Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
License: CC BY 4.0
arXiv:2312.03448v1 [cond-mat.supr-con] 06 Dec 2023

Extreme orbital a⁒bπ‘Žπ‘abitalic_a italic_b-plane upper critical fields far beyond Pauli limit in 4Hbsubscript𝐻𝑏H_{b}italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-Ta(S, Se)22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT bulk crystals

Fanyu Meng1,2,†12†{}^{1,2,{\dagger}}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT 1 , 2 , † end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT, Yang Fu1,2,†12†{}^{1,2,{\dagger}}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT 1 , 2 , † end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT, Senyang Pan33{}^{3}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT, Shangjie Tian4,1,2412{}^{4,1,2}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT 4 , 1 , 2 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT, Shaohua Yan1,212{}^{1,2}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT 1 , 2 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT, Zhengyu Li33{}^{3}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT, Shouguo Wang44{}^{4}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT, Jinglei Zhang3,*3{}^{3,*}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT 3 , * end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT, and Hechang Lei1,2,*12{}^{1,2,*}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT 1 , 2 , * end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT 11{}^{1}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT 1 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPTDepartment of Physics and Beijing Key Laboratory of Opto-electronic Functional Materials &\&& Micro-nano Devices, Renmin University of China, Beijing 100872, China
22{}^{2}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPTKey Laboratory of Quantum State Construction and Manipulation (Ministry of Education), Renmin University of China, Beijing 100872, China
33{}^{3}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPTAnhui Key Laboratory of Condensed Matter Physics at Extreme Conditions, High Magnetic Field Laboratory, HFIPS, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Hefei 230031, China
44{}^{4}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPTSchool of Materials Science and Engineering, Anhui University, Hefei 230601, China
(December 6, 2023)
Abstract

Transition metal disulfides 4Hbsubscript𝐻𝑏H_{b}italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-Ta(S, Se)22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT with natural heterostructure of 1T𝑇{T}italic_T- and 1H𝐻{H}italic_H-Ta(S, Se)22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT layers have became the focus of correlated materials their unique combinations of Mott physics and possible topological superconductivity. In this work, we study the upper critical fields ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2\mu_{0}H_{c2}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT of 4Hbsubscript𝐻𝑏H_{b}italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT and 4Hbsubscript𝐻𝑏H_{b}italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS1.991.99{}_{1.99}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 1.99 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPTSe0.010.01{}_{0.01}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 0.01 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT single crystals systematically. Transport measurements up to 35 T show that both of a⁒bπ‘Žπ‘{ab}italic_a italic_b-plane and c𝑐{c}italic_c-axis upper critical fields (ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,a⁒bsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2π‘Žπ‘\mu_{0}H_{c2,ab}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,csubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2𝑐\mu_{0}H_{c2,c}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT) for 4Hbsubscript𝐻𝑏H_{b}italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT and 4Hbsubscript𝐻𝑏H_{b}italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS1.991.99{}_{1.99}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 1.99 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPTSe0.010.01{}_{0.01}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 0.01 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT exhibit a linear temperature dependent behavior down to 0.3 K, suggesting the three-dimensional superconductivity with dominant orbital depairing mechanism in bulk 4Hbsubscript𝐻𝑏H_{b}italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-Ta(S, Se)22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT. However, the zero-temperature ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,a⁒bsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2π‘Žπ‘\mu_{0}H_{c2,ab}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT(0) for both crystals are far beyond the Pauli paramagnetic limit ΞΌ0HP\mu_{0}H{{}_{P}}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT roman_P end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT. It could be explained by the effects of spin-momentum locking in 1H𝐻Hitalic_H-Ta(S, Se)22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT layers with local inversion symmetry broken and the relatively weak intersublattice interaction between 1H𝐻Hitalic_H layers due to the existence of 1T𝑇Titalic_T layers.

The exploration of superconductors with large upper critical field ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2\mu_{0}H_{c2}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is of great interest to fundamental and applied physics. In conventional superconductors, the application of a magnetic field above the ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2\mu_{0}H_{c2}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT can destroy superconductivity via orbital or Pauli paramagnetic depairing mechanisms. The former one originates from the interaction between magnetic field and electron momentum. The latter one is caused by spin alignment of Cooper pairs by magnetic field, i.e., the competition between the binding energy of a Cooper pair and the Zeeman splitting energy 4 ; 5 . When the orbital depairing effect is weakened or eliminated, the ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2\mu_{0}H_{c2}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is determined mainly by the Pauli paramagnetic effect 6 ; 7 .

However, in some systems, the ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2\mu_{0}H_{c2}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT of a superconductor can exceed the Pauli paramagnetic limit field ΞΌ0⁒HPsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻P\mu_{0}H_{\rm{P}}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_P end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. In noncentrosymmetric superconductors, spin-orbit coupling (SOC) lifts the degeneracy of the electron band and manifest as an effective magnetic field ΞΌ0⁒Hso⁒(π’Œ)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻soπ’Œ\mu_{0}H_{\rm so}(\boldsymbol{k})italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_so end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( bold_italic_k ). The electron spins are locked along the directions of ΞΌ0⁒Hso⁒(π’Œ)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻soπ’Œ\mu_{0}H_{\rm so}(\boldsymbol{k})italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_so end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( bold_italic_k ) which are opposite for electrons of opposite momenta 8 ; 9 ; 10 . Such spin-momentum locking can significantly enhance the ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2\mu_{0}H_{c2}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT beyond the ΞΌ0⁒HPsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻P\mu_{0}H_{\rm{P}}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_P end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. For example, the Rashba-type SOC can lock the spin in the a⁒bπ‘Žπ‘abitalic_a italic_b plane, which will greatly enhance the c𝑐citalic_c-axis upper critical field ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,csubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2𝑐\mu_{0}H_{c2,c}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT 11 ; 12 . Another example is Ising superconductors, such as monolayer or few-layer MoS22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 13 ; 14 and NbSe22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 15 ; 16 , in which the a⁒bπ‘Žπ‘abitalic_a italic_b-plane upper critical field ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,a⁒bsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2π‘Žπ‘\mu_{0}H_{c2,ab}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT increases far above ΞΌ0⁒HPsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻P\mu_{0}H_{\rm{P}}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_P end_POSTSUBSCRIPT because of the Zeeman-type SOC locks the spin along the c𝑐{c}italic_c axis.

In centrosymmetric s𝑠sitalic_s-wave superconductors, such spin-momentum locking is usually destroyed due to the existence of inversion symmetry in the bulk materials and the restored spin degeneracy. However, recent studies have shown that Ising-protected superconductivity can occur in centrosymmetric materials at two-dimensional (2D) limit, such as stanene 17 and PdTe22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT films 18 , where SOC induces spin-orbit locking near the ΓΓ\Gammaroman_Ξ“ point to increase ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,a⁒bsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2π‘Žπ‘\mu_{0}H_{c2,ab}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT 19 . On the other hand, the strong spin-orbital-parity coupling caused by topological band inversion near the topological band crossing can also effectively pin the electron spins and lead to anisotropic renormalization effect of the external Zeeman field, thereby increasing the ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,a⁒bsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2π‘Žπ‘\mu_{0}H_{c2,ab}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT anisotropically 20 . Such mechanism has been used to explain the observed large enhancement ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,a⁒bsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2π‘Žπ‘\mu_{0}H_{c2,ab}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT of few-layer 2M𝑀{M}italic_M-WS22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 21 and monolayer 1T𝑇{T}italic_T’-MoTe22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 22 .

In contrast, for bulk centrosymmetric superconductors, the enhancement of ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2\mu_{0}H_{c2}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is still rare. The enhanced ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,a⁒bsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2π‘Žπ‘\mu_{0}H_{c2,ab}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT beyond the ΞΌ0⁒HPsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻P\mu_{0}H_{\rm{P}}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_P end_POSTSUBSCRIPT has been observed in bulk (LaSe)1.141.14{}_{1.14}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 1.14 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT(NbSe22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT)mπ‘š{}_{m}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT (mπ‘šmitalic_m = 1, 2) and [(SnSe)1+Ξ΄1𝛿{}_{1+\delta}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 1 + italic_Ξ΄ end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT]mπ‘š{}_{m}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_m end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT[NbSe2]11{}_{1}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 1 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT (mπ‘šmitalic_m = 1 - 15) with misfit structures, and organic cation intercalated bulk NbSe22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 23 ; 24 ; 25 ; 26 . However, in these systems, the blocking layers composed of LaSe, SnSe or organic cations can effectively decouple the interlayer coupling between two NbSe22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT layers. Thus they still show similar features of 2D superconductivity to the monolayer NbSe22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT with spin-momentum locking, resulting in the large ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,a⁒bsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2π‘Žπ‘\mu_{0}H_{c2,ab}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT.

