Higher angular momentum pairings in interorbital shadowed-triplet superconductors: Application to <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Sr</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">RuO</mml:mi><mml:mn>4</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:math>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Even-parity interorbital spin-triplet pairing emerges as an intriguing candidate in multiorbital superconductors with significant Hund's and spin-orbit coupling. Within such a state, the pairing is dominated by the intraband pseudospin-singlet component via the spin-orbit coupling, distinguishing it from a pure spin triplet and motivating the name, shadowed triplet. With atomic spin-orbit coupling, it was shown that this pairing exhibits an anisotropic $s$-wave character, while higher angular momentum pairing symmetries such as $d$- or $g$-wave have been proposed based on phenomenological analyses in candidate systems. A natural question is then whether higher angular momentum pairings may arise with this form of spin-triplet pairing. Here, we examine the interplay between spin-orbit coupling and the electronic dispersions in correlated metals and demonstrate how they can be realized. We apply this idea to ${\mathrm{Sr}}_{2}{\mathrm{RuO}}_{4}$ and determine the competition among different pairing states as multiple spin-orbit coupling parameters are tuned. The presence of both $d$- and $g$-wave pairings, including a $d+ig$ state, are found when momentum-dependent spin-orbit coupling with $d$-wave character is increased. Implications of the theory and future directions are also discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".