Abstract
The pair density wave (PDW) is an extraordinary superconducting state in which Cooper pairs carry non-zero momentum1,2. Evidence for the existence of intrinsic PDW order in high-temperature (high-Tc) cuprate superconductors3,4 and kagome superconductors5 has emerged recently. However, the PDW order in iron-based high-Tc superconductors has not been observed experimentally. Here, using scanning tunnelling microscopy and spectroscopy, we report the discovery of the PDW state in monolayer iron-based high-Tc Fe(Te,Se) films grown on SrTiO3(001) substrates. The PDW state with a period of λ ≈ 3.6aFe (aFe is the distance between neighbouring Fe atoms) is observed at the domain walls by the spatial electronic modulations of the local density of states, the superconducting gap and the π-phase shift boundaries of the PDW around the vortices of the intertwined charge density wave order. The discovery of the PDW state in the monolayer Fe(Te,Se) film provides a low-dimensional platform to study the interplay between the correlated electronic states and unconventional Cooper pairing in high-Tc superconductors.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals
Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription
$29.99 / 30 days
cancel any time
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 51 print issues and online access
$199.00 per year
only $3.90 per issue
Rent or buy this article
Prices vary by article type
from$1.95
to$39.95
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Data availability
All data supporting the findings of this study are available from the corresponding authors on reasonable request. Source data are provided with this paper.
Code availability
The code used to analyse the data reported in this study is available from the corresponding authors on reasonable request.
References
Agterberg, D. F. et al. The physics of pair-density waves: cuprate superconductors and beyond. Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 11, 231–270 (2020).
Fradkin, E., Kivelson, S. A. & Tranquada, J. M. Colloquium: theory of intertwined orders in high temperature superconductors. Rev. Mod. Phys. 87, 457–482 (2015).
Hamidian, M. H. et al. Detection of a Cooper-pair density wave in Bi2Sr2CaCu2O8+x. Nature 532, 343–347 (2016).
Du, Z. et al. Imaging the energy gap modulations of the cuprate pair-density-wave state. Nature 580, 65–70 (2020).
Chen, H. et al. Roton pair density wave in a strong-coupling kagome superconductor. Nature 599, 222–228 (2021).
Bardeen, J., Cooper, L. N. & Schrieffer, J. R. Microscopic theory of superconductivity. Phys. Rev. 106, 162–164 (1957).
Fulde, P. & Ferrell, R. A. Superconductivity in a strong spin-exchange field. Phys. Rev. 135, 550 (1964).
Larkin, A. I. & Ovchinnikov, Y. N. Inhomogeneous state of superconductors. Sov. Phys. JETP 20, 762–769 (1965).
Chen, H.-D., Vafek, O., Yazdani, A. & Zhang, S.-C. Pair density wave in the pseudogap state of high temperature superconductors. Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 187002 (2004).
Berg, E. et al. Dynamical layer decoupling in a stripe-ordered high-Tc superconductor. Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 127003 (2007).
Agterberg, D. F. & Tsunetsugu, H. Dislocations and vortices in pair-density-wave superconductors. Nat. Phys. 4, 639–642 (2008).
Berg, E., Fradkin, E. & Kivelson, S. A. Charge-4e superconductivity from pair-density-wave order in certain high-temperature superconductors. Nat. Phys. 5, 830–833 (2009).
Lee, P. A. Amperean pairing and the pseudogap phase of cuprate superconductors. Phys. Rev. X 4, 031017 (2014).
Berg, E., Fradkin, E. & Kivelson, S. A. Pair-density-wave correlations in the Kondo–Heisenberg model. Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 146403 (2010).
Ruan, W. et al. Visualization of the periodic modulation of Cooper pairing in a cuprate superconductor. Nat. Phys. 14, 1178–1182 (2018).
Edkins, S. D. et al. Magnetic field-induced pair density wave state in the cuprate vortex halo. Science 364, 976–980 (2019).
