# Pairing symmetry and long range pair potential in a weak coupling theory of superconductivity

## I Introduction

Many experiments were performed to find clues regarding mechanism of high-$`T_c`$ superconductivity and the nature of the superconducting pair wave function. Notwithstanding this effort the nature of the orbital symmetry of the order parameter is not yet known completely after a decayed of its discovery although strong evidence of a major $`\mathrm{d}_{\mathrm{x}^2\mathrm{y}^2}`$ symmetry exists . Phase and node sensitive experiments also reported a sign reversal of the order parameter supporting $`d`$ wave symmetry . The most current scenario as appears from various experiments and theory that the pairing symmetry of these family could be a mixed one like $`\mathrm{d}_{\mathrm{x}^2\mathrm{y}^2}+\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}\theta }\alpha `$ where $`\alpha `$ could be something in the $`s`$ wave family or $`d_{xy}`$. The electron doped $`\mathrm{Nd}_{2\mathrm{x}}\mathrm{Ce}_\mathrm{x}\mathrm{CuO}_4`$ superconductors are however pure $`s`$ wave like .

Tunneling experiments had questioned the pure d-wave symmetry as the data were interpreted as an admixture of d and s-wave components due to orthorhombicity in YBCO. Possibility of a minor but finite $`id_{xy}`$ symmetry alongwith the predominant $`d_{x^2y^2}`$ has also been suggested in connection with magnetic defects or small fractions of a flux quantum $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0=hc/2e`$ in YBCO powders. Similar proposals came from various other authors in the context of magnetic field, magnetic impurity, interface effect etc.  These proposals got the correct momentum when experimental data on longitudinal thermal conductivity by Krishana et al,  of $`\mathrm{Bi}_2\mathrm{Sr}_2\mathrm{CaCu}_2\mathrm{O}_8`$ compounds and that by Movshovich et al,  showed supportive indication to such proposals. There are experimental results related to interface effects as well as in the bulk that indicates mixed pairing symmetry (with dominant $`d`$-wave) , thus providing a strong threat to the pure $`d`$ wave models.

In this paper our main aim is to study the possibility of a mixed pairing symmetry state with $`\mathrm{\Delta }(k)=\mathrm{\Delta }_{d_{x^2y^2}}+e^{i\theta }s_\alpha `$ where $`\alpha =xy,x^2+y^2`$ for $`\theta =0,\pi /2`$ with both $`d`$ and $`s`$ on an equal footing. We show that $`d_{x^2y^2}`$ can mix with $`s_{xy}`$ in the tetragonal group for $`\theta =0`$ but not for $`\theta =\pi /2`$. The phase of the second condensate state is thus extremely important. We then show that eventhough the lowest order $`d_{x^2y^2}`$ cannot mix with $`s_{x^2+y^2}`$, the corresponding higher order symmetries can mix freely with each other. By lowest order we mean the usual $`d`$-wave (i.e, simple $`\mathrm{cos}k_x\mathrm{cos}k_y`$ form), extended $`s`$ wave (i.e, simple $`\mathrm{cos}k_x+\mathrm{cos}k_y`$ form) and so on. By higher order we mean such symmetries with higher harmonics present in it, like $`\mathrm{cos}\xi k_x\pm \mathrm{cos}\xi k_y`$ form where $`\xi =na`$ ($`n=1,2,3..`$) or even more complicated like $`\mathrm{cos}2k_x\mathrm{cos}k_y\pm \mathrm{cos}k_x\mathrm{cos}2k_y`$ and so on. This will be clearer as we proceed. Now, in order to obtain such pairing symmetry in the respective channels one needs effective attractive pairing potential $`V(\xi k,\xi k^{})`$. We derive, in the spirit of tight binding longer range attraction than the usual nearest (or next nearest) neighbour one such interaction potential. The potential $`V(\xi k,\xi k^{})`$ therefore, changes the position of its minimum from that of the usual $`d`$ or $`s`$ wave cases for $`n>1`$. We show, depending on the position of the pair potential or in other words, longer ranged attractions $`\xi =2a,3a,4a`$ etc. the dominant symmetry changes from $`d_{x^2y^2}`$ for $`\xi =a`$ to $`s`$ like otherwise.