In this work, we show that the bulk centrosymmetric superconductors 4Hbsubscript𝐻𝑏H_{b}italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-Ta(S, Se)22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT exhibit the enhancements of ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,a⁒bsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2π‘Žπ‘\mu_{0}H_{c2,ab}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT that are about three times larger than the ΞΌ0⁒HPsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻P\mu_{0}H_{\rm{P}}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_P end_POSTSUBSCRIPT even the dimensionalities of superconductivity are still three dimensional (3D). Such behaviors could originate from the local inversion-symmetry breaking in 1H𝐻Hitalic_H-Ta(S, Se)22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT layers combined with the weak intersublattice coupling.

The single crystals of 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT and 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS1.991.99{}_{1.99}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 1.99 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPTSe0.010.01{}_{0.01}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 0.01 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT were grown by using the chemical vapor transport method 28 . X-ray diffraction (XRD) patterns were measured using a Bruker D8 X-ray machine with Cu KΞ±subscript𝐾𝛼K_{\alpha}italic_K start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Ξ± end_POSTSUBSCRIPT radiation (Ξ»πœ†\lambdaitalic_Ξ» = 1.5418 Γ…). The magnetic susceptibility and transport measurements were measured using the Quantum Design MPMS3 and PPMS-14T. High-field transport measurements was performed in Chinese High Magnetic Field Laboratory (CHMFL) in Hefei using a resistive water-cooled magnet in fields up to 35 T and at temperatures down to 0.3 K in a helium-3 cryostat. Field dependence of resistivity was measured by AC bridge (Lakeshore, 370).

Refer to caption

Figure 1: (a) Crystal structure of 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-Ta(S, Se)22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT. (b) Powder XRD pattern of crushed 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT single crystals. Inset shows the XRD pattern of a 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT single crystal. (c) Temperature dependence of zero-field ρa⁒b⁒(T)subscriptπœŒπ‘Žπ‘π‘‡\rho_{ab}(T)italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T ) for 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT and 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS1.991.99{}_{1.99}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 1.99 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPTSe0.010.01{}_{0.01}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 0.01 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT single crystals. Inset shows the enlarged view of ρa⁒b⁒(T)subscriptπœŒπ‘Žπ‘π‘‡\rho_{ab}(T)italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T ) curves at low-temperature region. (d) Temperature dependence of 4π⁒χ⁒(T)πœ‹πœ’π‘‡\pi\chi(T)italic_Ο€ italic_Ο‡ ( italic_T ) at ΞΌ0⁒Hsubscriptπœ‡0𝐻\mu_{0}{H}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H = 1 mT along the a⁒bπ‘Žπ‘{ab}italic_a italic_b plane with ZFC and FC modes.

Ta(S, Se)22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT has a layered structure with the Ta(S, Se)22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT layers stacking along c𝑐citalic_c axis with weak van der Waals (vdW) interactions. The Ta(S, Se)22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT layer can form different local structures and the most typical ones are the T𝑇{T}italic_T-type structure with Ta(S, Se)66{}_{6}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 6 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT octahedra layer and the H𝐻{H}italic_H-type structure with TaCh66{}_{6}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 6 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT trigonal prism layer. The 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-Ta(S, Se)22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT is one of Ta(S, Se)22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT polymorphs, which is composed of alternating stackings of 1H𝐻{H}italic_H- and 1T𝑇{T}italic_T-Ta(S, Se)22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT layers (Fig. 1(a)). The interlayer distance s𝑠sitalic_s between two 1H𝐻{H}italic_H-Ta(S, Se)22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT layers is about 11.8 Γ…, when the interlayer distance between 1H𝐻Hitalic_H and 1T𝑇Titalic_T layers is about 5.9 Γ…. The 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-Ta(S, Se)22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT has the hexagonal symmetry with P633{}_{3}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 3 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT/m⁒m⁒cπ‘šπ‘šπ‘{mmc}italic_m italic_m italic_c space group (No. 194). Although the 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-Ta(S, Se)22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT crystal has a global inversion symmetry with the inversion center located at the center of the 1T𝑇{T}italic_T layer, the 1H𝐻{H}italic_H layer has a local inversion symmetry breaking 27 . Fig. 1(b) presents the powder XRD pattern of 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-Ta(S, Se)22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT crystal, which can be fitted well by using the crystal structure of 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-Ta(S, Se)22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT. The inset shows the XRD pattern of a 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-Ta(S, Se)22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT single crystal. All of peaks can be indexed by the indices of (00l𝑙litalic_l) planes, confirming that the c𝑐{c}italic_c axis is perpendicular to the crystal surface.

Fig. 1(c) shows the temperature dependence of a⁒bπ‘Žπ‘abitalic_a italic_b-plane resistivity ρa⁒b⁒(T)subscriptπœŒπ‘Žπ‘π‘‡\rho_{ab}(T)italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T ) of 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT and 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS1.991.99{}_{1.99}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 1.99 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPTSe0.010.01{}_{0.01}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 0.01 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT single crystals. With the decrease of temperature, the ρa⁒b⁒(T)subscriptπœŒπ‘Žπ‘π‘‡\rho_{ab}(T)italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T ) curve of 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT exhibits two jumps at 315 K and 22 K. The former one is ascribed to the formation of 1313\sqrt{13}square-root start_ARG 13 end_ARGΓ—\timesΓ—1313\sqrt{13}square-root start_ARG 13 end_ARG commensurate charge density wave (CCDW) transition in the 1T𝑇{T}italic_T layer and the latter one could be due to the appearance of CCDW in the 1H𝐻{H}italic_H layer, both of which are consistent with the results reported previously 28 ; 29 ; 30 ; 31 ; 32 . When lowering temperature further, there is a superconducting transition with the onset transition temperature T𝑇Titalic_Tonsetcsuperscriptsubscriptabsent𝑐onset{}_{c}^{\rm{onset}}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_onset end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = 3.5 K, which is about 4 times higher than that of 2H𝐻{H}italic_H-TaS22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 33 . It is noted that the transition width ΔΔ\Deltaroman_Ξ”T𝑇Titalic_T is rather large (∼similar-to\sim∼ 0.9 K) and the zero-resistivity temperature T𝑇Titalic_Tzerocsuperscriptsubscriptabsent𝑐zero{}_{c}^{\rm{zero}}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_zero end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is about 2.6 K. In contrast, 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS1.991.99{}_{1.99}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 1.99 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPTSe0.010.01{}_{0.01}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 0.01 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT only shows the resistivity jump at ∼similar-to\sim∼ 316 K, suggesting that the 1313\sqrt{13}square-root start_ARG 13 end_ARGΓ—\timesΓ—1313\sqrt{13}square-root start_ARG 13 end_ARG CCDW in 1T𝑇{T}italic_T layer still exist while the CCDW transition in the 1H𝐻{H}italic_H layer is strongly suppressed by just 0.5 % Se doping. Moreover, the T𝑇Titalic_Tonsetcsuperscriptsubscriptabsent𝑐onset{}_{c}^{\rm{onset}}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_onset end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT of 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS1.991.99{}_{1.99}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 1.99 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPTSe0.010.01{}_{0.01}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 0.01 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT (2.92 K) is slightly lower than that of undoped sample but with a narrower ΔΔ\Deltaroman_Ξ”T𝑇Titalic_T (∼similar-to\sim∼ 0.27 K), in agreement with the results in literature 34 . Fig. 1(d) shows the dc magnetic susceptibility 4Ο€πœ‹\piitalic_Ο€Ο‡πœ’\chiitalic_Ο‡(T𝑇{T}italic_T) as a function of temperature at ΞΌ0⁒Hsubscriptπœ‡0𝐻\mu_{0}{H}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H = 1 mT along the a⁒bπ‘Žπ‘{ab}italic_a italic_b plane with zero-field-cooling (ZFC) and field-cooling (FC) modes. The T𝑇Titalic_Tonsetcsuperscriptsubscriptabsent𝑐onset{}_{c}^{\rm{onset}}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_onset end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT defined as the temperature where the 4Ο€πœ‹\piitalic_Ο€Ο‡πœ’\chiitalic_Ο‡(T𝑇{T}italic_T) starts to become negative is about 3.47 K for 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT and 2.7 K for 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS1.991.99{}_{1.99}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 1.99 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPTSe0.010.01{}_{0.01}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 0.01 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT, respectively, consistent with the resistivity data. For 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{b}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT, the ZFC 4Ο€πœ‹\piitalic_Ο€Ο‡πœ’\chiitalic_Ο‡(T𝑇{T}italic_T) shows that the superconducting volume fraction (SVF) at 1.8 K is only about 3.0 %, which explains the large ΔΔ\Deltaroman_Ξ”T𝑇Titalic_T in ρ𝜌\rhoitalic_ρa⁒bπ‘Žπ‘{}_{ab}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_a italic_b end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT(T𝑇{T}italic_T) curve. It implies that the CCDW in 1H𝐻{H}italic_H layer may strongly compete with superconductivity, leading to the weak superconducting behavior. In contrast, 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS1.991.99{}_{1.99}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 1.99 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPTSe0.010.01{}_{0.01}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 0.01 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT shows a bulk superconductivity with the SVF of about 63.9 % at 1.8 K when the 1H𝐻{H}italic_H-layer CCDW is suppressed. Furthermore, the FC curves for both crystals show much small SVFs, implying rather strong flux pinning effects in these type-II superconductors 28 .

