发表机构
Université Paris-Saclay; CNRS/IN2P3; IJCLab; Argonne National Laboratory; University of Chicago（巴黎萨克雷大学; 法国国家科学研究中心/欧洲核子研究学院; 介观物理与化学实验室; 阿贡国家实验室; 芝加哥大学）
机构由 AI 辅助整理，请以论文原文为准。AI 中文总结
本文通过Eilenberger方程与London方程的比较，证明微观与宏观理论在超导体杂质分布下电磁场分布一致，但微观理论能给出实验相关的超热场，并找到使超热场达到临界场的杂质分布族。
AI 中文摘要
超导中的非均匀非磁性杂质近来作为一种降低表面电阻和提高超热场的可行方法而受到关注。我们旨在利用Eilenberger方程从理论角度加深对杂质作用的理解，并研究基于London方程的更唯象方法在确定超导体内磁场分布方面的有效性。我们表明，对于超导体内杂质的任意空间分布，微观理论和宏观理论产生的电磁场分布完全相同。然而，这两种方法给出的与磁场相关的量有所不同。宏观模型仅给出Bean-Livingston势垒，而微观理论提供了与实验相关的超热场。基于微观形式，我们确定了一族杂质分布，使得超热场$H_{\ m{sh}}$等于临界场$H_c$，这是可达到的最大值。
英文摘要
Non-homogeneous, non-magnetic impurities in superconductivity have recently gained traction as a promising approach to reduce surface resistance and increase the superheating field. We aim to deepen the understanding of impurities' role from a theoretical perspective by utilizing Eilenberger's equation, and to investigate the validity of a more phenomenological approach based on London's equation for determining the magnetic field profile within the superconductor. We show that the microscopic and macroscopic theories produce identical electromagnetic field distributions for any spatial distributions of impurities inside the superconductors. However, the two approaches provide different magnetic field-related quantities. The macroscopic model only gives the Bean-Livingston barrier, while the microscopic theory provides the experimentally-relevant superheating field. Based on the microscopic formalism, we determine a family of impurity profiles that make the superheating field $H_{\rm{sh}}$ equal to the critical field $H_c$, which is the maximum achievable.
Comments8 pages, G figures