This study can particularly be justified based on the following grounds. (i) On general grounds, long range interaction arise from a decrease in screening as one approaches the insulator. In specific models of superconductivity like the spin-fluctuation mediated models, an increase in the antiferromagnetic correlation length occurs with underdoping. (ii) One of the potential theories of high temperature superconductivity that favors $`d`$ wave symmetry is the spin fluctuation theory . The gap symmetry of the spin fluctuation theory is however not the simplest $`d`$-wave but higher order $`d`$-wave, approximately of the form $`(\mathrm{cos}k_x\mathrm{cos}k_y)(\mathrm{cos}k_x+\mathrm{cos}k_y)^N`$ . Explicit $`k`$-anisotrpy of the gap in spin fluctuation mediated superconductivity was obtained by Lenck and Carbotte  in BCS theory with the phenomenological spin susceptibility as pairing interaction using fast-Fourier-Transform technique, without any prior assumption about the symmetry of the gap. They concluded, the gap although have nodal lines along $`k_x=k_y`$, does not have the simplest $`d`$-wave symmetry but rather higher order $`d`$ wave symmetry with higher harmonics present in it. Therfore, this work provide a real space derivation of a pair potential that produces higher order $`d`$-wave symmetry similar to that present in the spin fluctuation theory. (iii) In the magnetic scenario of the cuprates , one can set $`\xi `$ equal to the magnetic coherence length which is larger than the lattice spacing . The coherence length in the superconducting state which is different for different materials may be because a short range interaction requires larger densities than a long range one in order to produce coherent motion that leads to superconductivity. (The $`T_cx`$ relationship is not unique in all high $`T_c`$ systems, some starts to superconduct with very small doping, $`x`$ whereas some systems require larger $`x`$). (iv) The high $`T_c`$ systems are in very complicated circuit and the electronic correlation effects may not be adequately accounted unless one considers next nearest or further neighbour repulsion. Therefore, in the spirit of tight binding lattice the effective attraction may only arise with more distant attractive interation. (v) In a most recent angel resolved photoemission (ARPES) experiment by a well known group , such requirement of long range interaction was realized. One of their essential findings is, as the doping decreases, the maximum gap increases, but the slope of the gap near the nodes decreases. This particular feature although consistent with $`d`$ wave but cannot be fit by simple $`\mathrm{cos}(2\varphi )`$ but requires a finite mixing of $`\mathrm{cos}(6\varphi )`$ as well, where $`\varphi `$ is angle between $`k_x,k_y`$ given as, $`\mathrm{tan}^1(k_y/k_x)`$. The $`\mathrm{cos}(6\varphi )`$ contains higher harmonics than simple $`(\mathrm{cos}k_x\mathrm{cos}k_y)`$. Rest of the lay out of the paper is as follows. In section II, we derive the pair potential required for higher anisotropic $`d`$ and extended $`s`$ wave symmetries. We also provide a brief prescription of finding coupled gap equations for the amplitudes of such higher anisotropic symmetries. In section III, we present and discuss in details all the numerical results providing strong signature of change in dominant pairing symmetry with range of interation. Finally, we conlude in section IV.

## II Model Calculation

Let us consider that the overlap of orbitals in different unit cells is small compared to the diagonal overlap. Then in the spirit of tight binding lattice description, the matrix element of the pair potential may be obtained as,

$`V(\stackrel{}{q})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\stackrel{}{\delta }}{}}V_\stackrel{}{\delta }e^{i\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{R}_\delta }=V_0^r+V_1f^d(k)f^d(k^{})+V_1g(k)g(k^{})`$ (7)   
$`+V_2f^{d_{xy}}(k)f^{d_{xy}}(k^{})+V_2f^{s_{xy}}(k)f^{s_{xy}}(k^{})`$   
$`+V_3f^d(2k)f^d(2k^{})+V_3g(2k)g(2k^{})`$   
$`+2V_4\stackrel{~}{f}_1^d(2k)\stackrel{~}{f}_1^d(2k^{})+2V_4\stackrel{~}{f}_2^d(2k)\stackrel{~}{f}_2^d(2k^{})`$   
$`+2V_4\stackrel{~}{g}_1(2k)\stackrel{~}{g}_1(2k^{})+2V_4\stackrel{~}{g}_2(2k)\stackrel{~}{g}_2(2k^{})`$   
$`+V_5f^{d_{xy}}(2k)f^{d_{xy}}(2k^{})+V_5f^{s_{xy}}(2k)f^{s_{xy}}(2k^{})`$   
$`+V_6f^d(3k)f^d(3k^{})+V_6g(3k)g(3k^{})`$   
where in the first result of the equation (7) $`\stackrel{}{R}_\delta `$ locates nearest neighbour and further neighbours, $`\stackrel{}{\delta }`$ labels and $`V_n`$, $`n=1,\mathrm{},6`$ represents strength of attraction between the respective neighbour interaction. The first term in the above equation $`V_0^r`$ refers to the on-site interaction which is considered as repulsive but can be attractive as well giving rise isotropic $`s`$ wave. In this paper, we shall not consider the isotropic $`s`$ wave for a mixed symmetry with $`d`$ wave (cf. ). The form factors of the potential are obtained as,

$`f^d(nk)=\mathrm{cos}(nk_xa)\mathrm{cos}(nk_ya)`$ (8)   
$`g(nk)=\mathrm{cos}(nk_xa)+\mathrm{cos}(nk_ya)`$ (9)   
$`f^{d_{xy}}(nk)=2\mathrm{sin}(nk_xa)\mathrm{sin}(nk_ya)`$ (10)   
$`f^{s_{xy}}(nk)=2\mathrm{cos}(nk_xa)\mathrm{cos}(nk_ya)`$ (11)   
$`\stackrel{~}{f}_1^d(2k)=\mathrm{cos}(2k_xa)\mathrm{cos}(k_ya)\mathrm{cos}(k_xa)\mathrm{cos}(2k_ya)`$ (12)   
$`\stackrel{~}{f}_2^d(2k)=\mathrm{sin}(2k_xa)\mathrm{sin}(k_ya)\mathrm{sin}(k_xa)\mathrm{sin}(2k_ya)`$ (13)   
$`\stackrel{~}{g}_1(2k)=\mathrm{cos}(2k_xa)\mathrm{cos}(k_ya)+\mathrm{cos}(k_xa)\mathrm{cos}(2k_ya)`$ (14)   
$`\stackrel{~}{g}_2(2k)=\mathrm{sin}(2k_xa)\mathrm{sin}(k_ya)+\mathrm{sin}(k_xa)\mathrm{sin}(2k_ya)`$ (15)   
where $`f^d(nk)`$, $`g(nk)`$ leads to usual $`d_{x^2y^2}`$, $`s_{x^2+y^2}`$ pairing symmetry for $`n=1`$ and unusual or higher order $`d_{x^2y^2}`$, $`s_{x^2+y^2}`$ pairing symmetry respectively which results from interations along the $`x`$ and $`y`$ axes (i.e, $`1^{st}`$, $`3^{rd}`$, $`6^{th}`$ neighbour interaction). While the usual and higher order $`d_{xy}`$, $`s_{xy}`$ pairing symmetry results from $`f^{d_{xy}}(nk)`$, $`f^{s_{xy}}(nk)`$, the $`4^{th}`$ neighbour interaction gives rise to unconventional $`d`$ and extended $`s`$-wave pairing symmetry through $`\stackrel{~}{f}_n^d(2k)`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{g}_n(2k)`$ given in equation (2). In deriving Eqs. (7,2) terms responsible for triplet pairing which are not important for high $`T_c`$ systems are neglected. We shall discuss now the mixed phase symmetry of $`d_{x^2y^2}`$ with other symmetries taking two of the potential terms at a time, namely, a combination of potential terms in (7) ($`2^{nd},3^{rd}`$), ($`6^{th},7^{th}`$), ($`14^{th},15^{th}`$) gives rise to pairing symmetry $`\mathrm{\Delta }(k)=\mathrm{\Delta }_{d_{x^2y^2}}(0)f^d(\xi k)+e^{i\theta }\mathrm{\Delta }_{s_{x^2+y^2}}(0)g(\xi k)`$ where $`\xi =na`$, $`a`$ is the lattice constant and will be taken as unity. Similarly, a comibnation of ($`2^{nd},4^{th}`$), ($`6^{th},12^{th}`$) and so on will give rise to pairing symmetry $`\mathrm{\Delta }(k)=\mathrm{\Delta }_{d_{x^2y^2}}(0)f^d(\xi k)+e^{i\theta }\mathrm{\Delta }_{d_{xy}}(0)f^{d_{xy}}(\xi k)`$ etc.

Free energy of a superconductor with arbritary pairing symmetry may be written as,

$$F_{k,k^{}}=\frac{1}{\beta }\underset{k,p=\pm }{}\mathrm{ln}(1+e^{p\beta E_k})+\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_k^2}{V_{kk^{}}}$$
(16)   
where $`E_k=\sqrt{(ϵ_k\mu )^2+\mathrm{\Delta }_k^2}`$ are the energy eigen values of a Hamiltonian that describes superconductivity. We minimize the free energy, Eq. (16) i.e, $`F/\mathrm{\Delta }`$ = 0, to get the gap equation as,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_k=\underset{k^{}}{}V_{kk^{}}\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_k^{}}{2E_k^{}}\mathrm{tanh}(\frac{\beta E_k^{}}{2})$$
(17)   
where $`ϵ_k`$ is the dispersion relation taken from the ARPES data  and $`\mu `$ the chemical potential will control band filling through a number conserving equation given below. For two component order parameter symmetries as mentioned above, we substitute the required form of the potential and the corresponding gap structure into the either side of Eq. (17) which gives us an identity equation. Then separating the real and imaginary parts together with comparing the momentum dependences on either side of it we get gap equations for the amplitudes in different channels as,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_j=\underset{k}{}V_j\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_jf_k^{j^2}}{2E_k}\mathrm{tanh}\left(\frac{\beta E_k}{2}\right),j=1,2$$
(18)   
Considering mixed symmetry of the form $`\mathrm{\Delta }(k)=\mathrm{\Delta }_{d_{x^2y^2}}(0)f^d(nk)+\mathrm{\Delta }_{s_{x^2+y^2}}(0)g(nk)`$ one identifies $`\mathrm{\Delta }_1=\mathrm{\Delta }_{d_{x^2y^2}}(0)`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }_2=\mathrm{\Delta }_{s_{x^2+y^2}}(0)`$ and $`f_k^1=f^d(nk)`$, $`f_k^2=g(nk)`$. Similarly, for mixed symmetries of the form $`\mathrm{\Delta }(k)=\mathrm{\Delta }_{d_{x^2y^2}}(0)f^d(nk)+\mathrm{\Delta }_{\alpha _{xy}}(0)f^{\alpha _{xy}}`$ where $`\alpha s,d`$ $`\mathrm{\Delta }_2=\mathrm{\Delta }_{\alpha _{xy}}(0)`$ and $`f_k^2=f_{nk}^{\alpha _{xy}}`$ and so on. The potential required to get such pairing symmetries are discussed in Eq. (7).

The number conserving equation that controls the band filling through chemical potential, $`\mu `$ is given by,

$$\rho (\mu ,T)=\underset{k}{}\left(1\frac{(ϵ_k\mu )}{E_k}\mathrm{tanh}\frac{\beta E_k}{2}\right).$$
(19)   
We solve self-consistently the above three equations (Eq.18 and Eq.19) in order to study the phase diagram of a mixed order parameter superconducting phase. The numerical results obtained for the gap amplitudes through Eqs. (18,19) will be compared with free energy minimizations via Eq. (16) to get the phase diagrams.

