Various techniques have been applied to visualize superconducting vortices, providing clues to their electromagnetic response. Here, we present a wide-field, quantitative imaging of the stray field of the vortices in a superconducting thin film using perfectly aligned diamond quantum sensors. Our analysis, which mitigates the influence of the sensor inhomogeneities, visualizes the magnetic flux of single vortices in YBa2Cu3O7−δ with an accuracy of ±10%. The obtained vortex shape is consistent with the theoretical model, and penetration depth and its temperature dependence agree with previous studies, proving our technique's accuracy and broad applicability. This wide-field imaging, which in principle works even under extreme conditions, allows the characterization of various superconductors.
Superconducting vortex, as a manifestation of macroscopic quantum effects, is one of the central subjects in the physics of superconductivity. Diverse vortex phases, such as vortex lattice, vortex liquid, and Bragg glass, appear in type-II superconductors' mixed state.1–3 Those phases and vortex dynamics lead to bulk electromagnetic responses of superconductors and, thus, have been under vigorous investigation. In addition, since the flux quantization in superconducting vortices originates from the gap symmetry, anomalous quantization, such as a half-quantum vortex in p–wave superconductors,4,5 is proposed to emerge as a signature of unconventional pairing symmetry. Therefore, techniques that can quantitatively image quantum vortices under various temperatures, pressures, and magnetic fields would help to probe a wide variety of superconductivity with open questions.
Several techniques are available to visualize local magnetic fields.6–9 In particular, scanning techniques using sensor chips are widely used for quantitative measurements of magnetic flux density.8,10–12 In such scanning techniques, superconducting quantum interference devices (SQUIDs)10,11 and nitrogen-vacancy (NV) centers in diamonds13,14 are prominent as sensors. While SQUIDs have excellent sensitivity, NV centers operate under severe environments, such as high temperatures and high magnetic fields.15,16 Scanning microscopy provides nanoscale spatial resolution and high accuracy.12 As for the NV-center technique, alternatively, imaging with a wide field of view exceeding (100 × 100 μm2) is possible with a camera and NV ensemble sensors.9,17 This technique is beneficial in terms of high throughput.9 Furthermore, it can be introduced into extreme environments such as ultrahigh pressure,18–20 which are not accessible by the scanning technique. Thus, it aids in researching unconventional superconductors at high temperatures and pressures.21,22 Using this technique, efforts have been made particularly to image the stray magnetic fields of superconducting quantum vortices,23,24 but achieving magnetic accuracy close to the scanning technique13 has been challenging. The issue arises primarily due to the fact that the measurement of superconductors is conducted in a low magnetic field, where the inhomogeneity of the sensor's strain parameter25 and the signal overlap resulting from a diamond sensor ensemble with four NV axes render quantitative analysis to extract field component perpendicular to the superconductors' surface practically impossible.
Here, we address these issues by utilizing a perfectly aligned NV ensemble sensor26–30 and implementing an analysis that eliminates sensor inhomogeneities resulting from strain distribution, complemented by reference measurements in a zero magnetic field. Consequently, we report a quantitative wide-field magnetic imaging of superconducting vortices in a thin film of a typical high-Tc superconductor YBa2Cu3O7−δ (YBCO). The combination of the inherent high throughput of wide-field NV microscopy and achieved quantitativeness enables statistical analysis. The obtained statistics is consistent with the single quantization of vortices. Moreover, the stray magnetic field distribution aligns well with theoretical models, offering an alternative method for estimating the magnetic field penetration depth. Our technique, which combines high throughput and accuracy, is helpful for comprehensive characterization, including exploring unconventional superconductors.31–33
We use NV ensemble sensors at the diamond surface to visualize vortex stray magnetic fields. Figure 1(a) is the measurement schematic. The sensors are located in a thin film grown on a (111) Ib diamond substrate ( mm3) using a chemical vapor deposition (CVD) technique.26–30 The symmetry axis of the NV center (NV axis) is perfectly aligned perpendicular to the diamond surface. The CVD-grown NV layer thickness is 2.3 μm [Fig. 1(a)], measured by secondary ion mass spectroscopy. The areal density of NV centers and the density of nitrogen atoms are estimated to be μm–2 and , respectively. We adhere the diamond chip to a YBCO thin film by varnish [Fig. 1(b)]. The stray field from the vortices is detected at the NV centers in the CVD layer at a distance d away [Fig. 1(a)]. The YBCO sample is a (100) thin film (S-type) on a MgO substrate purchased from Ceraco Ceramic Coating GmbH. The nominal YBCO thickness is . The critical temperature is estimated to be from the temperature-dependent sheet resistance shown in Fig. 1(c).
