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 <a:math xmlns:a="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <a:mrow> <a:msub> <a:mrow> <a:mi>NdNiO</a:mi> </a:mrow> <a:mrow> <a:mn>2</a:mn> </a:mrow> </a:msub> </a:mrow> </a:math> . 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 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.363 | 0.003 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".