Spin Susceptibility of a Superconductor
Abstract
We discuss the spin susceptibility of superconductors in which a Cooper pair consists of two electrons having the angular momentum due to strong spin-orbit interactions. The susceptibility is calculated analytically for several pseudospin quintet states in a cubic superconductor within the linear response to a Zeeman field. The susceptibility for symmetry states is isotropic in real space. For and symmetry cases, the results depend sensitively on choices of order parameter. The susceptibility is isotropic for a symmetry state, whereas it becomes anisotropic for an symmetry state. We also find in a state that the susceptibility tensor has off-diagonal elements.
I Introduction
Spin-orbit interaction is a source of exotic electronic states realized in topological semimetals [1, 2], topological insulators [3, 4], and topological superconductors [5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 9]. In the presence of strong spin-orbit interactions, spin and orbital angular momentum of an electron are inseparable degrees of freedom. Electronic properties of such materials are characterized by an electron with pseudospin . Recent studies have suggested a possibility of superconductivity due to Cooper pairing between two electrons with [10, 11]. The large angular momentum of an electron enriches the symmetry of the order parameter such as pseudospin-quintet even-parity and pseudospin-septet odd-parity [12, 13] in addition to conventional spin-singlet even-parity and spin-triplet odd-parity. Such high angular-momentum pairing states would feature superconducting phenomena of superconductors [14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19]. In particular, a large angular momentum of a Cooper pair would qualitatively change the magnetic response of a superconductor to an external magnetic field.
The spin susceptibility reflects well the internal spin structures of a Cooper pair. It is well known in spin-singlet superconductors that the spin susceptibility decreases monotonically with the decrease of temperature below and vanishes at zero temperature [20]. This phenomenon occurs independently of the direction of a Zeeman field because a Cooper pair has no spin. In spin-triplet superconductors, on the other hand, the susceptibility can be anisotropic depending on the relative alignment between a Zeeman field and a vector in the order parameter. For , the spin susceptibility is constant independent of temperature. Thus, the unchanged Knight shift across in experiments could be a strong evidence of spin-triplet superconductivity. For , the susceptibility decreases with decreasing temperature below . Such anisotropy is more remarkable when the number of components in a vector is smaller. For superconductors, however, our knowledge of the spin susceptibility is very limited to a theoretical paper that reported vanishing the spin susceptibility at zero temperature for a singlet-quintet mixed state in a centrosymmetric superconductor [21].
In this paper, we study theoretically the response of pseudospin-quintet even-parity superconductors to an external Zeeman field. The angular momentum of a Cooper pair in such superconductors is . Since the pairing symmetries of the pseudospin-quintet states are not well understood, we decided to calculate the spin susceptibility for the plausible pair potentials at a cubic superconductor preserving time-reversal symmetry. The spin susceptibility is analytically calculated based on the linear response formula [22]. The pair potential of pseudospin-quintet states is described by a five-component vector that couples to five matrices in pseudospin space. Such complicated internal structures of the pair potential enrich the magnetic response of superconductors. When the symmetry of the pair potential is high in pseudospin space ( state), the magnetic response is isotropic in real space and the spin susceptibility decreases monotonically with the decrease of temperature. The results are similar to those of 3He B-phase. When the pair potential is independent of wavenumber ( and states), the spin susceptibility shows unique features to pseudospin-quintet states. The magnetic response becomes anisotropic in real space in an state and the susceptibility tensor has finite off-diagonal elements in a state.
This paper is organized as follows. In Sec. II, we described the electronic structure and the pair potential of a superconductor in terms of five matrices. The characteristic behaviors of the spin-susceptibility are discussed in Sec. III. The conclusion is given in Sec.IV. Algebras of matrices and a number of mathematical relationships used in the paper are summarized in Appendices. Throughout this paper, we use the system of units , where is the Boltzmann constant and is the speed of light.