Overview of the NV ensemble-based magnetic imaging. (a) Schematic of the vortex stray field imaging. (b) Photograph of the sample. The diamond chip and the YBCO thin film are bonded by varnish. (c) Temperature dependence of the sheet resistance of the YBCO thin film. The horizontal solid black line indicates zero resistance. (d) Schematic of the microscope system. A magnetic shield surrounds the cryostat and the objective lens (not shown). (e) Typical ODMR spectra. The black circles and red squares are data acquired at external fields of 0 and 1 mT, respectively. An offset of 0.1 is added to the 1 mT data for visibility. (f) The coil voltage dependence of the splitting between resonance frequencies . The upper axis is the magnetic field estimated from the fitting (solid black line). These data are acquired at .
Overview of the NV ensemble-based magnetic imaging. (a) Schematic of the vortex stray field imaging. (b) Photograph of the sample. The diamond chip and the YBCO thin film are bonded by varnish. (c) Temperature dependence of the sheet resistance of the YBCO thin film. The horizontal solid black line indicates zero resistance. (d) Schematic of the microscope system. A magnetic shield surrounds the cryostat and the objective lens (not shown). (e) Typical ODMR spectra. The black circles and red squares are data acquired at external fields of 0 and 1 mT, respectively. An offset of 0.1 is added to the 1 mT data for visibility. (f) The coil voltage dependence of the splitting between resonance frequencies . The upper axis is the magnetic field estimated from the fitting (solid black line). These data are acquired at .
Our microscope system is shown in Fig. 1(d). The sample is fixed with vacuum grease to a stage in an optical cryostat (Montana Instruments Cryostation s50). The sample temperature is controlled by a heater and monitored by a thermometer of the stage. Hereafter, we use the stage thermometer value as the temperature. We expand a green laser (532 nm, 120 mW) onto the diamond to image the photoluminescence (PL) of the NV centers. We image the wavelength range of the NV center ( –750 nm) with a CMOS camera and optical filters. The optical diffraction limit is estimated to be nm. Since we acquire the images through the diamond, the optical resolution becomes 0.9 μm due to optical aberration.34 We use a loop microwave antenna35 fixed on the optical window of the cryostat to manipulate the NV centers. A coil applies a spatially uniform static magnetic field in the direction perpendicular to the YBCO surface, parallel to the NV axis. We perform field-cooling (FC) to generate the vortices by cooling down the stage temperature from to the desired temperature. At the same time, we modulate their density by tuning the field generated by the coil.
Figures 2(a) and 2(b) show the distributions of obtained under FC conditions of and , respectively. We obtain these images at 40 K. There are multiple point-shaped magnetic field distributions at the larger field [Fig. 2(b)], while no such distributions at the smaller field [Fig. 2(a)]. Each of these points is a superconducting vortex. Later we prove that they are genuinely single vortices. The absence of such a feature in Fig. 2(a) indicates no vortices in this view, implying minuscule magnetic fields are realized in the cooldown process. We define this condition as zero-field cooling.
Magnetic imaging of superconducting vortices. (a) and (b) Distribution of . (a) and (b) are the data under FC of μT and μT, respectively. (c)–(e) Distribution of the stray field from the vortices (see supplementary material for full data) (c)–(e) is the data under FC of , 2.1, and 3.7 μT, respectively. (f) Relationship between vortex density and magnetic field (coil voltage). The error bars correspond to μT, the 95% confidence interval of the calibration [Fig. 1(f)]. Inset shows the enlarged view near the zero magnetic fields. Arrows indicate the condition of each data acquired. The measurements are performed at . The vertical dashed black line is the actual zero field condition estimated by the linear fitting.
