Table 2 Extracted fit parameters from the B(x) model for the “O-doping” sample, measured at \(\sim\) 4.5 K.

\(B_{a}\) [mT]	\(B_{0}\) [mT]	\(\mathscr{N}(B_a)\)	Case A		Case B
\(B_{a}\) [mT]	\(B_{0}\) [mT]	\(\mathscr{N}(B_a)\)	\(\Lambda\) [nm]	\(\Lambda _N\)	\(\lambda\) [nm]	\(\Lambda _N\)
100	104.3	1	146.9±22.6	1.0±0.2	146.9±22.6	1.0±0.2
110	114.7	1	219.8±14.3	1.5±0.3	219.8±14.3	1.5±0.3
125	130.4	1	272.5±19.4	1.9±0.3	272.5±19.4	1.9±0.3
150	153.8±2.8	0.58±0.42	624.7±229.0	4.3±1.7	355.2±161.4	2.4±1.2
200	200	0	\(\infty\)	\(\infty\)	\(\infty\)	\(\infty\)

The thickness of the “dead layer” is estimated at \(d=\)24.4±11.2 nm. Identical values of \(\mathscr{N}(B_a)\) are obtained for both cases since: (1) values up to 125 mT are consistent with the Meissner state and therefore \(\mathscr{N}=1\); (2) at 150 mT, despite the different values of \(\lambda\) and \(\Lambda\), the length scales of each are much longer than the probed depth such that the resulting field profiles are virtually identical and therefore, identical values of surface field are obtained.

Quick links

Search