Refer to caption

Figure 2: Field dependence of ρa⁒b⁒(ΞΌ0⁒H)subscriptπœŒπ‘Žπ‘subscriptπœ‡0𝐻\rho_{ab}(\mu_{0}{H})italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H ) of 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT single crystal for (a) Hβˆ₯cconditional𝐻𝑐{H}\|{c}italic_H βˆ₯ italic_c and (b) Hβˆ₯a⁒bconditionalπ»π‘Žπ‘{H}\|{ab}italic_H βˆ₯ italic_a italic_b, and of the 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS1.991.99{}_{1.99}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 1.99 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPTSe0.010.01{}_{0.01}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 0.01 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT single crystal for (c) Hβˆ₯cconditional𝐻𝑐{H}\|{c}italic_H βˆ₯ italic_c and (d)Hβˆ₯a⁒bconditionalπ»π‘Žπ‘{H}\|{ab}italic_H βˆ₯ italic_a italic_b measured at various temperatures in field up to 35 T. (e) and (f) Temperature dependence of ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2⁒(T)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2𝑇\mu_{0}{H}_{c2}(T)italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T ) for Hβˆ₯cconditional𝐻𝑐{H}\|{c}italic_H βˆ₯ italic_c (red circles) and Hβˆ₯a⁒bconditionalπ»π‘Žπ‘{H}\|{ab}italic_H βˆ₯ italic_a italic_b (blue square) for 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT and 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS1.991.99{}_{1.99}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 1.99 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPTSe0.010.01{}_{0.01}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 0.01 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT single crystal, respectively. Red and blue dashed lines are the fits using 3D GL model for ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,a⁒b⁒(T)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2π‘Žπ‘π‘‡\mu_{0}{H}_{c2,ab}(T)italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T ) and ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,c⁒(T)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2𝑐𝑇\mu_{0}{H}_{c2,c}(T)italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T ). Green dashed lines denote the ΞΌ0⁒HPsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻P\mu_{0}{H}_{\rm{P}}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_P end_POSTSUBSCRIPT.

Fig. 2 illustrates the resistive transitions from superconducting state to normal state with an applied magnetic field up to 35 T which oriented parallel to the c𝑐{c}italic_c axis and parallel to the a⁒bπ‘Žπ‘{ab}italic_a italic_b plane for both crystals. It can be clearly seen that superconductivity is suppressed by increasing magnetic field at the same temperature. At T𝑇Titalic_T = 0.3 K, the superconductivity of 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT is completely suppressed at 1.6 T for Hβˆ₯cconditional𝐻𝑐{H}\|{c}italic_H βˆ₯ italic_c (Fig. 2(a)). In contrast, this field is significantly enhanced to about 27 T for H||ab{H}||{ab}italic_H | | italic_a italic_b (Fig. 2(b)). In addition, for both field directions, the superconducting transitions of ρa⁒b⁒(T)subscriptπœŒπ‘Žπ‘π‘‡\rho_{ab}({T})italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T ) curves for 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT are shifted to lower magnetic fields gradually with increasing temperatures. For 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS1.991.99{}_{1.99}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 1.99 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPTSe0.010.01{}_{0.01}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 0.01 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT, the ρa⁒b⁒(ΞΌ0⁒H)subscriptπœŒπ‘Žπ‘subscriptπœ‡0𝐻\rho_{ab}(\mu_{0}{H})italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H ) curves exhibit similar behaviors to those of 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT and the superconductivity is suppressed at ΞΌ0⁒H∼similar-tosubscriptπœ‡0𝐻absent{\mu_{0}{H}}\simitalic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H ∼ 1.25 T for Hβˆ₯cconditional𝐻𝑐{H}\|{c}italic_H βˆ₯ italic_c (Fig. 2(c)) and at ΞΌ0⁒H∼similar-tosubscriptπœ‡0𝐻absent\mu_{0}{H}\simitalic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H ∼ 20 T for Hβˆ₯a⁒bconditionalπ»π‘Žπ‘{H}\|{ab}italic_H βˆ₯ italic_a italic_b (Fig. 2(d)), respectively. It is worthy of noting that the superconducting transition widths of 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS1.991.99{}_{1.99}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 1.99 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPTSe0.010.01{}_{0.01}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 0.01 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT is much narrower than those of 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT at various temperatures, possibly related to the bulk superconductivity in the former.

