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/

Zendy Plus

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

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

We address the hypothesis that in intermetallic compounds, contrary to along-standing view that considers electron count and crystal structure type asthe only significant chemical criteria for the occurrence of superconductivity,consideration of the actual elements present is a third equally importantfactor. The importance of chemical identity may seem obvious, especially tochemists, but it has not previously been explicitly tested for intermetallicsuperconductors. Here we test the hypothesis by searching for and finding a newsuperconductor in the tetragonal symmetry Hf5Sb3-xMx solid solution. This phaseis ideal for this study, because M can be many 3d, 4d and 5d transition metalsin an M-Sb chain and is a minor elemental constituent. We findsuperconductivity for M = Ru only. This is the case even when the electroncount can be adjusted to the same value with a different transition elementwithin the same structure type. This leads us to propose that, like Cu-O(cuprate superconductors) and Fe-As (iron-pnictide superconductors) indifferent classes of compounds, Ru and Sb may be a critical element pair forsuperconductivity in intermetallic phases.

Superconductivity in Hf$_5$Sb$_3$$_-$$_x$Ru$_x$: Are Ru and Sb a critical charge-transfer pair for superconductivity?