English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The Comment insists on the following: in our model it is assumed that theeffective interactions have specific energy ranges within the single band witha cutoff at \omega_1 for the phononic part and a range from \omega_1 to\omega_2 in the AF channel. Our reply is that we assume that V_i(k,k')\neq 0 if|\xi_k|<\omega_i and |\xi_{k'}|<\omega_i, and otherwise V_i(k,k')= 0 (i=1,2),as stated in our paper. This is the model of BCS type with two attractiveinteractions, and this assumption is the characteristic of the BCSapproximation. The claim "the integration limits have been modified such thatthe AF channel mediated pairing sets in where the ph-channel pairing terminatesand is limited at an energy given by \omega_j=\omega_{AF}" in the Comment iswrong. We describe the model and the method to solve the gap equation in moredetail.

Reply to "Comment on 'Isotope effect in multi-band and multi-channel attractive systems and inverse isotope effect in iron-based superconductors'"