Liu, X., Chong, Y. X., Sharma, R. & Davis, J. C. S. Discovery of a Cooper-pair density wave state in a transition-metal dichalcogenide. Science 372, 1447–1452 (2021).
Yu, Y. et al. High-temperature superconductivity in monolayer Bi2Sr2CaCu2O8+δ. Nature 575, 156–163 (2019).
Chuang, T.-M. et al. Nematic electronic structure in the “parent” state of the iron-based superconductor Ca(Fe1-xCox)2As2. Science 327, 181–184 (2010).
Dai, P. Antiferromagnetic order and spin dynamics in iron-based superconductors. Rev. Mod. Phys. 87, 855–896 (2015).
Li, W. et al. Stripes developed at the strong limit of nematicity in FeSe film. Nat. Phys. 13, 957–961 (2017).
Fernandes, R. M. et al. Iron pnictides and chalcogenides: a new paradigm for superconductivity. Nature 601, 35–44 (2022).
Cho, C.-w et al. Thermodynamic evidence for the Fulde–Ferrell–Larkin–Ovchinnikov state in the KFe2As2 superconductor. Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 217002 (2017).
Kasahara, S. et al. Evidence for an Fulde–Ferrell–Larkin–Ovchinnikov state with segmented vortices in the BCS-BEC-crossover superconductor FeSe. Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 107001 (2020).
Wang, Q.-Y. et al. Interface-induced high-temperature superconductivity in single unit-cell FeSe films on SrTiO3. Chinese Phys. Lett. 29, 037402 (2012).
Zhang, W.-H. et al. Direct observation of high-temperature superconductivity in one-unit-cell FeSe films. Chinese Phys. Lett. 31, 017401 (2014).
Li, F. et al. Interface-enhanced high-temperature superconductivity in single-unit-cell FeTe1−xSex films on SrTiO3. Phys. Rev. B 91, 220503 (2015).
Liu, C. et al. Detection of bosonic mode as a signature of magnetic excitation in one-unit-cell FeSe on SrTiO3. Nano Lett. 19, 3464–3472 (2019).
Liu, C. et al. Zero-energy bound states in the high-temperature superconductors at the two-dimensional limit. Sci. Adv. 6, eaax7547 (2020).
Chen, C., Liu, C., Liu, Y. & Wang, J. Bosonic mode and impurity-scattering in monolayer Fe(Te,Se) high-temperature superconductors. Nano Lett. 20, 2056–2061 (2020).
Chen, C. et al. Atomic line defects and zero-energy end states in monolayer Fe(Te,Se) high-temperature superconductors. Nat. Phys. 16, 536–540 (2020).
Hao, N. & Hu, J. Topological phases in the single-layer FeSe. Phys. Rev. X 4, 031053 (2014).
Wang, Z. F. et al. Topological edge states in a high-temperature superconductor FeSe/SrTiO3(001) film. Nat. Mater. 15, 968–973 (2016).
Shi, X. et al. FeTe1−xSex monolayer films: towards the realization of high-temperature connate topological superconductivity. Sci. Bull. 62, 503–507 (2017).
Ren, Z. et al. Nanoscale decoupling of electronic nematicity and structural anisotropy in FeSe thin films. Nat. Commun. 12, 10 (2021).
Fan, Q. et al. Plain s-wave superconductivity in single-layer FeSe on SrTiO3 probed by scanning tunnelling microscopy. Nat. Phys. 11, 946–952 (2015).
Wang, Z. et al. Evidence for dispersing 1D Majorana channels in an iron-based superconductor. Science 367, 104–108 (2020).
Fujita, K. et al. Direct phase-sensitive identification of a d-form factor density wave in underdoped cuprates. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 111, E3026–E3032 (2014).
Cho, D., Bastiaans, K. M., Chatzopoulos, D., Gu, G. D. & Allan, M. P. A strongly inhomogeneous superfluid in an iron-based superconductor. Nature 571, 541–545 (2019).
Zhang, Y., Jiang, K., Zhang, F., Wang, J. & Wang, Z. Atomic line defects and topological superconductivity in unconventional superconductors. Phys. Rev. X 11, 011041 (2021).