II J=3/2 Superconductor
We begin our analysis with the normal state Hamiltonian adopted in Ref. 13. The electronic states have four degrees of freedom consisting of two orbitals of equal parity and spin 1/2. In the presence of strong spin-orbit interactions, the effective Hamiltonian for a electron is given by [23]
(1) | ||||
(2) |
where means the transpose of a matrix and is the annihilation operator of an electron at with the -component of angular momentum being . The normal state Hamiltonian is represented by
(3) |
with and
(4) | ||||
(5) | ||||
(6) | ||||
(7) |
where for and represents the direction of wavenumber on the Fermi surface. The constants and determine the normal state property. The spin-orbit interactions increase with the increase of . The coefficients are normalized as
(8) |
where means the integral over the solid angle on the Fermi surface. The normalized five-component vector determines the dependence of the normal state dispersions on pseudospins. The spinors for the angular momenum of are described by,
(13) | ||||
(18) | ||||
(23) |
The matrices in pseudospin space are defined as
(24) | ||||
(25) | ||||
(26) |
and is the identity matrix. They satisfy the following relations
(27) | |||
(28) | |||
(29) |
where is the unitary part of the time-reversal operation with meaning complex conjugation. The superconducting pair potential is represented as
(30) |
where a five-component vector represents an even-parity pseudospin-quintet state. Throughout this paper, we assume that all components of are real values. As a result of the Fermi-Dirac statistics of electrons, the pair potential is antisymmetric under the permutation of two pseudospins, (i.e., ). The Bogoliubov-de Gennes Hamiltonian reads,
(33) |
where represents the particle-hole conjugation of .
The interaction with a uniform Zeeman field is described by [23]
(34) | ||||
(35) |
for and , where is the Bohr’s magneton, and and are the coupling constants. The matrix structures of and are displayed in Appendix A. The angular momenta in the Zeeman Hamiltonian are then given by
(36) | ||||
(37) | ||||
(38) | ||||
(39) |
In the linear response theory, the spin susceptibility is calculated by using the formula [22]
(40) |
The summation over the Matsubara frequency and that over the wavenumber are regularized by introducing the Green’s functions in the normal state and the spin susceptibility in the normal state [24].
The Green’s function for a superconducting state can be obtained by solving the Gor’kov equation
(44) | |||
(45) |
The anomalous Green’s function results in
(46) |
Generally speaking, it is not easy to calculate analytically the inversion of matrices.
To proceed analytic calculation, we consider a cubic symmetric superconductor [14], in which even-parity pair potentials are classified into , , and states according to irreducible representations (irreps) of cubic symmetry. With focusing on pseudospin-quintet Cooper pairs, their pairing states are explicitly represented as
(47) | ||||
(48) | ||||
(49) |
where the unit vector determines the pseudospin structure of state and (). states involve momentum-dependent coefficients, which comes from the fact that and , and themselves belong to () irreps of cubic symmetry.
Generally speaking, the coefficients for are determined from the steady states of the free energy [25]. For state, three distinct steady states exist: , , and . The first two states preserve time-reversal symmetry, while the last state breaks time-reversal symmetry. For state, there are four distinct steady states: , , , . The last two states break time-reversal symmetry. Time-reversal symmetry-breaking superconducting states have a problem specific to them: the formation of Bogoliubov-Fermi surfaces [13, 14, 19]. Since the relations between the pseudospin structures of a Cooper pair and the magnetic response of a superconductor is the main issue in this paper, we focus on time-reversal symmetry respecting superconducting states. In addition to the steady states, we also consider another pseudospin states described by , , and . The last one is the admixture of and states. These states complement possible combinations of (). The comparison between the calculated results for such states and those for the steady states helps us to understand the relations between the pseudospin structures of a Cooper pair and the spin susceptibility. Note that represents a possible order parameter in tetragonal symmetric superconductors with the high symmetry axis being the direction [25].