Figs. 2(e) and 2(f) show the ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2⁒(T)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2𝑇\mu_{0}{H}_{c2}({T})italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T ) for Hβˆ₯cconditional𝐻𝑐{H}\|{c}italic_H βˆ₯ italic_c and Hβˆ₯a⁒bconditionalπ»π‘Žπ‘{H}\|{ab}italic_H βˆ₯ italic_a italic_b as a function of temperature for 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT and 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS1.991.99{}_{1.99}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 1.99 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPTSe0.010.01{}_{0.01}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 0.01 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT single crystal, respectively. Because the 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT has a relatively large ΔΔ\Deltaroman_Ξ”T𝑇Titalic_T, the ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2⁒(T)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2𝑇\mu_{0}{H}_{{c2}}({T})italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T ) is evaluated using the criterion of 50 % normal-state resistivity ρn,a⁒b⁒(ΞΌ0⁒H,T)subscriptπœŒπ‘›π‘Žπ‘subscriptπœ‡0𝐻𝑇\rho_{n,ab}(\mu_{0}{H},{T})italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H , italic_T ). The ρn,a⁒b⁒(ΞΌ0⁒H,T)subscriptπœŒπ‘›π‘Žπ‘subscriptπœ‡0𝐻𝑇\rho_{n,ab}(\mu_{0}{H},{T})italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H , italic_T ) was determined by linearly extrapolating the normal-state behavior above the onset of superconductivity transition in ρa⁒b⁒(ΞΌ0⁒H)subscriptπœŒπ‘Žπ‘subscriptπœ‡0𝐻\rho_{ab}(\mu_{0}{H})italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H ) curves. Interestingly, the ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2⁒(T)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2𝑇\mu_{0}{H}_{{c2}}({T})italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T ) curves of 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT and 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS1.991.99{}_{1.99}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 1.99 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPTSe0.010.01{}_{0.01}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 0.01 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT single crystals exhibit similar linear behaviors in the whole temperature range for both field directions. We fitted these linear ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2\mu_{0}{H}_{{c2}}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-T𝑇{T}italic_T relationships for both a⁒bπ‘Žπ‘abitalic_a italic_b-plane and c𝑐citalic_c-axis fields in the framework of a phenomenological 3D anisotropic Ginzburg-Landau (GL) theory with considering orbital depairing mechanism only. In general, orbital depairing occurs when the vortices begin to overlap at the orbital critical field ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2orb∼Φ0ΞΎ0similar-tosubscriptπœ‡0superscriptsubscript𝐻𝑐2orbsubscriptΞ¦0subscriptπœ‰0\mu_{0}{H}_{{c2}}^{\rm{orb}}\sim\frac{\Phi_{0}}{\xi_{0}}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_orb end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∼ divide start_ARG roman_Ξ¦ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_ΞΎ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG with Ξ¦0subscriptΞ¦0\Phi_{0}roman_Ξ¦ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT being magnetic flux quantum (= 2.07Γ—10βˆ’1515{}^{-15}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT - 15 end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT Wb) and ΞΎπœ‰\xiitalic_ΞΎ being the GL coherence length. In highly anisotropic materials, the GL coherence length may vary in different directions of the material. Due to the layered structure of 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-Ta(S, Se)22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT, the GL coherence length ΞΎa⁒bsubscriptπœ‰π‘Žπ‘\xi_{ab}italic_ΞΎ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT in the a⁒bπ‘Žπ‘{ab}italic_a italic_b-plane can be assumed isotropic, which may distinctly different from the c𝑐{c}italic_c-axis one. In the presence of a c𝑐{c}italic_c-axis magnetic field, the ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,c⁒(T)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2𝑐𝑇\mu_{0}{H}_{{c2,c}}({T})italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T ) depends only on ΞΎa⁒bsubscriptπœ‰π‘Žπ‘\xi_{ab}italic_ΞΎ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT 35 ; 36 ; 37 and ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,c⁒(T)=Ξ¦02⁒π⁒ξa⁒b⁒(T)2=Ξ¦02⁒π⁒ξa⁒b⁒(0)2⁒(1βˆ’TTc)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2𝑐𝑇subscriptΞ¦02πœ‹subscriptπœ‰π‘Žπ‘superscript𝑇2subscriptΞ¦02πœ‹subscriptπœ‰π‘Žπ‘superscript021𝑇subscript𝑇𝑐\mu_{0}H_{c2,c}(T)=\frac{\Phi_{0}}{2\pi\xi_{ab}(T)^{2}}=\frac{\Phi_{0}}{2\pi% \xi_{ab}(0)^{2}}\left(1-\frac{T}{T_{c}}\right)italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T ) = divide start_ARG roman_Ξ¦ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 italic_Ο€ italic_ΞΎ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG = divide start_ARG roman_Ξ¦ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 italic_Ο€ italic_ΞΎ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 0 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG ( 1 - divide start_ARG italic_T end_ARG start_ARG italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ), where ΞΌ0subscriptπœ‡0\mu_{0}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is vacuum permeability and the temperature-dependent ΞΎa⁒b⁒(T)=ξ⁒(0)⁒(1βˆ’TTc)βˆ’12subscriptπœ‰π‘Žπ‘π‘‡πœ‰0superscript1𝑇subscript𝑇𝑐12\xi_{ab}(T)=\xi(0)\left(1-\frac{T}{T_{c}}\right)^{-\frac{1}{2}}italic_ΞΎ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T ) = italic_ΞΎ ( 0 ) ( 1 - divide start_ARG italic_T end_ARG start_ARG italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. While the ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,c⁒(T)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2𝑐𝑇\mu_{0}H_{c2,c}(T)italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T ) for H||ab{H}||{ab}italic_H | | italic_a italic_b depends on both ΞΎa⁒bsubscriptπœ‰π‘Žπ‘\xi_{ab}italic_ΞΎ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and ΞΎcsubscriptπœ‰π‘\xi_{c}italic_ΞΎ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT with ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,c⁒(T)=Ξ¦02⁒π⁒ξa⁒b⁒(T)⁒ξc⁒(T)=Ξ¦02⁒π⁒ξa⁒b⁒(0)⁒ξc⁒(0)⁒(1βˆ’TTc)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2𝑐𝑇subscriptΞ¦02πœ‹subscriptπœ‰π‘Žπ‘π‘‡subscriptπœ‰π‘π‘‡subscriptΞ¦02πœ‹subscriptπœ‰π‘Žπ‘0subscriptπœ‰π‘01𝑇subscript𝑇𝑐\mu_{0}H_{c2,c}(T)=\frac{\Phi_{0}}{2\pi\xi_{ab}(T)\xi_{c}(T)}=\frac{\Phi_{0}}{% 2\pi\xi_{ab}(0)\xi_{c}(0)}\left(1-\frac{T}{T_{c}}\right)italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T ) = divide start_ARG roman_Ξ¦ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 italic_Ο€ italic_ΞΎ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T ) italic_ΞΎ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T ) end_ARG = divide start_ARG roman_Ξ¦ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 italic_Ο€ italic_ΞΎ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 0 ) italic_ΞΎ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 0 ) end_ARG ( 1 - divide start_ARG italic_T end_ARG start_ARG italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ). Thus, for the orbital depairing mechanism, the ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,c⁒(T)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2𝑐𝑇\mu_{0}H_{c2,c}(T)italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T ) and ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,a⁒b⁒(T)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2π‘Žπ‘π‘‡\mu_{0}H_{c2,ab}(T)italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T ) should exhibit a linear temperature dependence. It is clearly seen that the 3D GL equations can fit the ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,c⁒(T)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2𝑐𝑇\mu_{0}H_{c2,c}(T)italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T ) and ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,a⁒b⁒(T)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2π‘Žπ‘π‘‡\mu_{0}H_{c2,ab}(T)italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T ) curves for both crystals perfectly. The fitted zero-temperature ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,c⁒(0)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2𝑐0\mu_{0}H_{c2,c}(0)italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 0 ) and ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,a⁒b⁒(0)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2π‘Žπ‘0\mu_{0}H_{c2,ab}(0)italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 0 ) of 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT is 1.20(1) T and 22.0(3) T, respectively (Fig. 2(e)). Correspondingly, the calculated ΞΎa⁒b⁒(0)=Ξ¦02⁒π⁒μ0⁒Hc⁒2,c⁒(0)=165.4⁒(7)subscriptπœ‰π‘Žπ‘0subscriptΞ¦02πœ‹subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2𝑐0165.47\xi_{ab}(0)=\sqrt{\frac{\Phi_{0}}{2\pi\mu_{0}H_{c2,c}(0)}}=165.4(7)italic_ΞΎ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 0 ) = square-root start_ARG divide start_ARG roman_Ξ¦ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 italic_Ο€ italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 0 ) end_ARG end_ARG = 165.4 ( 7 ) Γ…Β and ΞΎa⁒b⁒(0)=9.1⁒(5)subscriptπœ‰π‘Žπ‘09.15\xi_{ab}(0)=9.1(5)italic_ΞΎ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 0 ) = 9.1 ( 5 ) Γ…. For 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS1.991.99{}_{1.99}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 1.99 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPTSe0.010.01{}_{0.01}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 0.01 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT, ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,c⁒(0)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2𝑐0\mu_{0}H_{c2,c}(0)italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 0 ) = 1.10(2) T and ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,a⁒b⁒(0)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2π‘Žπ‘0\mu_{0}H_{c2,ab}(0)italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 0 ) = 17.7(3) T (Fig. 2(f)). The calculated ΞΎa⁒b⁒(0)subscriptπœ‰π‘Žπ‘0\xi_{ab}(0)italic_ΞΎ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 0 ) is 173(2) Γ…Β when ΞΎc⁒(0)=9.1⁒(5)subscriptπœ‰π‘09.15\xi_{c}(0)=9.1(5)italic_ΞΎ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 0 ) = 9.1 ( 5 ) Γ….

