams, J. M., Inorg. Chem. 27, 467 (1988).Google Scholar
[3] Evain, M., Whangbo, M.-H., Beno, M. A., and Williams, J. M., J. Am. Chem. Soc. 110, 614 (1988).Google Scholar
[4] Iguchi, E. and Yonezawa, Y., Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 26, L1492 (1987).Google Scholar
[5] Kondo, J., Asai, Y., and Nagai, S., J. Phys..Soc. Jpn. 57, 4334 (1988).Google Scholar
[6] Feiner, L. F. and Leeuw, D. M. de, preprint.Google Scholar
[7] Metzger, R. M. and Bloch, A. N., J. Chem. Phys. 63, 5098 (1975).Google Scholar
[8] Klymenko, V. E., Krivnov, V. Ya., Ovchinnikov, A.A., Ukrainsky, I. I., and Shvets, A. F., Sov. Phys. JETP 42, 123 (1975).Google Scholar
[9] Torrance, J. B. and Silverman, B. D., Phys. Rev. B15, 788 (1977).Google Scholar
[10] Soos, Z. G., Ducasse, L. R., and Metzger, R. M., J. Chem. Phys. 77, 3036 (1982).Google Scholar
[11] Torrance, J. B. and Metzger, R. M., IBM Research Report RJ 6790 (64858) 25 April 1989.Google Scholar
[12] Torrance, J. B. and Metzger, R. M., to be published.Google Scholar
[13] Metzger, R. M., J. Chem. Phys. 64, 2069 (1976).Google Scholar
[14] Metzger, R. M. in Crystal Cohesion and Conformational Energies (Topics in Current Physics Vol.26), edited by Metzger, R. M. (Springer, New York, 1981) page 80.Google Scholar