III Spin susceptibility

As shown in the second term in Eq. (46), the anomalous Green’s function contains the pairing correlation belonging to odd-frequency symmetry class. The stable superconducting states can be described by
(50) |
which means the absence of odd-frequency pairs. Odd-frequency pairs increase the free-energy of a uniform superconducting state [26] because they indicate the paramagnetic response to a magnetic field [27, 28, 29]. A phenomenological argument on the paramagnetic response of odd-frequency Cooper pairs is given in Appendix A of Ref. [30]. Eq. (50) gives a guide that relates the stable pair potential to the electronic structures . To understand this situation, we briefly summarize the case of spin-triplet superconductors in the presence of a strong Rashba spin-orbit interaction with
(51) |
where represents the amplitude of spin-orbit interaction, and for and are the Pauli matrix and the unit vector in spin space, respectively. The stable order parameter is determined as
(52) |
so that odd-frequency pairs are absent and the transition temperature is optimal [26, 31]. Namely, the order parameter of a spin helical state is stable in this case. The pair potentials other than the helical state would be realized when the Rashba spin-orbit interaction is sufficiently weak. The choice in Eq. (52) and that in Eq. (50) are equivalent to each other. We choose the normal state dispersion so that Eq. (50) is satisfied for the pair potentials in Eqs. (47)-(49). The Green’s function in the superconducting state can be expressed simply and analytically under Eq. (50). The results of the Green’s function in such a case are shown in Appedix B.
The spin susceptibility results in
(53) |
with . The tensor is defined by
(54) |
and its elements are calculated to be
(55) | ||||
(56) | ||||
(57) | ||||
(58) | ||||
(59) | ||||
(60) | ||||
(61) |
The results in Eq. (55)-(60) describe the characteristic features of the susceptibility of superconductors.
III.1 state
In the presence of attractive interactions in an channel, the pair potential is represented by Eqs. (30) and47). We always set so that Eq. (50) is satisfied. Different from the -wave spin-singlet pairing that also belongs to the irrep, an state in the pseudo-spin quintet pairing has the pseudospin degrees of freedom, which allows us to choose a variety of pseudospin structures. We first choose a pseudospin structure of a irrep characterized by . The spin susceptibility is calculated as
(62) | ||||
(63) |
In BCS theory, represents the fraction of Cooper pairs to quasiparticles on the Fermi surface. Indeed is zero at , increases monotonically with the decrease of , and becomes unity at . The susceptibility tensor is diagonal and isotropic in real space. The susceptibility for a pseudospin structure of an irrep characterized by results in,
(64) |
The susceptibility for an admixture of and irreps ( ) is also calculated as
(65) |
The off-diagonal elements in the susceptibility tensor are always zero in these cases, ( for ).

In Fig. 1(a), we plot the susceptibility at as a function of temperature. The dependence of the pair potential on temperature is calculated by solving the gap equation in the weak coupling limit. As shown in Appedix C, the gap equation is common for all the superconducting states considered in the present paper and is identical to that in BCS theory. The results show that the susceptibility decreases with the decrease of temperature below . The results are independent of such choices of the pseudospin structures as , , and at . Although a Cooper pair has the angular momentum of in the quintet states, the susceptibility is isotropic for all the pseudospin structures. The characteristic behaviors are independent of the strength of spin-orbit interaction . The isotropic feature of the spin susceptibility is considered as a result of high symmetry of the pair potential. The pseudospin structures in the pair potential are characterized by which can be described by the linear combination of as shown in Eqs. (24)-(26). For a irrep, for characterize both the normal state dispersion and the pair potential. The pair potential with is symmetric under the cyclic permutation among and . For an irrep, the pair potential is symmetric under interchanging . The structure of results in the isotropic susceptibility including the direction. Thus, the direction of a Zeeman field in real space does not point a specific direction in pseudospin space. For comparison, we briefly mention the spin susceptibility in superfluid 3He B-phase described by
(66) |
The pair potential is symmetric under the cyclic permutation among and . As a result, the susceptibility plotted with a broken line in Fig. 1(b) is isotropic in real space.
At the end of the subsection, we briefly discuss the effects of term on the spin susceptibility by choosing . The results are shown in Fig. 1(c). The isotropic nature of the susceptibility remains unchanged even for . The amplitude of the susceptibility depends on the pseudospin structure of the pair potential; the amplitude for a irrep becomes slightly larger than that for an irrep.