Lawler, M. J. et al. Intra-unit-cell electronic nematicity of the high-Tc copper-oxide pseudogap states. Nature 466, 347–351 (2010).
Yim, C. M. et al. Discovery of a strain-stabilised smectic electronic order in LiFeAs. Nat. Commun. 9, 2602 (2018).
Parker, C. V. et al. Fluctuating stripes at the onset of the pseudogap in the high-Tc superconductor Bi2Sr2CaCu2O8+x. Nature 468, 677–680 (2010).
Hart, S. et al. Controlled finite momentum pairing and spatially varying order parameter in proximitized HgTe quantum wells. Nat. Phys. 13, 87–93 (2017).
Zhang, Y. & Wang, Z. Kramers Fulde–Ferrell state and superconducting spin diode effect. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/2209.03520 (2022).
Acknowledgements
We acknowledge technical assistance from X. Xu, C. Chen and Y. Li and discussions with P. A. Lee and D. F. Agterberg. This work was supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of China (Grant No. 2018YFA0305604), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 11888101), the Beijing Natural Science Foundation (Z180010), the Innovation Program for Quantum Science and Technology (2021ZD0302403), the Strategic Priority Research Program of Chinese Academy of Sciences (XDB28000000) and the China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (2021M700253). Z.W. is supported by the US Department of Energy, Basic Energy Sciences Grant No. DE-FG02-99ER45747.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
The order of the first two authors was determined arbitrarily. J.W. conceived and supervised the research. T.W., Y.L. and G.H. grew the samples. Y.L., T.W. and G.H. carried out the STM and STS experiments. T.W., Y.L. and J.W. analysed the experimental data. Z.W. and Y.Z. proposed the theoretical model. Y.L., T.W., Z.W. and J.W. wrote the manuscript.
Corresponding authors
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Peer review
Peer review information
Nature thanks the anonymous reviewers for their contribution to the peer review of this work.
Additional information
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Extended data figures and tables
Extended Data Fig. 1 More information about the 1-UC Fe(Te,Se)/STO.
a, An STM topography of 1-2 UC Fe(Te,Se)/STO at large-scale (200×200 nm2, Vs = 1 V, Is = 0.5 nA) with terraces of the STO substrate (lighter color means the higher height). The cyan area at the edge of the lower STO terrace shows the 2nd-UC Fe(Te,Se) film. b, Line profile taken along the orange curve in a. The thickness of the 1-UC FeTe1-xSex film is approximately 0.59 nm, corresponding to the composition x ≈ 0.5. c, An STM image of 1-UC Fe(Te,Se)/STO (10×10 nm2, Vs = 0.1 V, Is = 0.5 nA). d, Averaged tunneling spectrum (averaged over ~ 100 spectra) taken along the light grey arrow in c, which shows two pairs of coherence peaks at Δ1 ≈ 11 meV and Δ2 ≈ 19 meV. e, Waterfall-plot of dI/dV curves taken along the light grey arrow in c.
Extended Data Fig. 2 Characterization of domain walls.
a, b, STM images (16×16 nm2, Vs = 0.1 V, Is = 0.5 nA) of two domain walls labeled as D1 (a) and D4 (b). c, d, dI/dV maps of two domain walls. The lattice vectors qi,x(y) of two regions marked by white spots in a and b satisfy q1,x(y) = q2,x(y). dI/dV maps shown in c and d are measured at the red dashed box in a and b, respectively.
Extended Data Fig. 3 Non-dispersive PDW and absence of PDW in high energy dI/dV maps.
a, The STM topography of the domain wall D3 shown in Fig. 4. b, The bias dependence of the wavevector of the LDOS modulation at the domain wall. c,d, dI/dV map (c) taken at 80 mV over the same FOV of a and corresponding magnitude of the Fourier transform (d). There is no spatial modulation in the dI/dV map (c) and no FFT peak at around Q ≈ 0.28QFe at the energy much higher than the superconducting gap (d). e,f, Spatial variation of the amplitude (e) and phase (f) of the LDOS modulation at bias voltage from 0 to 14 mV. The averaging length scales in e and f are denoted by dashed circles. The LDOS modulations mainly exist in the energies within the superconducting gap, which is also observed at domain wall D2 (Supplementary Fig. 13). Dashed lines in a,c,e and f mark the edges of the domain wall.
