
In the latter two cases, broken parity and time reversal symmetries combine to destabilize the spatially uniform state, giving rise to the spatial dependence in the gap functions. The former two states are unlikely in any theory that is based on local interactions (like the single band Hubbard model). Since the above three states are not s-wave pairing states, and (as argued below) Li$_{2}$Pd$_{3}$B appears to be s-wave, a phase transition in the pairing state of Li$_{2}$(Pd$_{1-x}$Pt$_{x}$)$_{3}$B with varying $x$ would have to occur for any of these states to exist in Li$_{2}$Pt$_{3}$B. Furthermore, these states should be extremely sensitive to impurities and $%
T_{c}$ should be strongly suppressed when $x$ is varied away from 1. These are in contrast with the experimentally observed smooth evolution of $T_{c}$ with $x$ [@Badica; @2005]. Given these arguments against unconventional superconductivity, we attribute the dramatic difference between these two compounds to the variation of ASOC.

When parity symmetry is violated, the ASOC that breaks the spin degeneracy of each band takes the form $\alpha\mathbf{g(k)\cdot S(k)}/\hbar$, where $%
\alpha$ denotes the spin-orbit coupling strength, $\mathbf{S(k)}$ is the spin of an electron with momentum $\hbar \mathbf{k}$, and $\mathbf{g(k)}$ is a dimensionless vector ($\mathbf{g(-k)=-g(k)}$ to preserve time reversal symmetry). This ASOC leads to an energy splitting of the originally degenerate spin states and results in spin-eigenstates that are polarized parallel or anti-parallel to $\mathbf{g(k)}$. The ASOC plays a crucial role in the determination of the superconducting state. The key point is that if a spin-triplet contribution to the superconducting gap function is to emerge, its characteristic d-vector $\mathbf{d(k)}$ must be parallel to $%
\mathbf{g(k)}$ (provided that the ASOC is sufficiently large) [@Frigeri; @2004; @Frigeri; @2005]. This leads to two gap functions $\Delta_{\pm}(\mathbf{k}%
)=\psi\pm t \mid\mathbf{g(k)}\mid$, where each gap is defined on one of the two bands formed by the degeneracy lifting of the ASOC; $\
In the latter two cases, broken parity and time reversal isotropy compound to destabilize the spatially uniform state, giving raise to the spatial dependence in the gap function. The early two states are improbable in any theory that is based on local interaction (like the single band Hubbard mannequin). Since the above three country are not s - wave pairing states, and (as argued below) Li$_{2}$Pd$_{3}$B appears to be second - wave, a phase transition in the pairing state of Li$_{2}$(Pd$_{1 - x}$Pt$_{x}$)$_{3}$B with vary $ x$ would have to occur for any of these states to exist in Li$_{2}$Pt$_{3}$B. Furthermore, these states should be highly sensitive to impurity and $% 
 T_{c}$ should be strongly suppressed when $ x$ is varied aside from 1. These are in contrast with the experimentally observed smooth evolution of $ T_{c}$ with $ x$ [ @Badica; @2005 ]. Given these arguments against unconventional superconductivity, we attribute the dramatic difference between these two compounds to the variation of ASOC. 

 When parity symmetry is violated, the ASOC that breaks the spin degeneracy of each set takes the form $ \alpha\mathbf{g(k)\cdot S(k)}/\hbar$, where $% 
 \alpha$ announce the spin - orbit coupling strength, $ \mathbf{S(k)}$ is the tailspin of an electron with momentum $ \hbar \mathbf{k}$, and $ \mathbf{g(k)}$ is a dimensionless vector ($ \mathbf{g(-k)=-g(k)}$ to preserve meter reversal symmetry). This ASOC leads to an department of energy splitting of the originally degenerate spin states and results in spin - eigenstates that are polarized parallel or anti - parallel to $ \mathbf{g(k)}$. The ASOC plays a crucial role in the determination of the superconducting state. The cardinal point is that if a tailspin - triplet contribution to the superconducting gap function is to emerge, its characteristic d - vector $ \mathbf{d(k)}$ must be parallel to $% 
 \mathbf{g(k)}$ (provided that the ASOC is sufficiently big) [ @Frigeri; @2004; @Frigeri; @2005 ]. This leads to two gap functions $ \Delta_{\pm}(\mathbf{k}% 
) = \psi\pm metric ton \mid\mathbf{g(k)}\mid$, where each gap is defined on one of the two bands formed by the corruption lifting of the ASOC; $ \

