69Ga NMR and magnetic susceptibility in δ-phase of Pu1−xGax (x=0.05, x=0.08) alloys

Piskunov, Yu. V.; Михалев, К. Н.; Buzlukov, A. L.; Gerashenko, A.; Verkhovskiǐ, S. V.; Ogloblichev, V. V.; Архипов, В. Е.; Королев, А. В.; Zouev, Yu.N.; Svyatov, I. L.

doi:10.1016/j.jnucmat.2008.09.047

Cited by 3 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…3c). Here, consistency of the relaxation rate with free moment behavior (T 1 T ) −1 ∝ (T + T θ ) 1.5 at T > T * [40] supports our pro- ) FIG. 3: a, Calculated band entropy S versus T for each composition.…”

supporting

confidence: 83%

“…The hybridization between the 5f electrons of Pu and the conduction electrons is therefore much weaker than has gen-erally been assumed; hence, the 5f electrons are close to the threshold for localization and Pu is arguably the most strongly correlated of the elements. The experimental signatures of the pseudogapped state are reminiscent of those in transition-metal oxides [29][30][31][32][33], and include a peak in the electronic heat capacity below T * , accompanied by a thermally activated Hall coefficient [34] and a downturn below T * in physical quantities that are sensitive to the thermally averaged electronic density of states such as the electrical resistivity, Knight shift and magnetic susceptibility [35][36][37][38][39][40].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…3c; D(T ) consists of a broad maximum around T * ≈ 100 K and a steep downturn for T < T * . A close examination of χ [38], Knight shift (reflecting the local magnetic susceptibility at substituted 69 Ga nuclei) [39,40] and ρ [35][36][37] data for δ−Pu (in Figs. 3c) reveal that these too exhibit similar broad maxima around T * and steep downturns for T < T * .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…c, Calculated thermally-accessible electronic density of states D(T ) (Eq. 2) for each composition (with the estimated spin susceptibility also shown, using g = 2 7 and J = 1 2 , on the right-hand axis; see Methods), published susceptibility versus T [38], published NMR Knight shifts versus T [39,40], and published electrical resistivity [35,36] (divided by 3 for 8% Am). d, Comparison of the D el (ε) derived in this work (black line and top and right-hand axes) for 2% Ga against that calculated by way of dynamical mean field theory (DMFT) using quantum Monte Carlo (grey line and bottom and left-hand axes) [12].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations