Superconductivity in the Parent Infinite-Layer Nickelate <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <mml:mrow> <mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>NdNiO</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mrow> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:mrow> </mml:math>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We report evidence for superconductivity with onset temperatures up to 11 K in thin films of the infinite-layer nickelate parent compound NdNiO 2 . A combination of oxide molecular beam epitaxy and atomic hydrogen reduction yields samples with high crystallinity and low residual resistivities, a substantial fraction of which exhibit superconducting transitions. We survey a large series of samples with a variety of techniques, including electrical transport, scanning transmission electron microscopy, x-ray absorption spectroscopy, and resonant inelastic x-ray scattering, to investigate the possible origins of superconductivity. We propose that superconductivity could be intrinsic to the undoped infinite-layer nickelates but suppressed by disorder due to a possibly sign-changing order parameter, a finding which would necessitate a reconsideration of the nickelate phase diagram. Another possible hypothesis is that the parent materials can be hole doped from randomly dispersed apical oxygen atoms, which would suggest an alternative pathway for achieving superconductivity.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".