## III Results and Discussions

We present in this section our numerical results for a set of fixed parameters, e.g, a cut-off energy $`\mathrm{\Omega }_c`$= 500 K around the Fermi level above which superconducting condensate does not exist, a fixed ratio $`V_1/V_2=0.71`$ in Eq. (18) between the strengths of pairing interaction channels through out. In figures 1 and 2 we present results for $`\mathrm{\Delta }(k)=\mathrm{\Delta }_{d_{x^2y^2}}(0)f^d(\xi k)+e^{i\theta }\mathrm{\Delta }_{s_{x^2+y^2}}(0)g(\xi k)`$ symmetries for $`\theta =\pi /2`$ and $`\theta =0`$ respectively. Such symmetries would arise from a combination of two component pair potentials ($`2^{nd},3^{rd}`$), ($`6^{th},7^{th}`$), ($`14^{th},15^{th}`$) and so on. We shall discuss only the results of $`\theta =0`$ and $`\theta =\pi /2`$. These two phases of $`\theta `$ can cause important differences (cf. figures 3, 4). It is known that for any $`\theta 0`$, time reversal symmetry is locally broken  which correspond to a phase transition to an almost fully gapped phase (except at the points $`\pm \pi /2,\pm \pi /2`$ due to common nodal points from both the channels) from a partially ungapped phase of $`d_{x^2y^2}`$ symmetry. On the other hand, the $`\theta =0`$ phase still remains nodeful, although the nodal lines shifts a lot from the usual $`k_x=k_y`$ lines of the $`d_{x^2y^2}`$.

The solid lines represent the amplitude of $`d_{x^2y^2}`$ channel whereas the dashed lines indicate that of $`s_{x^2+y^2}`$. These figures (1 $`\&`$ 2) clearly demostrate that the usual $`d_{x^2y^2}`$ and $`s_{x^2+y^2}`$ symmetries do not mix with each other (cf. Figures 1(a), 2(a)) but the higher order $`d_{x^2y^2}`$, $`s_{x^2+y^2}`$ symmetries do mix with each other (cf. figures 1(c,d), 2(c,d)). In fact, as the interaction becomes longer ranged (i.e, $`\xi /a=1,2,3,4`$ as is demonstrated in figures 1, 2 (a), (b), (c), (d) respectively) the dominant symmetry changes drastically; as the typical length $`\xi `$ is odd multiple of the lattice constant, the dominant symmetry at lower doping is $`d_{x^2y^2}`$ like whereas when the $`\xi `$ is even multiple of the lattice constant, the dominant symmetry at lower doping is something in the $`s`$-wave family (see also figures 3, 4).

As the typical length $`\xi `$ is increased the predominant symmetry at the optimal doping ) changes from $`d`$-wave at $`\xi =a`$, to an extended $`s`$-wave $`s_{x^2+y^2}`$, $`s_{xy}`$ for $`\xi =2a`$, to again a predominant $`d`$-wave symmetry at $`\xi =3a`$ and finally for $`\xi =4a`$ to extended $`s`$ wave symmetry for $`\theta =\pi /2`$. These phase diagrams (figures 1,2,3,4) drawn at T = 1 mK does not change the scenario even for $`\theta =0`$, in the mixed phase of $`d`$-wave with $`s_{x^2+y^2}`$ symmetry but causes significant change for that with $`s_{xy}`$ symmetry (cf. Fig.4). More significantly, the case of $`\xi =2a`$ is universal (i.e, independent of $`\theta `$ and $`s_{x^2+y^2}`$ or $`s_{xy}`$ mixing with $`d`$ -wave), the dominant symmetry at zero temperature is $`s`$-wave type. This work therefore, has revealed in a significant way the change in predominant pairing symmetry as the interaction range is changed at T=0. It is to be noted that in contrast to hole doped material, the electron doped materials (like $`\mathrm{Nd}_{2\mathrm{x}}\mathrm{Ce}_\mathrm{x}\mathrm{CuO}_4`$) have no signature of dominant $`d`$-wave symmetry. Furthermore, the antiferromagnetic phase in the electron doped systems is more extended or exists till larger doping in comparison to the hole doped material. Therefore, considering models related to spin fluctuation mediated superconductivity, the longer range attraction should be more important. In the present picture, we showed that such longer range interaction cause change in the pairing symmetry which might make this study to have imporatant bearings for the high-$`T_c`$ compunds.

Some interesting features of the data presented is that optimal doping remains unchanged irrespective of $`\xi `$ that causes a significant crossover in the dominant symmetry of the order parameter. The position of the $`d`$-wave does not change appreciably except the case of $`\xi /a=4`$ while the extended $`s`$ wave region moves drastically with $`\xi `$. In particular, for $`\xi /a=1`$, the extended $`s`$ wave family has finite amplitude only at densities close to zero ($`\rho 0`$) (cf. figures 1,2,3) leading to no mixed phases except the outstanding case of $`\theta =0`$ for $`s_{xy}`$ (cf. figure 4). In $`\xi /a=2`$ case, the extended $`s`$-wave family completely takes over the position of the $`d`$-wave that it had in case of $`\xi /a=1`$. For $`\xi /a=3`$, the $`d`$-wave regains its poisition although both the amplitude and width decreases to about $`50\%`$ to that of the $`\xi /a=1`$ case and the $`s`$-wave shifts towards larger doping having its amplitude minimum at the maximum of $`d`$-wave. For $`\xi /a=4`$ the extended $`s`$-wave dominates and the $`d`$-wave either becomes a minor component or does not appear at all. Furthermore, in the optimal doping whichever symmetry dominates causes the amplitude of the other minimum i.e, the dominant symmetry always expels the other one at the optimum doping.

Following the above discussion it is obvious that the Fig.4 represents an exceptional case. Fig.4 represents phase diagram of superconductors having mixed phase symmetry like $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{d_{x^2y^2}}(0)f^d(\xi k)+e^{i\theta }\mathrm{\Delta }_{s_{xy}}(0)f^{s_{xy}}(\xi k)`$ with $`\theta =0`$ (the case of $`\theta =\pi /2`$ is discussed in Fig.3 and should be contrasted with Fig.4). The phase diagram comprises the amplitudes of the respective symmetry channels as a function band filling $`\rho `$. In striking contrast to all the figures Fig.1, Fig.2 and Fig.3, there is strong mixing of $`d_{x^2y^2}`$ with $`s_{xy}`$ for $`\xi /a=1,3\&4`$.

In fact mixing between the two symmetries is so strong that it is difficult to find out the predominant symmetry for the cases $`\xi /a=1\&3`$. In this mixed symmetry, for $`\theta =\pi /2`$ and $`\xi /a=4`$ (cf. Fig. 3(d)), the $`d`$-wave amplitude is practically zero whereas for $`\theta =0`$ (cf. Fig. 4(d)) it has strong mixing regime. This is the only mixed phase where both of the symmetries at optimal doping has large values (see Figs 4(a), (c)) unlike those in figures 1 to figures 3. The results of this figure thus convincingly points out the role of the phase between the two mixing symmetries. All the experimentally observed properties of cuprates will be consistent with the scenario of Fig. 4, including the sign change of the order parameter as well as gap nodes. The strong interplay between the two order parameters of mixed $`ds_{xy}`$ symmetry has also been reflected in their thermal behaviors (cf. Fig. 5). In Figures 5 and 6 we display the temperature dependencies of the amplitudes (in eV) of different symmetry order parameters for $`\xi /a=3`$ as maximum mixing is found in

this case. When the $`s_{xy}`$ component determines the bulk $`T_c`$, (e.g, at $`\rho =0.75`$ in Fig. 5(a)) the amplitude of the $`s_{xy}`$ component is suppressed with the onset of the $`d`$-wave component. However, when the bulk $`T_c`$ is determined by the $`d`$-wave, the amplitude of the $`d`$-wave is not affected by the onset of the $`s_{xy}`$ component. This behavior is indeed new. In a study of mixed phase with usual $`d+is`$ phase with $`s`$ as isotropic $`s`$-wave, it was shown earlier  that the $`d`$-wave component gets suppressed with the onset of $`s`$-wave but not the reverse. In contrast to Fig. 5, the temperature dependencies of the amplitudes of the $`d`$ and $`s_{x^2+y^2}`$ symmetries remain unaffected by each other as displayed in figure 6. In general, however, the growth of the amplitudes of different symmetries with lowering in temperature is faster in case of $`\theta =0`$ than that for $`\theta =\pi /2`$. This once again emphasize the role of the phase $`\theta `$. Temperature dependencies for other values of $`\xi /a`$ is qualitatively same as those shown in figures 5 and 6.

So far we have discussed the interplay of order parameters in mixed phases like $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{d_{x^2y^2}}+e^{i\theta }s_\alpha `$, $`\alpha =x^2+y^2`$ or $`xy`$. This excluded discussion of some other exotic $`d`$ and $`s_{x^2+y^2}`$ symmetries that can arise from the $`4^{th}`$ neighbour attraction as discussed earlier in the context of Eqs. (7,13). More specifically, a combination of ($`8^{th}+9^{th}`$) and ($`10^{th}+11^{th}`$) terms of Eq. (7) can give rise to mixed pairing symmetries such as, $`\mathrm{\Delta }(k)=\mathrm{\Delta }_{d_{x^2y^2}}(0)F^d(k)+e^{i\theta }\mathrm{\Delta }_{s_{x^2+y^2}}(0)G^s(k)`$ where $`F^d(k)=f^d(k)[1+f^{d_{xy}}(k)+f^{s_{xy}}(k)]`$, $`G^s(k)=g(k)[f^{d_{xy}}(k)+f^{s_{xy}}(k)1]`$. These exotic symmetries are not discussed in the literature. Following the same procedure as deriving Eq. (18) one can find the gap equation for the components $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{d_{x^2y^2}}(0)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{s_{x^2+y^2}}(0)`$, although bit complicated arrives at the same gap equation as Eq. (18) with the pair vertex $`V_jV_j/2`$ and $`f_k^1=F^d(k)`$, $`f_k^2=G^s(k)`$. Solving the gap equations together with the number equation (19) simultaneously no mixing between these unconventional $`d`$ and $`s`$ wave symmetries was found. Within the same parameter as in earlier figures (i.e, $`V_1/V_2=0.71`$), $`d`$-wave remains very strong at lower dopings (within the range $`1\rho >0.70`$) whereas the $`s`$-wave amplitude appears very close to zero band filling. Therefore, in Fig. 7 we present the momentum anisotropy of the unconventional $`d`$-wave gap originated from $`4^{th}`$ neighbour attraction. It is clear that gap anisotropy is undoubtedly very different form the usual nearest-neighbour $`d`$-wave symmetry, although basic features of change in sign, nodes etc. remains same as that of the ordinary $`d`$-wave. This gap symmetry at $`\rho =0.8`$ gives rise to a BCS gap ratio $`2\mathrm{\Delta }(k)_{max}/k_BT_c=5.0`$ against 4.29 in case of usual $`d`$-wave. Such higher anisotropic $`d`$ wave symmetries will have advantage of avoiding electronic repulsion in strongly correlated system like the cuprates.

## IV Conclusions

We have studied the superconducting phase with two component order parameter scenario, such as, $`\mathrm{d}_{\mathrm{x}^2\mathrm{y}^2}+\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{i}\theta }\mathrm{s}_\alpha `$, where $`\alpha =xy,x^2+y^2`$. We showed, that in absence of orthorhombocity, the usual $`\mathrm{d}_{\mathrm{x}^2\mathrm{y}^2}`$ does not mix with usual $`\mathrm{s}_{\mathrm{x}^2+\mathrm{y}^2}`$ symmetry gap in an anisotropic band structure. But the $`\mathrm{s}_{\mathrm{xy}}`$ symmetry does mix with the usual $`d`$-wave for $`\theta =0`$. Even in absence of orthorhombocity, the higher anisotropic $`d`$-wave symmetry mixes with higher anisotropic extended $`s`$ wave symmetry. This is obtained by considering longer ranged two-body attractive potential in the spirit of tight binding lattice than the usual nearest neighbour. This study revealed that the dominant pairing symmetry changes drastically from $`d`$ to $`s`$ like as the attractive pair potential is obtained from longer ranged attraction – if the interaction is sufficiently short ranged that can be mapped into a nearest neighbour potential, at low doping, the system is described by pure $`d_{x^2y^2}`$ order parameter. Such consideration of longer range attraction has also been revealed by recent ARPES data . The role of longer range pair potential on pairing symmetry within weak coupling theory of superconductivity has thus been established. We showed that the momentum distribution of the higher anisotropic $`d`$-wave symmetries is quite different from the usual $`d`$-wave symmetries. We found that the typical interplay in the temperature dependencies of these higher order $`d`$ and $`s`$ wave pairing symmetries can be different from what is known. In brief, we believe such study of higher anistropic symmetries is potentially important and will stimulate further studies in contrast to the usual $`d`$ and $`s`$ wave symmetries.

## V Acknowledgments

A large part of this work was carried out at UFF, Niterói, Rio de Janeiro and was financially supported by the Brazilian agency FAPERJ, project no. E-26/150.925/96-BOLSA.