The (3 × 1)-O/Nb(100) surface λS was measured to be 0.20 ± 0.06, and its atomic-scale surface structure was confirmed. These results were supported by consistency between measured helium atom scattering Debye–Waller factors and ab initio density-functional theory predictions. The λS measured for the (3 × 1)-O surface reconstruction is further diminished from the metallic, unreconstructed Nb(100) value and the reported bulk Nb λ values. Furthermore, varying subsurface O has no significant effect on the λS of the (3 × 1)-O reconstruction. While the metallic, unreconstructed Nb(100) surface is significantly affected by accumulated subsurface C and O, the (3 × 1)-O reconstruction stabilizes its λS against the effects of subsurface O. Due to the low λS, a negligible critical temperature (TC) ≤ 6.2 × 10–3 K was estimated, indicating that at operational temperatures of ∼2 K, the (3 × 1)-O/Nb(100) reconstruction is not superconducting alone. However, the proximity effect indicates that a thin normal metal in contact with a superconductor exhibits some superconducting properties while the superconductor's properties are diminished. These results contain the first measurement of (3 × 1)-O/Nb(100) λS, distinguish the effects of surface structure and chemical composition on λS, and indicate that the (3 × 1)-O/Nb(100) surface has diminished superconducting properties relative to the unreconstructed, metallic Nb(100) and the Nb bulk.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Thompson et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: