对“内在隧穿的本质：区别内在特征与伪影”评论的答复
Reply to comment on "Essence of intrinsic tunnelling: Distinguishing intrinsic features from artefacts
摘要：
最近的PRB，此后被称为参考。[1]实验上解析了高温超导体c轴电流-电压特性（IVC）的本征形状，并证明了在足够高的热负荷下，热致IVC非线性远远超过本征IVC非线性，以致于可以安全地忽略本征IVC。该评论的作者没有考虑到实验结果的参考。[1]并试图通过引用刷子状IVC来质疑其所有结论，该IVC声称不加热。我将证明这种说法缺乏证据;事实上，可以肯定地说，IVC不是没有加热。我将进一步表明，为这一评论所选择的数据使得有可能首次探索温度对一系列载荷的影响，其中真正的响应不会被加热所隐藏，并首次证明同一样品的$R(T)$负责在浴温超过180 K时在$T_c$之上和之下采取的丰富多样的IVC行为。因此，这些数据实际上提供了强有力的新证据，支持参考文献1的主要结论。[1]特别是本征隧穿光谱的关键发现的外在原因。
英文摘要：
The recent PRB, henceforth referred as Ref.[1], experimentally resolves the intrinsic shape of the c-axis current-voltage characteristics (IVC) of HTSC and demonstrates that at sufficiently high heat loads the heating-induced IVC nonlinearities exceed the intrinsic ones so radically that the latter might be safely ignored. The author of the comment fails to take account of the experimental findings by Ref.[1] and seeks to cast doubt on all its conclusions through reference to a brush-like IVC, which is claimed to be free of heating. I will show that this claim lacks substantiation; indeed it can be stated with certainty that the IVC is not free from heating. I will further show that the data selected for this comment make it possible to explore for the first time the effect of temperature on a range of loads where the genuine response is not hidden by heating and to demonstrate for the first time that $R(T)$ of the same sample is responsible for a rich variety of IVC behaviours taken above and below $T_c$ at bath temperatures spanned over 180K. Thus these data in fact provide strong novel evidence in favour of the major conclusions by Ref.[1], in particular the extrinsic cause of the key findings by intrinsic tunnelling spectroscopy.
机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来，可能存在错误，请以论文正文为准。
