Charge modulations versus strain waves in resonant x-ray scattering

Abstract

References (29)

Citing Articles

Download: PDF (305 kB) or Buy this Article (US$25) (Use Article Pack)

P. Abbamonte
Department of Physics and Federick Seitz Materials Research Laboratory, University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois 61801, USA

Received 16 August 2006; published 17 November 2006

Amethod is described for using resonant x-ray scattering to separatelyquantify the charge (valence) modulation and the strain wave associatedwith a charge density wave. The essence of the methodis a separation of the atomic form factor into a"raw" amplitude f_R( omega ) and a valence-dependent amplitude f_D( omega ) which inmany cases may be determined independently from absorption measurements. Theadvantage of this separation is that the strain wave followsthe average quantity |f_R( omega )+vf_D( omega )|², whereas the charge modulation follows only|f_D( omega )|². This allows the two distinct modulations to be quantifiedseparately. A scheme for characterizing a given CDW as Peierls-likeor Wigner-like follows naturally. The method is illustrated for anidealized model of a one-dimensional chain.

URL:	http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevB.74.195113
DOI:	10.1103/PhysRevB.74.195113
PACS:	78.70.Ck; 72.15.Nj; 61.10.Eq 78.70.Ck X-ray scattering (condensed matter) 72.15.Nj Collective modes (e.g., in one-dimensional conductors) including synthetic metals 61.10.Eq X-ray scattering including small-angle scattering YEAR: 2006
KEYWORDS:	X-ray scattering, charge density waves, atomic structure

REFERENCES (29)

View in Separate Window/Tab

For access to fully linked references, you need to log in. For access to fully linked references, you need to Log in.

E. Wigner, Phys. Rev. 46, 1002 (1934).
D. Gibbs, D. R. Harshman, E. D. Isaacs, D. B. McWhan, D. Mills, and C. Vettier, Phys. Rev. Lett. 61, 1241 (1988).
J. P. Hannon, G. T. Trammell, M. Blume, and D. Gibbs, Phys. Rev. Lett. 61, 1245 (1988).
C. Kao, J. B. Hastings, E. D. Johnson, D. P. Siddons, G. C. Smith, and G. A. Prinz, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65, 373 (1990).
C. W. M. Castleton and M. Altarelli, Phys. Rev. B 62, 1033 (2000).
S. B. Wilkins, P. D. Spencer, P. D. Hatton, S. P. Collins, M. D. Roper, D. Prabhakaran, and A. T. Boothroyd, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 167205 (2003).
S. S. Dhesi et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 056403 (2004).
G. Beutier, G. van der Laan, K. Chesnel, A. Marty, M. Belakhovsky, S. P. Collins, E. Dudzik, J.-C. Toussaint, and B. Gilles, Phys. Rev. B 71, 184436 (2005).
K. J. Thomas et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 237204 (2004).
C. Schüßler-Langeheine et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 156402 (2005).
U. Staub, V. Scagnoli, A. M. Mulders, K. Katsumata, Z. Honda, H. Grimmer, M. Horisberger, and J. M. Tonnerre, Phys. Rev. B 71, 214421 (2005).
L. G. Parratt and C. F. Hempstead, Phys. Rev. 94, 1593 (1954).
M. Blume and D. Gibbs, Phys. Rev. B 37, 1779 (1988).
B. W. Battermann and H. Cole, Rev. Mod. Phys. 36, 681 (1964).
M. Fujita, H. Goka, K. Yamada, and M. Matsuda, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 167008 (2002).
J. M. Tranquada, J. D. Axe, N. Ichikawa, Y. Nakamura, S. Uchida, and B. Nachumi, Phys. Rev. B 54, 7489 (1996).