III.2 state
When attractive interactions between two electrons work in a or an channel, the order parameters in Eqs. (48) and (49) are isotropic in momentum space. To satisfy Eq. (50), we switch off and consider a simple pseudospin quintet superconductor in the following subsections. In other words, the pair potentials independent of momenta are stable when is sufficiently smaller than the Fermi energy . Even if we choose , superconductors show the rich magnetic response depending on the pseudospin structures of the pair potential. The effects of the pseudospin-dependent dispersions on the magnetic response will be discussed later.
We first discuss a state with . In addition to the diagonal element given by Eq.(62), the susceptibility has the off-diagonal elements as
(67) |
The results for are displayed in Fig. 2(a). The pair potential includes off-diagonal terms with through for as shown in Eqs. (24)-(26). The first term of in Eqs. (58)-(60) is the direct results of such pseudospin structure. Since the pair potential is independent of wavenumber, these off-diagonal terms remain nonzero values even after averaging over directions in momentum space on the Fermi surface. Thus, the appearance of the off-diagonal elements in the susceptibility tensor is a characteristic feature of a state.
Secondly, we display the susceptibility for a state with in Fig. 2(b), where we delete component from Eq. (49). As a result, is no longer equivalent to and , which explains the anisotropy of the diagonal elements in Fig. 2(b). As shown in Eqs. (58)-(60), the off-diagonal elements are finite only for the multi-component pair potentials. At the present case, only the element remains finite because of .
Finally, we display the susceptibility for a state with in Fig. 2(c), which has only component. The diagonal elements are anisotropic as they are in Fig. 2(b). All the off-diagonal elements vanish because the pair potential has only one pseudospin component. Thus, the off-diagonal elements emerge if and () coexist in the pair potential. In particular, the nonzero off-diagonal elements are determined from the direction of high symmetry axis in tetragonal symmetric superconductors, e.g., and for the pair potential with since the high symmetry axis is the direction.
III.3 state
The susceptibility for an state with is calculated as
(68) | ||||
(69) | ||||
(70) | ||||
(71) |
The results are shown in Fig. 3(a). All the off-diagonal elements vanish as shown in Eqs. (58)-(60). The product of does not include such off-diagonal terms as with , which explains the absence of the off-diagonal elements in the susceptibility tensor. The diagonal elements of the susceptibility becomes anisotropic due to the last term in Eqs. (55) and (56). The product of includes , which breaks symmetry between and . As a result, the last term in Eq. (55) and that in Eq. (56) have the opposite signs to each other. Thus the anisotropy in the susceptibility is a characteristic feature of an state. The degree of the anisotropy in an state is rather weaker than that in a spin-triplet superconductor. For comparison, in Fig. 1(b), we plot the susceptibility of a spin-triplet helical state characterized by in Eq. (51) with two solid lines. When a Zeeman field is perpendicular to , the susceptibility is a constant across . The results for , on the other hand, the susceptibility decreases down to . These behaviors are independent of the amplitudes of . In spin-triplet superconductors, both the dimension in spin space and that in real space are three. Therefore, it is possible to define two different directions relatively to the direction of a Zeeman field: ( and ). The clear anisotropy of the susceptibility in Fig. 1(b) is a result of the dimensional consistency between in spin space and in real space.
In Fig. 3(b) and (c), we display the results for the single component states with and , respectively. They are possible order parameters of states in the presence of time-reversal symmetry [25]. We find the relation
(72) |
because the last term in Eqs. (55) and (56) is absent. Including the results in Fig. 2(c), Eqs. (55)-(60) suggest that the anisotropic response like Eq. (72) and the absense of off-diagonal elements are the common feature of the single component order parameter.