For the layered materials, the ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,a⁒b⁒(T)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2π‘Žπ‘π‘‡\mu_{0}{H}_{{c2,ab}}({T})italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T ) usually has a linear behavior near TcT{{}_{c}}italic_T start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT because when the ΞΎc⁒(T)subscriptπœ‰π‘π‘‡\xi_{c}(T)italic_ΞΎ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T ) is larger than the interlayer distance s𝑠sitalic_s the system behaves like a 3D system and the ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,a⁒b⁒(T)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2π‘Žπ‘π‘‡\mu_{0}{H}_{{c2,ab}}({T})italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T ) can be described by the 3D GL equation 35 . However, according to the Lawrence-Doniach (LD) model for layered superconductors with weak interlayer Josephson coupling, the temperature dependence of ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2\mu_{0}{H}_{{c2}}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT can change to (Tcβˆ’T)1/2superscriptsubscript𝑇c𝑇12\left(T_{\mathrm{c}}-T\right)^{1/2}( italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - italic_T ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 1 / 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT when the ΞΎc⁒(T)subscriptπœ‰π‘π‘‡\xi_{c}(T)italic_ΞΎ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T ) decreases with temperature and the criterion for the crossover of ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2\mu_{0}{H}_{{c2}}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT from 3D behavior to 2D one is ΞΎc/s2<1subscriptπœ‰c𝑠21\xi_{\mathrm{c}}/\frac{s}{\sqrt{2}}<1italic_ΞΎ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / divide start_ARG italic_s end_ARG start_ARG square-root start_ARG 2 end_ARG end_ARG < 1 38 . Such crossover behavior has been observed in the artificial multilayers with increasing the thickness of nonsuperconducting layer 39 . For present two materials, the values of ΞΎc/s2subscriptπœ‰c𝑠2\xi_{\mathrm{c}}/\frac{s}{\sqrt{2}}italic_ΞΎ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / divide start_ARG italic_s end_ARG start_ARG square-root start_ARG 2 end_ARG end_ARG are about 1.09 ∼similar-to\sim∼ 1.27, which is large than 1, thus both of them should still be the 3D superconducting systems and this explains the linear behavior persists to the temperature far below TcT{{}_{c}}italic_T start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT.

The most striking feature of ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,a⁒b⁒(T)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2π‘Žπ‘π‘‡\mu_{0}{H}_{{c2,ab}}({T})italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T ) is that such a linear behavior can be extended far beyond the ΞΌ0⁒HPsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻P\mu_{0}{H}_{\rm{P}}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_P end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. For ΞΌ0⁒HPsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻P\mu_{0}{H}_{\rm{P}}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_P end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, once the magnetic energy is of the order of the superconducting condensation energy, the system gains energy entering the normal state, thus leading to the ΞΌ0⁒HP∼kB⁒Tc/Ο‡nβˆ’Ο‡sc⁒(T)similar-tosubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻Psubscriptπ‘˜Bsubscript𝑇csubscriptπœ’nsubscriptπœ’sc𝑇\mu_{0}H_{\mathrm{P}}\sim k_{\mathrm{B}}T_{\mathrm{c}}/\sqrt{\chi_{\mathrm{n}}% -\chi_{\mathrm{sc}}(T)}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_P end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∼ italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / square-root start_ARG italic_Ο‡ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - italic_Ο‡ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_sc end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T ) end_ARG, where Ο‡nsubscriptπœ’n\chi_{\mathrm{n}}italic_Ο‡ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and Ο‡scsubscriptπœ’sc{\chi_{\mathrm{sc}}}italic_Ο‡ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_sc end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is magnetic susceptibility at normal state and superconducting state, respectively 40 . For weakly coupled Bardeen-Cooper-Schrieffer (BCS) superconductors with a pure Pauli susceptibility, ΞΌ0⁒HP=Ξ”02⁒μBβ‰ˆ1.86⁒Tcsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻PsubscriptΞ”02subscriptπœ‡π΅1.86subscript𝑇c\mu_{0}H_{\mathrm{P}}=\frac{\Delta_{0}}{\sqrt{2}\mu_{B}}\approx 1.86T_{\mathrm% {c}}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_P end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = divide start_ARG roman_Ξ” start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG square-root start_ARG 2 end_ARG italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG β‰ˆ 1.86 italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, where ΞΌBsubscriptπœ‡π΅\mu_{B}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is Bohr magneton and Ξ”0subscriptΞ”0\Delta_{0}roman_Ξ” start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is the superconducting energy gap based on BCS theory for T𝑇Titalic_T = 0 K, which is known as the Clogston-Chandrasekhar limit 4 ; 5 . If the BCS Pauli paramagnetic effect is the strong depairing mechanism and the ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2\mu_{0}{H}_{{c2}}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT should be mainly limited by the ΞΌ0⁒HPsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻P\mu_{0}{H}_{\rm{P}}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_P end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. But it can be seen that both ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,a⁒b⁒(0)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2π‘Žπ‘0\mu_{0}{H}_{{c2,ab}}({0})italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 0 ) of 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT and 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS1.991.99{}_{1.99}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 1.99 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPTSe0.010.01{}_{0.01}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 0.01 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT crystals are about three times larger than their ΞΌ0⁒HPsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻P\mu_{0}{H}_{\rm{P}}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_P end_POSTSUBSCRIPT.

The strong spin-orbit scattering (SOS) could lead to the enhancement of ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2\mu_{0}{H}_{{c2}}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT because of the weakening influence of spin paramagnetism 3 ; 41 . But this theory is valid only for superconductors in the dirty-limit, i.e., l<ΞΎπ‘™πœ‰l<\xiitalic_l < italic_ΞΎ, where l𝑙litalic_l is the mean free length. Based on the transport measurements at normal state 28 , the estimated l𝑙litalic_l of electrons and holes from carrier mobilities and densities are between 941 Γ…Β βˆΌsimilar-to\sim∼ 1570 Γ…, much larger than ΞΎa⁒bsubscriptπœ‰π‘Žπ‘\xi_{ab}italic_ΞΎ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT(0) and ΞΎcsubscriptπœ‰π‘\xi_{c}italic_ΞΎ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT(0) for both crystals. Thus, the superconductivity of 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-Ta(S, Se)22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT should be in the clean-limit and the effect of SOS could not interpret their enhanced ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,a⁒bsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2π‘Žπ‘\mu_{0}{H}_{{c2,ab}}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. On the other hand, such remarkable enhancements of ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,a⁒b⁒(0)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2π‘Žπ‘0\mu_{0}{H}_{{c2,ab}}({0})italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 0 ) beyond ΞΌ0⁒HPsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻P\mu_{0}{H}_{\rm{P}}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_P end_POSTSUBSCRIPT are very similar to the phenomena observed in Ising superconductors with spin-momentum locking, such as few-layer or monolayer 2⁒H2𝐻2{H}2 italic_H-MoS22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT, 2⁒H2𝐻2{H}2 italic_H-NbSe22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT and 2⁒H2𝐻2{H}2 italic_H-TaS22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 13 ; 15 ; 42 . However, such spin-momentum locking would be destroyed in the bulk crystals where inversion symmetry and spin degeneracy are restored. For example, the ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,a⁒b⁒(0)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2π‘Žπ‘0\mu_{0}{H}_{{c2,ab}}({0})italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 0 ) of bulk 2H𝐻Hitalic_H-TaS22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT with Tcsubscript𝑇𝑐T_{c}italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1.4 K is only about 1.4 T, much smaller than ΞΌ0⁒HPsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻P\mu_{0}{H}_{\rm{P}}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_P end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∼similar-to\sim∼ 2.6 T 43 . In contrast, although the inversion symmetry of 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-Ta(S, Se)22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT crystals is maintained in the bulk material, their crystal structure comprises two sublattices (1T𝑇Titalic_T and 1H𝐻Hitalic_H layers) and the 1H𝐻Hitalic_H sublattice lacks inversion symmetry, leading to the local inversion-symmetry breaking. Because of the existence of 1T𝑇Titalic_T layers, two 1H𝐻Hitalic_H layers related by inversion symmetry are only weakly coupled and 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-Ta(S, Se)22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT can be regarded as the two copies of a noncentrosymmetric 1⁒H1𝐻1{H}1 italic_H-Ta(S, Se)22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT with weak interlayer coupling. Therefore, the spin-momentum locking will still manifest their effect in bulk 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-Ta(S, Se)22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT, resulting in the ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,a⁒b⁒(0)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2π‘Žπ‘0\mu_{0}{H}_{{c2,ab}}(0)italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( 0 ) far above the Clogston-Chandrasekhar limit ΞΌ0⁒HPsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻P\mu_{0}{H}_{\rm{P}}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_P end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. More specifically, in noncentrosymmetric materials, the SOC due to the local lack of inversion symmetry has an important effect on the ΞΌ0⁒HPsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻P\mu_{0}{H}_{{\rm{P}}}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_P end_POSTSUBSCRIPT by changing the spin susceptibility [40]. For example, if the intersublattice couplings between two 1⁒H1𝐻1{H}1 italic_H-Ta(S, Se)22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT layers are zero and the field is chosen to be perpendicular to the SOC, here Hβˆ₯a⁒bconditionalπ»π‘Žπ‘{H}\|{ab}italic_H βˆ₯ italic_a italic_b, then an external field will have no effect, i.e., the Ο‡nsubscriptπœ’n\chi_{\mathrm{n}}italic_Ο‡ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT will decrease to zero, and the ΞΌ0⁒HPsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻P\mu_{0}{H}_{\rm{P}}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_P end_POSTSUBSCRIPT will diverge, as long as the Zeeman energy is much less than any interband separation energy 40 . In this case, the ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,a⁒bsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2π‘Žπ‘\mu_{0}{H}_{{c2,ab}}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT will be determined by the orbital depairing mechanism only and the GL equation will be valid. It is noted that the above discussion on the enhancement of ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,a⁒bsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2π‘Žπ‘\mu_{0}{H}_{{c2,ab}}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT in 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-Ta(S, Se)22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT is qualitative. Further experimental and theoretical studies are needed to fully understand the effects of intersublattice couplings and spin-moment locking on ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,a⁒bsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2π‘Žπ‘\mu_{0}{H}_{{c2,ab}}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. In addition, when compared with 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS1.991.99{}_{1.99}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 1.99 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPTSe0.010.01{}_{0.01}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 0.01 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT, the slight enhancement of the ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,a⁒bsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2π‘Žπ‘\mu_{0}{H}_{{c2,ab}}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT in 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT may be due to its increased Tcsubscript𝑇𝑐T_{c}italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT as well as the appearance of CDW at 22 K that could take some effects on electronic structures and thus on ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,a⁒bsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2π‘Žπ‘\mu_{0}{H}_{{c2,ab}}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT.