In hhe latter two cases, broyen parity and jine revxrsal sgmmetrier combine to destabilize the spatiaoly uniform state, givivg rise tl the spqtiao dependencx in the gap fhkctious. The former twp states ase unlikely in avy theory that is based on local intewactionx (pike the singlg banc Hubgard model). Since the above three sfates age not s-wave pairong states, and (as argued bflow) Li$_{2}$Pd$_{3}$B appears to he s-wave, a kgasq transition kn the paignng state or Li$_{2}$(Pd$_{1-x}$Pt$_{x}$)$_{3}$B with varying $x$ woula havz to occur doe aji of these svates no exist in Ll$_{2}$It$_{3}$B. Furdhermorr, these states shmule be extremely sensitmve to impurities anq $%
T_{c}$ shound be strongly suppeewsed fhen $x$ ir vafies ewag from 1. Tiese are in contrast wuth the experimentaklr observed smokth evjlttion of $T_{c}$ with $x$ [@Badica; @2005]. Given these drghments against unconvenrional superconductivlty, we ateribute the dramatic difference between these two compkjndw bo tfw gariation of ASOC.

When parity symmetry is violwfec, nhe ASOC that brecks the spin degrnfrssy of each bavd takza fhe form $\alpha\mathhf{g(k)\cdoj S(k)}/\hbqr$, where $%
\wlphs$ denotes the spin-orbit coupling strengnh, $\mqthbf{S(k)}$ is the spiu of an eleccron woth mpmentum $\hbar \mathbf{k}$, anb $\mathgf{g(k)}$ is a dlmensionlsrs vector ($\mathbf{e(-k)=-g(l)}$ do preserve time reversal fymmetry). Vhis CSOC leaas tp an egergy splihting of the originally fegengrate vpin stated and results in spin-eigenstates that are polsrhzeg parallzl or snti-parallel eo $\mathbf{g(k)}$. Thg ASOC plcys a zrucial rome in tie determinaeion of the sgkerconducting state. Tre kwy piint is ghat if a spin-yriplet contributiob to the supercondmctine gap function iw ti emerge, its chsraztewidtmc d-vqwtor $\mathbf{d(n)}$ murt cr parxllel to $%
\mabhbw{g(k)}$ (lrovided that the ASMC ia sufficiently larbe) [@Frigeri; @2004; @Frigery; @2005]. This leads to two gap functilns $\Dxlta_{\pm}(\oathbg{k}%
)=\pfi\pm t \mid\mathbf{g(k)}\mid$, where eadh gap is denined on one jf tme tro bands fprmed by the degeneracy lifting of the ESOC; $\
In the latter two cases, broken parity reversal combine to the spatially uniform spatial in the gap The former two are unlikely in any theory that based on local interactions (like the single band Hubbard model). Since the above states are not s-wave pairing states, and (as argued below) Li$_{2}$Pd$_{3}$B appears to s-wave, phase in pairing state of Li$_{2}$(Pd$_{1-x}$Pt$_{x}$)$_{3}$B with varying $x$ would have to occur for any of these states exist in Li$_{2}$Pt$_{3}$B. Furthermore, these states should be sensitive to impurities and T_{c}$ should be strongly suppressed $x$ varied away 1. are contrast with the observed smooth evolution of $T_{c}$ with $x$ [@Badica; @2005]. Given these arguments against unconventional superconductivity, we attribute dramatic difference two compounds the of When parity symmetry the ASOC that breaks the spin band takes the form $\alpha\mathbf{g(k)\cdot S(k)}/\hbar$, where $% denotes the coupling strength, $\mathbf{S(k)}$ is the spin an electron with momentum $\hbar \mathbf{k}$, and $\mathbf{g(k)}$ a dimensionless vector ($\mathbf{g(-k)=-g(k)}$ to preserve time reversal symmetry). This ASOC leads to an energy the originally degenerate spin and results in that polarized or to $\mathbf{g(k)}$. ASOC plays a crucial role in the determination of the superconducting The key point is that if a spin-triplet contribution to gap is to emerge, characteristic d-vector $\mathbf{d(k)}$ must parallel $% \mathbf{g(k)}$ (provided that is large) @2005]. leads two gap functions $\Delta_{\pm}(\mathbf{k}% t \mid\mathbf{g(k)}\mid$, where each gap defined on one of the degeneracy lifting of the ASOC; $\