Extended Data Fig. 4 Determination of modulation wavevector Q at domain wall D1.
a, The STM topography of the domain wall D1. b, Zero-bias conductance (ZBC) map g(r, V = 0 mV) taken at the same area in a. c, The magnitude of the Fourier transform g(q, V = 0 mV) of the ZBC map in b. d–f, Spatial distribution of the modulation gQ(r) phase \({\phi }_{{{\bf{Q}}}_{{\rm{t}}}}^{g}({\bf{r}})\). The averaging length scales in d–f are denoted by dashed circles. The domain wall area is marked by black dashed lines in a,b and d–f. g–i, Statistical histogram of \({\phi }_{{{\bf{Q}}}_{{\rm{t}}}}^{g}({{\bf{r}}}_{{\rm{DW}}})\) (rDW represents the area of the domain wall) at the domain wall D1 for a series of tentative Qt. Only the points inside the domain wall area in d–f are counted. Black dashed lines in g–i are located at the half maximum of the peak. The determined wavevector Q corresponds to the minimum of the full width at half maximum (FWHM) of the peak in the distribution histogram \({\phi }_{{{\bf{Q}}}_{{\rm{t}}}}^{g}({{\bf{r}}}_{{\rm{DW}}})\), as shown in h.
Extended Data Fig. 5 Superconducting gap energy modulations at the domain wall labeled as D8 in another 1-UC Fe(Te,Se)/STO sample (s2).
a, The STM topography of the domain wall. (4.8×4.8 nm2, Vs = 0.04 V, Is = 2.5 nA). b, Spatial distribution of Δ1(r) measured in the same area in a. White dashed lines in b are guides to the eye. c, The magnitude of the Fourier transform of b. Orange crosses are at q = (±QFe,0), (0,±QFe). The modulation wavevector Q ≈ ±0.28QFe is marked by dashed blue circles. Black dashed lines in a and b mark the edges of the domain wall.
Extended Data Fig. 6 Spatial modulations of the LDOS, superconducting gap energy and coherence peak height at one domain wall labeled as D9 in another 1-UC Fe(Te,Se) film (s2).
a, The STM topography of the domain wall. (4.3×5.4 nm2, Vs = 0.04 V, Is = 2.5 nA). b, dI/dV map g(r, V = 3 mV) taken at the same area in a. c, The magnitude of the Fourier transform of b. d, Spatial distribution of Δ1(r) measured in the same area in a. e, The magnitude of the Fourier transform of d. f, Spatial distribution of superconducting coherence peak height measured in the same area in a. g, The magnitude of the Fourier transform of f. h, Line profiles along the (0,0) to (1,0)QFe direction in c, e, and g. Peaks at Q ≈ 0.28QFe appear for all curves. The profiles are normalized and shifted vertically for comparison. Orange crosses in c, e, and g are at q = (±QFe,0), (0,±QFe). Black dashed lines in a, b, d and f mark the edges of the domain wall. Orange dashed lines in b, d and f are guides to the eye.
Extended Data Fig. 7 ρ(r, V) map (a), corresponding Fourier transform ρ(q, V) (b), spatial variation of the amplitude \(|{A}_{2{\bf{Q}}}^{\rho (V)}({\bf{r}})|\) (c) and the phase \({\phi }_{2{\bf{Q}}}^{\rho (V)}({\bf{r}})\) (d) of the 2Q ρ(r) modulation at 2 mV at the domain wall shown in Fig. 4 (D3).
