Distinct electridelike nature of infinite-layer nickelates and the resulting theoretical challenges to calculate their electronic structure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We demonstrate in this paper that the recently discovered infinite-layer (IL) nickelates have much in common with a class of materials known as electrides. Oxide based electrides are compounds in which topotactic removal of loosely bound oxygens leaves behind voids with a landscape of attractive potentials for electrons. We show that this is also what happens in the IL nickelates, where one of the two electrons (per formula unit) freed during the topotactic synthesis is to a large degree located in the oxygen vacancy position, occupying partially a local $s$-symmetry interstitial orbital, rather than taking part alongside the other electon in converting Ni from 3+ to a full 1+ oxidation state. We demonstrate that the interstitial orbital in question, referred to by us as the zeronium $s$ or Z $s$ orbital, forms strong covalent bonds with neighboring Ni $3d_{3z^2-r^2}$ orbitals, which in turn facilitates the one-dimensional-like dispersion of the Ni $3d_{3z^2-r^2}$ band along the $c$-axis direction, leading also to a possible large out-of-plane coupling between Ni magnetic moments. This finding, reinforced by our electron localization function analysis, points to a fundamental distinction between the nickelates and the structurally analogous cuprates, may explain the absence of superconductivity in hydrogen-poor samples, and is certainly in agreement with the observed large $z$-polarized component in the Ni $L_3$-edge x-ray absorption spectra. In addition, by using DFT+U calculations as an illustration, we show that the electride-like nature of the IL nickelates is one of the main reasons for the theoretical difficulty in determining the much debated elusive Fermi surface of these novel superconductors and aslo in exploring the possibility of them becoming excitonic insulators at low temperatures.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".