Refer to caption

Figure 3: Field dependence of ρa⁒b⁒(ΞΌ0⁒H)subscriptπœŒπ‘Žπ‘subscriptπœ‡0𝐻\rho_{ab}(\mu_{0}{H})italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H ) at 2 K and various field directions for (a)4Hbsubscript𝐻𝑏H_{b}italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT and (b)4Hbsubscript𝐻𝑏H_{b}italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS1.991.99{}_{1.99}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 1.99 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPTSe0.010.01{}_{0.01}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 0.01 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT single crystals. Angular dependence of ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2⁒(ΞΈ)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2πœƒ\mu_{0}{H}_{{c2}}(\theta)italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ΞΈ ) of (c) 4Hbsubscript𝐻𝑏H_{b}italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT and (d) 4Hbsubscript𝐻𝑏H_{b}italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS1.991.99{}_{1.99}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 1.99 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPTSe0.010.01{}_{0.01}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 0.01 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT single crystals at 2.0 K. The ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2⁒(ΞΈ)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2πœƒ\mu_{0}{H}_{{c2}}(\theta)italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ΞΈ ) at each ΞΈπœƒ\thetaitalic_ΞΈ are determined using the criterion of 50 % normal-state resistivity ρn,a⁒b⁒(ΞΌ0⁒H,ΞΈ)subscriptπœŒπ‘›π‘Žπ‘subscriptπœ‡0π»πœƒ\rho_{n,ab}(\mu_{0}{H},{\theta})italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H , italic_ΞΈ ). The green and blue curves in (c) and (d) represent the fits using 3D anisotropic GL and 2D Tinkham models. Insets: enlarged views of ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2⁒(ΞΈ)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2πœƒ\mu_{0}{H}_{{c2}}(\theta)italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ΞΈ ) near ΞΈ=90βˆ˜πœƒsuperscript90\theta=90^{\circ}italic_ΞΈ = 90 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∘ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT (H||ab{H}||{ab}italic_H | | italic_a italic_b).

To further investigate the dimensionality of superconductivity in 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-Ta(S, Se)22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT, we studied the angle dependence of the ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2⁒(ΞΈ)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2πœƒ\mu_{0}{H}_{{c2}}(\theta)italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ΞΈ ) at 2 K, where ΞΈπœƒ\thetaitalic_ΞΈ is the angle between the magnetic field and the c𝑐{c}italic_c axis of the crystal. Figs. 3(a) and 3(b) show the evolution of ρa⁒b⁒(ΞΌ0⁒H)subscriptπœŒπ‘Žπ‘subscriptπœ‡0𝐻\rho_{ab}(\mu_{0}{H})italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H ) as a function of field at different ΞΈπœƒ\thetaitalic_ΞΈ for 4Hbsubscript𝐻𝑏H_{b}italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT and 4Hbsubscript𝐻𝑏H_{b}italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS1.991.99{}_{1.99}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 1.99 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPTSe0.010.01{}_{0.01}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 0.01 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT. When ΞΈ=0βˆ˜πœƒsuperscript0\theta=0^{\circ}italic_ΞΈ = 0 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∘ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, the superconductivity is suppressed at a relatively low field. With increasing ΞΈπœƒ\thetaitalic_ΞΈ, the superconducting transition shifts to higher fields gradually, but when ΞΈπœƒ\thetaitalic_ΞΈ is close to 90∘superscript9090^{\circ}90 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∘ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT this shift becomes much faster than those at low-angle region and the ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2\mu_{0}{H}_{{c2}}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT reaches the maximum value at ΞΈ=90βˆ˜πœƒsuperscript90\theta=90^{\circ}italic_ΞΈ = 90 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∘ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. These results further confirm the strong anisotropy of superconductivity in 4Hbsubscript𝐻𝑏H_{b}italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-Ta(S, Se)22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT. For 3D interlayer Josephson-coupled superconductors, the angular dependence of ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2⁒(ΞΈ)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2πœƒ\mu_{0}{H}_{{c2}}(\theta)italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ΞΈ ) can be described by the anisotropic 3D GL model 35 , (ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2⁒(ΞΈ)⁒cos⁑(ΞΈ)ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,c)2+(ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2⁒(ΞΈ)⁒sin⁑(ΞΈ)ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,a⁒b)2=1superscriptsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2πœƒπœƒsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2𝑐2superscriptsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2πœƒπœƒsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2π‘Žπ‘21\left(\frac{\mu_{0}H_{c2}(\theta)\cos(\theta)}{\mu_{0}H_{c2,c}}\right)^{2}+% \left(\frac{\mu_{0}H_{c2}(\theta)\sin(\theta)}{\mu_{0}H_{c2,ab}}\right)^{2}=1( divide start_ARG italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ΞΈ ) roman_cos ( italic_ΞΈ ) end_ARG start_ARG italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + ( divide start_ARG italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ΞΈ ) roman_sin ( italic_ΞΈ ) end_ARG start_ARG italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = 1. The general feature of this model is that the ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,a⁒b⁒(ΞΈ)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2π‘Žπ‘πœƒ\mu_{0}{H}_{{c2,ab}}(\theta)italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ΞΈ ) curve is smooth and has a bell shape near ΞΈ=90βˆ˜πœƒsuperscript90\theta=90^{\circ}italic_ΞΈ = 90 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∘ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. In contrast, the Tinkham model is used to express the ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,a⁒b⁒(ΞΈ)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2π‘Žπ‘πœƒ\mu_{0}{H}_{{c2,ab}}(\theta)italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ΞΈ ) of 2D superconductors with decoupled interlayer interactions 44 , |ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2⁒(ΞΈ)⁒cos⁑(ΞΈ)ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,c|+(ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2⁒(ΞΈ)⁒sin⁑(ΞΈ)ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,a⁒b)2=1subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2πœƒπœƒsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2𝑐superscriptsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2πœƒπœƒsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2π‘Žπ‘21\left|\frac{\mu_{0}H_{c2}(\theta)\cos(\theta)}{\mu_{0}H_{c2,c}}\right|+\left(% \frac{\mu_{0}H_{c2}(\theta)\sin(\theta)}{\mu_{0}H_{c2,ab}}\right)^{2}=1| divide start_ARG italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ΞΈ ) roman_cos ( italic_ΞΈ ) end_ARG start_ARG italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG | + ( divide start_ARG italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ΞΈ ) roman_sin ( italic_ΞΈ ) end_ARG start_ARG italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = 1. This equation exhibits a finite slope at ΞΈ=90βˆ˜πœƒsuperscript90\theta=90^{\circ}italic_ΞΈ = 90 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∘ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, making a cusp. Figs. 3(c) and 3(d) show the angular dependence of ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2⁒(ΞΈ)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2πœƒ\mu_{0}{H}_{{c2}}(\theta)italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ΞΈ ) at 2 K for 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT and 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS1.991.99{}_{1.99}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 1.99 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPTSe0.010.01{}_{0.01}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 0.01 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT single crystals extracted from Fig. 3(a) and 3(b) using the criterion of 50 % normal-state resistivity ρa⁒b⁒(ΞΌ0⁒H,ΞΈ)subscriptπœŒπ‘Žπ‘subscriptπœ‡0π»πœƒ\rho_{ab}(\mu_{0}{H},{\theta})italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H , italic_ΞΈ ). For 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT, it can be seen that both 3D anisotropic GL model (green) and 2D Tinkham model (blue) can fit the data at low-angle region (θ≀80∘)πœƒsuperscript80\left(\theta\leq 80^{\circ}\right)( italic_ΞΈ ≀ 80 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∘ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) well, whereas for ΞΈ>80βˆ˜πœƒsuperscript80\theta>80^{\circ}italic_ΞΈ > 80 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∘ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT(inset of Fig. 3(c)), the ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2⁒(ΞΈ)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2πœƒ\mu_{0}{H}_{{c2}}(\theta)italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ΞΈ ) curve with rounded bell shape suggests that the 3D GL model can described the behavior of ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2⁒(ΞΈ)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2πœƒ\mu_{0}{H}_{{c2}}(\theta)italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ΞΈ ) better and thus 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT should be a 3D superconducting system, which is consistent with above analysis of temperature dependence of ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,a⁒b⁒(T)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2π‘Žπ‘π‘‡\mu_{0}{H}_{{c2,ab}}({T})italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T ). On the other hand, for 4Hbsubscript𝐻𝑏H_{b}italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS1.991.99{}_{1.99}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 1.99 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPTSe0.010.01{}_{0.01}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 0.01 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT, the 3D GL model can fit the ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2⁒(ΞΈ)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2πœƒ\mu_{0}{H}_{{c2}}(\theta)italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ΞΈ ) curve better until ΞΈπœƒ\thetaitalic_ΞΈ is very close to 90∘superscript9090^{\circ}90 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∘ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT(|90βˆ˜βˆ’ΞΈ|<Β±0.5∘)superscript90πœƒplus-or-minussuperscript0.5\left(\left|90^{\circ}-\theta\right|<\pm 0.5^{\circ}\right)( | 90 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∘ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_ΞΈ | < Β± 0.5 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∘ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ), where the curve rises sharply and results in a cusp (inset of Fig. 3(d)). Similar behavior has been observed in Bi22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPTSr22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPTCaCu22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPTO88{}_{8}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 8 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT thin films 45 and Nb/CuMn multilayer system 39 . Especially, for Nb/CuMn multilayer, when the cusp-like behavior at ΞΈ=0βˆ˜πœƒsuperscript0\theta=0^{\circ}italic_ΞΈ = 0 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∘ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT appears on the top of a bell-shaped curve at 4.2 K, the ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,a⁒b⁒(T)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2π‘Žπ‘π‘‡\mu_{0}{H}_{{c2,ab}}({T})italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T ) still shows a linear behavior at this temperature region 39 . Such behaviors may be explained by the system near the point of 2D - 3D crossover of superconductivity 46 because 4⁒Hb4subscript𝐻𝑏4{H}_{{b}}4 italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-Ta(S, Se)22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT have the values of ΞΎc/s2subscriptπœ‰c𝑠2\xi_{\mathrm{c}}/\frac{s}{\sqrt{2}}italic_ΞΎ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / divide start_ARG italic_s end_ARG start_ARG square-root start_ARG 2 end_ARG end_ARG just slightly larger than 1.