Magnetic imaging of superconducting vortices. (a) and (b) Distribution of . (a) and (b) are the data under FC of μT and μT, respectively. (c)–(e) Distribution of the stray field from the vortices (see supplementary material for full data) (c)–(e) is the data under FC of , 2.1, and 3.7 μT, respectively. (f) Relationship between vortex density and magnetic field (coil voltage). The error bars correspond to μT, the 95% confidence interval of the calibration [Fig. 1(f)]. Inset shows the enlarged view near the zero magnetic fields. Arrows indicate the condition of each data acquired. The measurements are performed at . The vertical dashed black line is the actual zero field condition estimated by the linear fitting.
We examine the relation between the number of vortices and the magnetic flux density during FC. We count the number of the vortices in the field of view to obtain vortex areal density, as shown in Fig. 2(f). The vortex density increases linearly with the absolute value of the magnetic field. A superconducting vortex has a single flux quantum (where h is Planck's constant and e is the elementary charge). The vortex density corresponds to the magnetic flux density. Thus, in Fig. 2(f), the proportionality coefficient should be . The solid black line is the theoretical fitting based on the calibration in Fig. 1(f), consistent with the experimental result within the error bars. As shown by the vertical dashed line in the inset of Fig. 2(f), the zero field calibration is carried out within , corresponding to the exact residual field of , including geomagnetism. These results prove that the observed vortices have a single flux quantum.
The present method, which observes many vortices in a wide field of view quantitatively and simultaneously, enables us to make a statistical analysis. The inset of Fig. 3(a) depicts the distribution of for a typical vortex. Thus, the magnetic field is isotropically distributed concerning the distance r from the vortex center. We rely on Eq. (3) to extract the field, where we define as an average of far away from the vortex center (specifically, ) to avoid the effect of drift during FC cycles. There are 290 vortices in the results obtained under FC of several between −13.9 and 5.3 μT. We estimate the center-of-mass positions of these vortices by Gaussian fitting. Among them, we extract 190 vortices, located away from large inhomogeneity and separated by more than 8 μm to avoid the effect of drift and the influence of stray fields from neighboring vortices.
(a) Radial distribution of the stray field at ( ). The black circles and their error bar are the mean value and standard deviation for 190 vortices. The solid red line is the theoretical fitting. The finite offset of the magnetic field density at μm is due to statistical errors in taking the absolute value of squared deviation Eq. (3). Inset is the image of a typical single vortex in terms of . The scale bar is 2 μm. The circles indicate the background reference region (4.8 μm < r < 5 μm). (b) Histogram of the magnetic flux. The horizontal axis shows the value obtained by integrating the magnetic flux density in a radius of 2.5 μm from the vortex center indicated by the arrow in the top left of Fig. 3(a). The vertical red line is the value obtained from the theoretical treatment (see the text). (c) Temperature dependence of the London penetration depth λ. The gray area indicates that the local temperature of the measurement position reaches the critical temperature due to laser irradiation.
(a) Radial distribution of the stray field at ( ). The black circles and their error bar are the mean value and standard deviation for 190 vortices. The solid red line is the theoretical fitting. The finite offset of the magnetic field density at μm is due to statistical errors in taking the absolute value of squared deviation Eq. (3). Inset is the image of a typical single vortex in terms of . The scale bar is 2 μm. The circles indicate the background reference region (4.8 μm < r < 5 μm). (b) Histogram of the magnetic flux. The horizontal axis shows the value obtained by integrating the magnetic flux density in a radius of 2.5 μm from the vortex center indicated by the arrow in the top left of Fig. 3(a). The vertical red line is the value obtained from the theoretical treatment (see the text). (c) Temperature dependence of the London penetration depth λ. The gray area indicates that the local temperature of the measurement position reaches the critical temperature due to laser irradiation.
Figure 3(a) shows the obtained distribution of the magnetic field of a vortex as a function of r. The error bar reflects the standard deviation concerning the 190 vortices used in the analysis. The magnetic field just above the vortex center is 51.1 μT, while the error bars are kept as small as μT.