In the latter two cases, broken Parity and tIme reVerSal SyMmetRies Combine to destaBIlizE the spatially uniform stAte, giViNG risE To The spAtial dePEnDENce In ThE gaP fUNcTions. the Former tWo states arE unLiKely in any theORy That is baseD on Local interacTioNs (like ThE siNGle baNd HUbbarD model). sInce thE above thrEe STates aRE not s-waVE PaIrinG states, and (as argueD BeLOw) Li$_{2}$Pd$_{3}$B appears To be s-wAvE, A pHASe tRanSition in thE pAirinG State of lI$_{2}$(PD$_{1-X}$pT$_{x}$)$_{3}$B WIth varying $x$ woUld have to ocCUr fOr any oF tHesE States To exiSt IN Li$_{2}$pt$_{3}$B. FurthermOre, tHese stateS shoulD Be extreMEly sensItive tO imPurItieS AnD $%
T_{C}$ shOuLD be STrOngLY suPpressed WhEn $X$ is vaRied AWAY From 1. theSe arE in coNtrast with the ExpErimENtaLly obServeD smoOtH evolUtion oF $T_{c}$ wiTh $X$ [@Badica; @2005]. Given theSe arGuments agAinSt UncOnVentiONal supErcOndUctivitY, we attrIButE tHE DRaMatic difference betWeEN ThEse two coMpoundS To ThE VariatioN oF ASoC.

WhEN ParitY symMEtRy is violAted, thE aSoC That breAkS the spIn DegEneRacy oF Each Band taKes the foRm $\alpHA\mathbf{g(k)\cdot S(K)}/\Hbar$, where $%
\alphA$ DeNOTeS The sPin-Orbit coupliNg stREngtH, $\matHBf{s(k)}$ iS The spIn of aN eLEcTRon with momentum $\hbar \MaThbf{k}$, aNd $\matHbf{g(k)}$ is a dimenSionless veCTOR ($\mathbf{g(-K)=-g(k)}$ tO PrEServe time reverSal syMmetry). This asOC leads To an eNergy splItting of tHE OriginalLy dEgeNerAte SPIn States and resuLTS in sPiN-eigensTatEs that aRe pOlaRizEd pArAllel or anTi-parallEl To $\MaThBf{g(K)}$. The AsoC plays a CrUciAl RolE in thE DetermInatiOn of ThE sUPerConductINg STAte. THe KeY poiNt iS tHat if A spiN-TriPlet conTribution To tHE supErCoNductinG gap function iS tO emerge, its ChAraCterisTIC d-vector $\Mathbf{d(k)}$ must be parallel tO $%
\Mathbf{g(K)}$ (prOvideD thaT the ASOC iS suFficieNtlY Large) [@FRigeri; @2004; @frigeRi; @2005]. thiS LEads tO TWo Gap FuNctions $\DelTA_{\Pm}(\mAthbf{K}%
)=\pSi\pm T \mid\matHbf{g(k)}\mid$, where each gAP is Defined on one oF thE two BANdS foRMeD By tHe DEgeNERacy lifting of thE ASOC; $\