In summary, we investigated the superconducting properties of 4Hbsubscript𝐻𝑏H_{b}italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT and 4Hbsubscript𝐻𝑏H_{b}italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS1.991.99{}_{1.99}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 1.99 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPTSe0.010.01{}_{0.01}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 0.01 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT single crystals. Both of them show the linear temperature dependence of ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,a⁒b⁒(T)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2π‘Žπ‘π‘‡\mu_{0}H_{c2,ab}(T)italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T ) for Hβˆ₯a⁒bconditionalπ»π‘Žπ‘{H}\|{ab}italic_H βˆ₯ italic_a italic_b and Hβˆ₯cconditional𝐻𝑐{H}\|{c}italic_H βˆ₯ italic_c, suggesting the 3D superconductivity of 4Hbsubscript𝐻𝑏H_{b}italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-Ta(S, Se)22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT. It is confirmed further by the measurements of angle dependence of ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2⁒(ΞΈ)subscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2πœƒ\mu_{0}H_{c2}(\theta)italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_ΞΈ ). Peculiarly, even the 3D orbital depairing mechanism effect is dominant in centrosymmetric 4Hbsubscript𝐻𝑏H_{b}italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-Ta(S, Se)22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT bulk crystals, they still exhibit rather high ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,a⁒bsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2π‘Žπ‘\mu_{0}H_{c2,ab}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT(0) (∼similar-to\sim∼ 22 T for 4Hbsubscript𝐻𝑏H_{b}italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT and ∼similar-to\sim∼ 18 T for 4Hbsubscript𝐻𝑏H_{b}italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-TaS1.991.99{}_{1.99}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 1.99 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPTSe0.010.01{}_{0.01}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 0.01 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT), which are about 4 times as large as the ΞΌ0⁒HPsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻P\mu_{0}H_{\rm{P}}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_P end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. Such phenomena can be explained by the Ising-pairing enhanced ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,a⁒bsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2π‘Žπ‘\mu_{0}H_{c2,ab}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, which is closely related to the heterostructure of bulk 4Hbsubscript𝐻𝑏H_{b}italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-Ta(S, Se)22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT with local inversion-symmetry breaking of 1H𝐻Hitalic_H layers and the weak intersublattice interaction of 1H𝐻Hitalic_H layers because of the existence of 1T𝑇Titalic_T layers. Therefore, 4Hbsubscript𝐻𝑏H_{b}italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT-Ta(S,Se)22{}_{2}start_FLOATSUBSCRIPT 2 end_FLOATSUBSCRIPT system provides a paradigm that an extreme large ΞΌ0⁒Hc⁒2,a⁒bsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻𝑐2π‘Žπ‘\mu_{0}H_{c2,ab}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c 2 , italic_a italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT far beyond ΞΌ0⁒HPsubscriptπœ‡0subscript𝐻P\mu_{0}H_{\rm{P}}italic_ΞΌ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_P end_POSTSUBSCRIPT can still be realized in the 3D bulk superconductors with unique local structural symmetry.

This work was supported by Beijing Natural Science Foundation (Grant No. Z200005), National Key R&D Program of China (Grants Nos. 2018YFE0202600 and 2022YFA1403800), National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grants No. 12174443), the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities and Research Funds of Renmin University of China (RUC) (Grants Nos. 18XNLG14, 19XNLG17 and 21XNLG26), the Outstanding Innovative Talents Cultivation Funded Programs 2022 of Renmin University of China, Beijing National Laboratory for Condensed Matter Physics, and Collaborative Research Project of Laboratory for Materials and Structures, Institute of Innovative Research, Tokyo Institute of Technology.

††{}^{{\dagger}}start_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT † end_FLOATSUPERSCRIPT F.Y.M and Y.F. contributed equally to this work.

βˆ—βˆ—\astβˆ— Corresponding authors: zhangjinglei@hmfl.ac.cn (J. L. Z.), hlei@ruc.edu.cn (H. C. L.).