III.4 Admixture of and states
The results for a the admixture of and states, (i. e., ), are calculated as
(73) | ||||
(74) | ||||
(75) |
The off-diagonal elements are calculated in the similar way,
(76) | ||||
(77) | ||||
(78) |
The calculated results for are plotted in Fig. 3(d). Not only the diagonal elements but also the off-diagonal elements are anisotropic. All the elements in Eqs. (55)-(60) are finite and different from one another. The degree of the anisotropy in the diagonal elements are weaker than that in state and stronger than that in state. The characteristic features of the susceptibility displayed in Figs. 2 and 3 retain even if we consider term in the Zeeman Hamiltonian.
Finally, we briefly discuss the effects of the pseudospin-dependent dispersion on the characteristic behaviors of the susceptibility. When we switch on in and states, Eq. (50) is no longer holds. As a result, the additional terms such as
(79) |
appear at the numerator of the anomalous Green’s function in Eq. (108), where is a constant. Such components represent the admixture of pseudospin-triplet and the pseudospin-septet pairing correlations [19]. Their contribution to the susceptibility tensor is proportional to
(80) |
which modify the susceptibility tensor, However, they do not always cancel the off-diagonal elements in Fig. 2(a) in a state. They do not wash out the anisotropy of the diagonal elements in Fig. 3 in states.
IV Conclusion
We have studied theoretically the spin susceptibility of pseudospin-quintet pairing states in a superconductor that preserves cubic lattice symmetry and time-reversal symmetry. Within the linear response to a Zeeman field, we calculate the spin susceptibility by using the Green’s function that is obtained by solving the Gor’kov equation analytically. The pair potentials are chosen so that a superconducting state is stable under the pseudospin structures in the normal state. The calculated results indicat that the magnetic response of pseudospin-quintet states depends sensitively on the pseudospin structures of the pair potential. The susceptibility tensor in states is isotropic in real space as that in the B-phase of superfluid 3He. For states, the susceptibility tensor becomes anisotropic in real space. We found in a state that the susceptibility tensor has the off-diagonal elements.
Acknowledgements.
The authors are grateful to R. Nomura for useful discussion. This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI (Nos. JP19K14612, JP20H01857, JP22K03478) and JSPS Core-to-Core Program (No. JPJSCCA20170002). T. S. is supported in part by the establishment of university fellowships towards the creation of science technology innovation from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology (MEXT) of Japan. S.K. was supported by the CREST project (Grants No. JPMJCR19T2) from Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST).Appendix A Normal state
The spin susceptibility in the normal state is give by
(81) | ||||
(82) | ||||
(83) |
The the Green’s function is the solution of
(84) |
The trace of the Green’s function is calculated as
(85) |
where we use and define the tensor
(86) |
The angular momenta are expressed in terms of
(87) |
They obey the relation , which simply means that the angular momenta are antisymmetric under the time-reversal operation. The expression of
(88) | ||||
(89) |
suggests that and share the common matrix structures. The elements of the tensor are calculated as
(90) | ||||
(91) |
where as defined in Eq. (4) and we have used the relations
(92) |
The another tensor is defined by Eq. (54).
The summation over the wavenumber is replaced by the integration as
(93) |
where is the unit vector on the Fermi surface. By using the relations
(94) |
the susceptibility in the normal state becomes
(95) |
The summation over the Matsubara frequency is carried out as
(96) | ||||
(97) |
The integration over after the summation over the frequency can be calculated exactly as
(98) |
The resulting spin susceptibility
(99) |
is diagonal and isotropic independent of the direction of a Zeeman field.
The normal Green’s function can be described alternatively as
(100) | ||||
(101) |
When we carry out the summation over the wavenumber first as
(102) |
we find because of
(103) |
The discrepancy is derived from the fact that the integration over the wavenumber and the summation over the frequency do not converge.[24] On the way to Eq. (103), we have used the following relations
(104) | ||||
(105) |
We approximately replace by .
Appendix B Superconducting state
The Green’s function under Eq. (50) is calculated to be
(106) | ||||
(107) | ||||
(108) | ||||
(109) |
with . When we carry out the summation over the wavenumber, we find
(110) | ||||
(111) |
The average describes the anisotropy and the off-diagonal response of the spin susceptibility.