Figure 3(b) shows the magnetic flux projection obtained by integrating each vortex field over the region of μm, as indicated by the arrow in the top left of Fig. 3(a). The histogram forms a Gaussian distribution, meaning that all the single vortices are accurately captured as having the same flux. The magnetic flux's average and standard deviation is and , respectively, showing that the present technique has a precision of 10%. The statistical uniformity also guarantees that our analysis has removed the observed inhomogeneities. is smaller than because the integration range is limited to μm and only the field component parallel to the NV axis is detected, as schematically shown in Fig. 1(a).
We investigate the temperature dependence of λ. Figure 3(c) shows the from fitting the experimental result at each temperature obtained by raising temperature after FC of (see supplementary material for full data). The resulting remains at nm from to but dramatically increases above , reaching at . The vortex disappears at between and [a gray area in Fig. 3(c)], lower than the original K, due to the local heating by laser irradiation.
To conclude, we have quantitatively established the wide-field imaging of superconducting vortices using a perfectly aligned diamond quantum sensor. By eliminating the effect of inhomogeneity, the magnetic flux of a single vortex in a YBCO thin film was visualized with an accuracy of ±10%. In addition, we demonstrate the quantitative method to examine the penetration depth. We can further improve sensitivity and accuracy by combining techniques such as multi-frequency magnetic resonance52 and thinner CVD layers.28 The demonstrated precise high throughput method, applicable over a wide temperature range, helps to explore various superconducting properties and statistical evaluation, including their MHz–GHz dynamics.53 For example, it could apply to investigating an anomalous quantum vortex, such as a half-integer one, and to the high-pressure superconductivity in diamond anvil cells.18–20
SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL
See the supplementary material for all the magnetic imaging data in the present experiment, details of the numerics employed for the analysis, descriptions of the fitting methods, and information regarding the sensitivity.
We appreciate K. M. Itoh (Keio University) for providing the cryostat. The authors acknowledge the support of Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (Nos. JP22K03524, JP23H01103, JP19H05826, and JP22H04962) and of the MEXT Quantum Leap Flagship Program (Grant No. JPMXS0118067395). Some parts of this work were conducted at (Takeda Clean Room, Univ. Tokyo and Nanofab, Tokyo Tech), supported by Advanced Research Infrastructure for Materials and Nanotechnology in Japan (ARIM), Grant Nos. JPMXP1222UT1131 and JPMXP1222IT0058. S.N. is supported by the Forefront Physics and Mathematics Program to Drive Transformation (FoPM), WINGS Program, and JSR Fellowship, the University of Tokyo.
AUTHOR DECLARATIONS
Conflict of Interest
The authors have no conflicts to disclose.
Author Contributions
Shunsuke Nishimura: Conceptualization (equal); Data curation (equal); Formal analysis (equal); Investigation (equal); Methodology (equal); Software (equal); Visualization (equal); Writing – original draft (equal); Writing – review & editing (equal). Taku Kobayashi: Data curation (equal); Formal analysis (equal); Investigation (equal); Methodology (equal); Software (equal). Daichi Sasaki: Data curation (equal); Formal analysis (equal); Investigation (equal); Methodology (equal); Visualization (equal). Takeyuki Tsuji: Data curation (equal); Investigation (equal); Methodology (equal); Resources (equal). Takayuki Iwasaki: Funding acquisition (supporting); Investigation (equal); Resources (supporting); Supervision (equal); Writing – review & editing (equal). Mutsuko Hatano: Funding acquisition (equal); Project administration (equal); Resources (equal); Supervision (equal). Kento Sasaki: Conceptualization (equal); Investigation (equal); Methodology (equal); Software (equal); Supervision (lead); Validation (lead); Visualization (lead); Writing – original draft (equal); Writing – review & editing (equal). Kensuke Kobayashi: Conceptualization (equal); Project administration (equal); Supervision (equal); Validation (equal); Writing – original draft (equal); Writing – review & editing (equal).
DATA AVAILABILITY
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding authors upon reasonable request.