In the latter two cases,broken par ity a ndtim ereve rsal  symmetries co m bine  to destabilize the sp atial ly unif o rm  stat e, givi n gr i seto  t hesp a ti al de pen dence i n the gapfun ct ions. The fo r me r two stat esare unlikely  in  any t he ory thatisbased  on lo c al int eractions  ( l ike th e  single b an d Hu bbard model). Sin c et he above three  state sa re n ots-w ave pairin gstate s , and ( a sa r g ued below) Li$_{2 }$Pd$_{3}$B app ears t obes -wave,  a ph as e  tr ansition in  the  pairingstateo f Li$_{ 2 }$(Pd$_ {1-x}$ Pt$ _{x }$)$ _ {3 }$ B w it h  va r yi ng$ x$would ha ve  t o occ ur f o r a ny o f t hese  stat es to exist i n L i$_{ 2 }$P t$_{3 }$B.Furt he rmore , thes e sta te s should be ext reme ly sensit ive  t o i mp uriti e s and$%T_{ c}$ sho uld bes tro ng l y su ppressed when $x$is v ar ied away  from1 .Th e se are i ncon tras t withthee xp erimenta lly ob s er ve d smoot hevolut io n o f $ T_{c} $  wit h $x$[@Badica ; @20 0 5]. Given thes e  arguments ag a in s t  u n conv ent ional super cond u ctiv ity, we  at t ribut e the  d r am a tic difference betw ee n thes e two  compounds to  the varia t i o n of ASO C.
W he n  parity symmet ry is  violated, the ASOC  that  breaksthe spind e generacy  of  ea chban d ta kes the form$ \ alph a\ mathbf{ g(k )\cdotS(k )}/ \hb ar$ ,where $%\alpha$de no te sthe  spin - orbit co up lin gstr ength ,  $\mat hbf{S (k)} $is the  spin o f  a n elec tr on  wit h m om entum  $\h b ar\mathbf {k}$, and  $\ m athb f{ g( k)}$ is  a dimensionl es s vector ( $\ mat hbf{g( - k )=-g(k)} $ to preserve time reve r sal sym met ry).This  ASOC lea dsto anene r gy spl itting  of t he  or i g inall y de gen er ate spin s t a tes  andre sult s in sp in-eigenstates tha t  ar e polarized p ara llel o rant i -p a ral le l  to $ \mathbf{g(k)}$.  The ASOCpl a ys  a crucial rol ein thedetermi natio n  of the  supercon ducting s ta te.T h e k ey point i s that i f a spin- t riple t  c ontri but ion to  t hesuper conduc t ing  gapfuncti on  is to  emer ge , its ch aracteristic d-vector $ \mathb f{d(k )}$  must bepar a lle l to $%
\ math bf{g(k)}$(pr ovi ded t hat the A SOCi ssuf f icien tlyl arge) [@F r ig eri ; @2 004; @Frige r i ;  @2 005].  Th i s lead s to  two gap function s  $\Delta_{\pm} (\ma t h bf{ k}% )=\p si \pm t \mid\mat hbf {g ( k )}\mid$,  w here each g ap is de fi n ed on  one o f thetwo ban d s  f o rmed b y th e d egeneracy  li ft i ng of t he  A S OC; $\ 

In the_latter two_cases, broken parity and_time reversal_symmetries_combine to_destabilize_the spatially uniform_state, giving rise_to the spatial dependence_in the gap_functions._The former two states are unlikely in any theory that is based on local_interactions_(like the_single_band_Hubbard model). Since the above_three states are not s-wave_pairing states,_and (as argued below) Li$_{2}$Pd$_{3}$B appears to be_s-wave,_a phase transition_in the pairing state of Li$_{2}$(Pd$_{1-x}$Pt$_{x}$)$_{3}$B with varying $x$_would have to occur for any_of these states_to_exist_in Li$_{2}$Pt$_{3}$B. Furthermore, these_states should be extremely sensitive to_impurities and $%
T_{c}$ should be strongly_suppressed when $x$ is varied away from_1. These are in contrast with_the experimentally observed smooth evolution_of $T_{c}$_with $x$ [@Badica; @2005]. Given_these arguments against_unconventional superconductivity,_we attribute the_dramatic difference between these two compounds_to the variation_of ASOC.

When parity symmetry is violated,_the_ASOC that breaks_the_spin_degeneracy of_each band takes_the_form $\alpha\mathbf{g(k)\cdot_S(k)}/\hbar$,_where $%
\alpha$ denotes the spin-orbit coupling_strength,_$\mathbf{S(k)}$ is the spin of an electron_with momentum $\hbar \mathbf{k}$,_and_$\mathbf{g(k)}$ is a dimensionless_vector ($\mathbf{g(-k)=-g(k)}$ to preserve time_reversal symmetry). This ASOC leads to_an energy_splitting of_the originally degenerate spin states and results in spin-eigenstates that are_polarized parallel or anti-parallel to $\mathbf{g(k)}$._The ASOC plays a_crucial role_in_the determination of_the_superconducting state._The key point is that if a_spin-triplet contribution_to the superconducting gap function is_to emerge, its characteristic_d-vector_$\mathbf{d(k)}$ must be parallel to $%
\mathbf{g(k)}$_(provided that the ASOC is sufficiently_large) [@Frigeri; @2004; @Frigeri; @2005]._This_leads_to two gap functions $\Delta_{\pm}(\mathbf{k}%
)=\psi\pm_t \mid\mathbf{g(k)}\mid$, where each gap is_defined on one_of the two bands formed by the_degeneracy_lifting of the ASOC; $\