References

  • (1) A. M. Clogston, Phys. Rev. Lett. 9, 266 (1962).
  • (2) B. S. Chandrasekhar, Appl. Phys. Lett. 1, 7 (1962).
  • (3) K. Maki, Phys. Rev. 148, 362 (1966).
  • (4) N. R. Werthamer, E. Helfand, and P. C. Hohenberg, Phys. Rev. 147, 295 (1966).
  • (5) R. A. Klemm, A. Luther, and M. R. Beasley, Phys. Rev. B 12, 877 (1975).
  • (6) X. Xu, W. Yao, D. Xiao, and T. F. Heinz, Nat. Phys. 10, 343 (2014).
  • (7) D. Xiao, G.-B. Liu, W. Feng, X. Xu, and W. Yao, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 196802 (2012).
  • (8) K. F. Mak, K. He, J. Shan, and T. F. Heinz, Nat. Nanotech. 7, 494 (2012).
  • (9) L. P. Gor’kov and E. I. Rashba, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 037004 (2001).
  • (10) S. Yoshizawa, T. Kobayashi, Y. Nakata, K. Yaji, K. Yokota, F. Komori, S. Shin, K. Sakamoto, and T. Uchihashi, Nat. Commun. 12, 1462 (2021).
  • (11) J. M. Lu, O. Zheliuk, I. Leermakers, N. F. Q. Yuan, U. Zeitler, K. T. Law, and J. T. Ye, Science 350, 1353 (2015).
  • (12) Y. Saito, Y. Nakamura, M. S. Bahramy, Y. Kohama, J. Ye, Y. Kasahara, Y. Nakagawa, M. Onga, M. Tokunaga, T. Nojima, Y. Yanase, and Y. Iwasa, Nat. Phys. 12, 144 (2016).
  • (13) Y. Xing, K. Zhao, P. Shan, F. Zheng, Y. Zhang, H. Fu, Y. Liu, M. Tian, C. Xi, H. Liu, J. Feng, X. Liu, S. Ji, X. Chen, Q. K. Xue, and J. Wang, Nano. Lett. 17, 6802 (2017).
  • (14) X. Xi, Z. Wang, W. Zhao, J.-H. Park, K. T. Law, H. Berger, L. ForrΓ³, J. Shan, and K. F. Mak, Nat. Phys. 12, 139 (2016).
  • (15) J. Falson, Y. Xu, M. H. Liao, Y. Y. Zang, K. J. Zhu, C. Wang, Z. T. Zhang, H. C. Liu, W. H. Duan, K. He, H. W. Liu, J. H. Smet, D. Zhang, and Q. K. Xue, Science 367, 1454 (2020).
  • (16) Y. Liu, Y. Xu, J. Sun, C. Liu, Y. Z. Liu, C. Wang, Z. T. Zhang, K. Y. Gu, Y. Tang, C. Ding, H. W. Liu, H. Yao, X. Lin, L. L. Wang, Q. K. Xue, and J. Wang, Nano Lett. 20, 5728 (2020).
  • (17) C. Wang, B. Lian, X. Guo, J. Mao, Z. Zhang, D. Zhang, B.-L. Gu, Y. Xu, and W. Duan, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 126402 (2019).
  • (18) Y.-M. Xie, B. T. Zhou, and K. T. Law, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 107001 (2020).
  • (19) E. Zhang, Y. M. Xie, Y. Fang, J. Zhang, X. Xu, Y. C. Zou, P. Leng, X. J. Gao, Y. Zhang, L. Ai, Y. Zhang, Z. Jia, S. Liu, J. Yan, W. Zhang, S. J. Haigh, X. Kou, J. Yang, F. Huang, K. T. Law, F. Xiu, and S. Dong, Nat. Phys. 19, 106 (2022).
  • (20) D. A. Rhodes, A. Jindal, N. Q. Yuan, Y. Jung, A. Antony, H. Wang, B. Kim, Y.-c. Chiu, T. Taniguchi, K. Watanabe, K. Barmak, L. Balicas, C. R. Dean, X. F. Qian, L. Fu, A. N. Pasupathy, and J. Hone, Nano Lett. 21, 2505 (2021).
  • (21) M. Trahms, C. Grosse, M. B. Alemayehu, O. K. Hite, O. Chiatti, A. Mogilatenko, D. C. Johnson, and S. F. Fischer, Super. Sci. Technol. 31, 065006 (2018).
  • (22) P. Samuely, P. SzabΓ³, J. Kačmarčík, A. Meerschaut, L. Cario, A. G. M. Jansen, T. Cren, M. Kuzmiak, O. Ε ofranko, and T. Samuely, Phys. Rev. B 104, 224507 (2021).
  • (23) O. Chiatti, K. Mihov, T. U. Griffin, C. Grosse, M. B. Alemayehu, K. Hite, D. Hamann, A. Mogilatenko, D. C. Johnson, and S. F. Fischer, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 35 215701 (2023).
  • (24) H. X. Zhang, A. Rousuli, K.N. Zhang, L. P. Luo, C. G. Guo, X. Cong, Z. Z. Lin, C. H. Bao, H. Y. Zhang, S. N. Xu, R. F. Feng, S. C. Shen, K. Zhao, W. Yao, Y. Wu, S. H. Ji, X. Chen, P. H. Tan, Q. K. Xue, Y. Xu, W. H. Duan, P. Yu, and S. Y. Zhou, Nat. Phys. 18, 1425 (2022).
  • (25) J. J. Gao, J. G. Si, X. Luo, J. Yan, Z. Z. Jiang, W. Wang, Y. Y. Han, P. Tong, W. H. Song, X. B. Zhu, Q. J. Li, W. J. Lu, and Y. P. Sun, Phys. Rev. B 102, 075138 (2020).
  • (26) M. H. Fischer, F. Loder, and M. Sigrist, Phys. Rev. B 84, 184533 (2011).
  • (27) M. Tanaka, H. Tokumoto, T. Nakashizu, W. Mizutani, K. Kajimura, S. Yamazaki, M. Ono, and H. Bando, Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 28, 473 (1989).
  • (28) R. M. Fleming and R. V. Coleman, Phys. Rev. B 16, 302 (1977).
  • (29) R. M. Fleming and R. V. Coleman, Phys. Rev. Lett. 36, 1555 (1976).
  • (30) I. Ekvall, J.-J. Kim, and H. Olin, Phys. Rev. B 55, 6758 (1997).
  • (31) J. A. Wilson, F. J. Di Salov, and S. Mahajan, Adv. Phys. 24, 117 (1975).
  • (32) A. Ribak, R. M. Skiff, M. Mograbi, P. Rout, M. Fischer, J. Ruhman, K. Chashka, Y. Dagan, and A. Kanigel, Sci. Adv. 6, eaax9480 (2020).
  • (33) M. Tinkham, Introduction to Superconductivity (New York: Dover) (2004).
  • (34) F. E. Harper and M. Tinkham, Phys. Rev. 172, 441 (1968).
  • (35) H. Inoue, M. Kim, C. Bell, Y. Hikita, S. Raghu, and H. Y. Hwang, Phys. Rev. B 88, 241104 (2013).
  • (36) R. A. Klemm, Layered Superconductors (Oxford: Oxford University Press) (2012).
  • (37) C. Attanasio, C. Coccorese, L. V. Mercaldo, M. Salvato, L. Maritato, A. N. Lykov, S. L. Prischepa, and C. M. Falco, Phys. Rev. B 57, 6056 (1998).
  • (38) M. H. Fischer, M. Sigrist, D. F. Agterberg, and Y. Yanase, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 14, 153 (2023).
  • (39) A. A. Abrikosov and L. P. Gorkov, Sov. Phys. JETP 15, 752 (1962).
  • (40) Y. F. Yang, S. A. Fang, V. Fatemi, J. Ruhman, E. Navarro-Moratalla, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, E. Kaxiras, and P. Jarillo-Herrero, Phys. Rev. B 98, 035203 (2018).
  • (41) M. Abdel-Hafiez, X. M. Zhao, A. A. Kordyuk, Y. W. Fang, B. Pan, Z. He, C. G. Duan, J. Zhao, and X. J. Chen, Sci. Rep. 6, 31824 (2016).
  • (42) M. Tinkham, Phys. Rev. 129, 2413 (1963).
  • (43) E. Silva, R. Marcon, R. Fastampa, M. Giura, and S. Sarti, Physica C 214, 175 (1993).
  • (44) T. Schneider and A. Schmidt, Phys. Rev. B 47, 5915 (1993).