Appendix C Gap equation
The attractive interactions between two electrons are necessary for Cooper pairing. Some bosonic excitation usually mediates the attractive interactions. In this Appendix, we assume the attractive interaction phenomenologically and derive the gap equation for superconducting states discussed in this paper. The pair potential of the superconducting states is defined by
(112) |
where , , , and are the indices of pseudospin of an electron. The attractive interaction works on two electrons with and and generats the pair potential between two electrons with and . The attractive interaction can be decomposed as
(113) |
For states in Sec. III A, we choose
(116) | ||||
(119) | ||||
(120) |
By substituting the anomalous Green’s function in Eq. (108) into Eq. (112), we obtain the gap equation
(121) |
where we have used Eq. (8). After integrating over , we obtain
(122) |
The results coinsides with the gap equation in BCS theory. For , , and an admixture state of them in Sec. III B and C, we replace by 1 for all in Eqs. (116)-(120). The gap equation for such states is identical to Eq. (122).
References
- Fang et al. [2016] C. Fang, H. Weng, X. Dai, and Z. Fang, Topological nodal line semimetals, Chinese Physics B 25, 117106 (2016).
- Armitage et al. [2018] N. P. Armitage, E. J. Mele, and A. Vishwanath, Weyl and dirac semimetals in three-dimensional solids, Rev. Mod. Phys. 90, 015001 (2018).
- Hasan and Kane [2010] M. Z. Hasan and C. L. Kane, Colloquium: Topological insulators, Rev. Mod. Phys. 82, 3045 (2010).
- Qi and Zhang [2011] X.-L. Qi and S.-C. Zhang, Topological insulators and superconductors, Rev. Mod. Phys. 83, 1057 (2011).
- Tanaka et al. [2012] Y. Tanaka, M. Sato, and N. Nagaosa, Symmetry and topology in superconductors âodd-frequency pairing and edge statesâ, Journal of the Physical Society of Japan 81, 011013 (2012), https://doi.org/10.1143/JPSJ.81.011013 .
- Sato and Fujimoto [2016] M. Sato and S. Fujimoto, Majorana fermions and topology in superconductors, Journal of the Physical Society of Japan 85, 072001 (2016), https://doi.org/10.7566/JPSJ.85.072001 .
- Mizushima et al. [2016] T. Mizushima, Y. Tsutsumi, T. Kawakami, M. Sato, M. Ichioka, and K. Machida, Symmetry-protected topological superfluids and superconductors ―from the basics to 3he―, Journal of the Physical Society of Japan 85, 022001 (2016).
- Chiu et al. [2016] C.-K. Chiu, J. C. Y. Teo, A. P. Schnyder, and S. Ryu, Classification of topological quantum matter with symmetries, Rev. Mod. Phys. 88, 035005 (2016).
- Sato and Ando [2017] M. Sato and Y. Ando, Topological superconductors: a review, Reports on Progress in Physics 80, 076501 (2017).
- Butch et al. [2011] N. P. Butch, P. Syers, K. Kirshenbaum, A. P. Hope, and J. Paglione, Superconductivity in the topological semimetal yptbi, Phys. Rev. B 84, 220504 (2011).
- Nakajima et al. [2015] Y. Nakajima, R. Hu, K. Kirshenbaum, A. Hughes, P. Syers, X. Wang, K. Wang, R. Wang, S. R. Saha, D. Pratt, J. W. Lynn, and J. Paglione, Topological ¡i¿r¡/i¿pdbi half-heusler semimetals: A new family of noncentrosymmetric magnetic superconductors, Science Advances 1, e1500242 (2015), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/sciadv.1500242 .
- Brydon et al. [2016] P. M. R. Brydon, L. Wang, M. Weinert, and D. F. Agterberg, Pairing of fermions in half-heusler superconductors, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 177001 (2016).
- Agterberg et al. [2017] D. F. Agterberg, P. M. R. Brydon, and C. Timm, Bogoliubov fermi surfaces in superconductors with broken time-reversal symmetry, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 127001 (2017).