ρ(q, V) exhibits maxima at around ±2Q (marked by dashed blue circles). The amplitude of the modulation is restricted to the domain wall region and the phase of the 2Q modulation is nearly uniform in the domain wall region, indicating the existence of the 2Q CDW. The averaging length scales in c and d are denoted by dashed circles. The edge of the domain wall is marked by the dashed lines in a, c and d.
Extended Data Fig. 8 Comparison between the atomic lattice and 2Q CDW state at the domain wall shown in Fig. 4 (D3).
a,b, Spatial variation of the phase \({\phi }_{0.5{{\bf{Q}}}_{{\rm{Fe}}}}^{T}\left({\bf{r}}\right)\) of the STM topology T(r) modulation at 0.5QFe (a) and the phase \({\phi }_{2{\bf{Q}}}^{\rho (2{\rm{mV}})}\left({\bf{r}}\right)\) of the ρ(r, V = 2 mV) (charge density) modulation at 2Q (b). Topological defects in a and b are marked by black dots. c,d, Spatial variation of the amplitude \(\left|{A}_{0.5{{\bf{Q}}}_{{\rm{Fe}}}}^{T}\left({\bf{r}}\right)\right|\) of the STM topology T(r) modulation at 0.5QFe (c) and the amplitude \(\left|{A}_{2{\bf{Q}}}^{\rho (2{\rm{mV}})}\left({\bf{r}}\right)\right|\) of the ρ(r, V = 2 mV) modulation at 2Q (d). The spatial variations of the phase and amplitude show many differences between the atomic lattice and 2Q CDW, indicating that the 2Q CDW is independent of the atomic lattice. The averaging length scales are denoted by dashed circles. The edge of the domain wall is marked by the dashed lines.
Extended Data Fig. 9 Possible theoretical scenarios for the PDW state at the domain wall.
a, Schematic of the PDW state at the domain wall. \({\varDelta }_{{\rm{SC}}}^{\mathrm{1,2}}\) and \({\varDelta }_{{\rm{SC}}}^{{\rm{DW}}}\) represent the zero-momentum superconductivity in the domains (1 and 2) and at the domain wall, respectively. b, Illustration of the finite center of mass momentum, equal-spin pairing in the presence of only Rashba SOC. \({\rm{\langle }}{c}_{{\bf{k}},\uparrow }{c}_{-{\bf{k}}+{\bf{Q}},\uparrow }{\rm{\rangle }}\) and \({\rm{\langle }}{c}_{-{\bf{k}},\downarrow }{c}_{{\bf{k}}-{\bf{Q}},\downarrow }{\rm{\rangle }}\) are equal-spin pairing order parameters where one spin sector carries momentum +Q and the other spin sector –Q. c, Illustration of the finite center of mass momentum equal-spin pairing in the presence of both Rashba and Dresselhaus SOC. In this case, the triplet equal-spin pairing order parameters \({\rm{\langle }}{c}_{{\bf{k}},\sigma }{c}_{-{\bf{k}}+{\bf{Q}},\sigma }{\rm{\rangle }}\) and \({\rm{\langle }}{c}_{-{\bf{k}},\sigma }{c}_{{\bf{k}}-{\bf{Q}},\sigma }{\rm{\rangle }}\) can have both spin components (σ), i.e., each equal-spin pairing sector carries both nonzero momentum +Q and –Q, giving rise to the equal-spin pairing PDW state. d,f, Calculated tunneling density of states ρi(ω) with i the site index, for two examples with Q = 2π/12 (d) and Q = 2π/4 (f), where the insets show the zoom-in feature around the coherent peaks. e,g, The spatial modulations of the superconducting gap extracted from the corresponding coherence peak positions for the Q = 2π/12 (e) and Q = 2π/4 (g).
Supplementary information
Supplementary Information
This file contains Supplementary Text, Figs. 1–20 and References.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Liu, Y., Wei, T., He, G. et al. Pair density wave state in a monolayer high-Tc iron-based superconductor. Nature 618, 934–939 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-06072-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-06072-x
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.
