↓ Skip to main content

Superconductivity in diamond

Overview of attention for article published in Nature, April 2004
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

1 blog
2 tweeters
4 patents
1 Facebook page
5 Wikipedia pages


867 Dimensions

Readers on

274 Mendeley
1 CiteULike
Superconductivity in diamond
Published in
Nature, April 2004
DOI 10.1038/nature02449
Pubmed ID

E. A. Ekimov, V. A. Sidorov, E. D. Bauer, N. N. Mel'nik, N. J. Curro, J. D. Thompson, S. M. Stishov


Diamond is an electrical insulator well known for its exceptional hardness. It also conducts heat even more effectively than copper, and can withstand very high electric fields. With these physical properties, diamond is attractive for electronic applications, particularly when charge carriers are introduced (by chemical doping) into the system. Boron has one less electron than carbon and, because of its small atomic radius, boron is relatively easily incorporated into diamond; as boron acts as a charge acceptor, the resulting diamond is effectively hole-doped. Here we report the discovery of superconductivity in boron-doped diamond synthesized at high pressure (nearly 100,000 atmospheres) and temperature (2,500-2,800 K). Electrical resistivity, magnetic susceptibility, specific heat and field-dependent resistance measurements show that boron-doped diamond is a bulk, type-II superconductor below the superconducting transition temperature T(c) approximately 4 K; superconductivity survives in a magnetic field up to Hc2(0) > or = 3.5 T. The discovery of superconductivity in diamond-structured carbon suggests that Si and Ge, which also form in the diamond structure, may similarly exhibit superconductivity under the appropriate conditions.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 274 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 1%
China 3 1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Ukraine 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 261 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 68 25%
Researcher 66 24%
Student > Master 35 13%
Professor 22 8%
Student > Bachelor 15 5%
Other 40 15%
Unknown 28 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Physics and Astronomy 133 49%
Materials Science 44 16%
Chemistry 30 11%
Engineering 16 6%
Chemical Engineering 2 <1%
Other 6 2%
Unknown 43 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 November 2020.
All research outputs
of 17,663,872 outputs
Outputs from Nature
of 80,168 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 166,627 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature
of 962 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,663,872 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 80,168 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 90.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 166,627 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 962 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.