- Brydon et al. [2018] P. M. R. Brydon, D. F. Agterberg, H. Menke, and C. Timm, Bogoliubov fermi surfaces: General theory, magnetic order, and topology, Phys. Rev. B 98, 224509 (2018).
- Kim et al. [2018] H. Kim, K. Wang, Y. Nakajima, R. Hu, S. Ziemak, P. Syers, L. Wang, H. Hodovanets, J. D. Denlinger, P. M. R. Brydon, D. F. Agterberg, M. A. Tanatar, R. Prozorov, and J. Paglione, Beyond triplet: Unconventional superconductivity in a spin-3/2 topological semimetal, Science Advances 4, 10.1126/sciadv.aao4513 (2018), https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/4/4/eaao4513.full.pdf .
- Venderbos et al. [2018] J. W. F. Venderbos, L. Savary, J. Ruhman, P. A. Lee, and L. Fu, Pairing states of spin- fermions: Symmetry-enforced topological gap functions, Phys. Rev. X 8, 011029 (2018).
- Kobayashi et al. [2019] S. Kobayashi, A. Yamakage, Y. Tanaka, and M. Sato, Majorana multipole response of topological superconductors, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 097002 (2019).
- Kim et al. [2021a] D. Kim, S. Kobayashi, and Y. Asano, Josephson effect of superconductors with electrons, Phys. Rev. B 103, 184516 (2021a).
- Kim et al. [2021b] D. Kim, S. Kobayashi, and Y. Asano, Quasiparticle on bogoliubov fermi surface and odd-frequency cooper pair, Journal of the Physical Society of Japan 90, 104708 (2021b), https://doi.org/10.7566/JPSJ.90.104708 .
- Yosida [1958] K. Yosida, Paramagnetic susceptibility in superconductors, Phys. Rev. 110, 769 (1958).
- Yu and Liu [2020] J. Yu and C.-X. Liu, Spin susceptibility, upper critical field, and disorder effect in j=32 superconductors with singletâquintet mixing, Journal of Applied Physics 128, 063904 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0013596 .
- Mahan [1990] G. D. Mahan, Many-Particle Physics (Plenum Press, New York, 1990).
- Luttinger and Kohn [1955] J. M. Luttinger and W. Kohn, Motion of electrons and holes in perturbed periodic fields, Phys. Rev. 97, 869 (1955).
- Abrikosov et al. [1975] A. A. Abrikosov, L. P. Gor’kov, and I. E. Dzyaloshinski, Methods of Quantum Field Theory in Statistical Physics (Dover Publications, New York, 1975).
- Sigrist and Ueda [1991] M. Sigrist and K. Ueda, Phenomenological theory of unconventional superconductivity, Rev. Mod. Phys. 63, 239 (1991).
- Asano and Sasaki [2015] Y. Asano and A. Sasaki, Odd-frequency cooper pairs in two-band superconductors and their magnetic response, Phys. Rev. B 92, 224508 (2015).
- Tanaka et al. [2005] Y. Tanaka, Y. Asano, A. A. Golubov, and S. Kashiwaya, Anomalous features of the proximity effect in triplet superconductors, Phys. Rev. B 72, 140503 (2005).
- Asano et al. [2011] Y. Asano, A. A. Golubov, Y. V. Fominov, and Y. Tanaka, Unconventional surface impedance of a normal-metal film covering a spin-triplet superconductor due to odd-frequency cooper pairs, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 087001 (2011).
- Suzuki and Asano [2014] S.-I. Suzuki and Y. Asano, Paramagnetic instability of small topological superconductors, Phys. Rev. B 89, 184508 (2014).
- Suzuki et al. [2022] S.-I. Suzuki, T. Sato, and Y. Asano, Odd-frequency cooper pair around a magnetic impurity, Phys. Rev. B 106, 104518 (2022).
- Frigeri et al. [2004] P. A. Frigeri, D. F. Agterberg, and M. Sigrist, Spin susceptibility in superconductors without inversion symmetry, New Journal of Physics 6, 115 (2004).