Ordered structure of FeGe$_2$ formed during solid-phase epitaxy

A Trampert; B Haas; B Jenichen; E Willinger; H Kirmse; J Herfort; M Hanke; S C Erwin; S Gaucher; X Huang

arxiv: 1907.05189 · v1 · pith:5H2ACEO3new · submitted 2019-07-11 · ❄️ cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Ordered structure of FeGe₂ formed during solid-phase epitaxy

B Jenichen , M Hanke , S Gaucher , A Trampert , J Herfort , H Kirmse , B Haas , E Willinger

show 2 more authors

X Huang S C Erwin

This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-24 23:09 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.mtrl-sci

keywords FeGe2solid phase epitaxyP4mm space grouptetragonal structurethin filmselastic energy minimizationFe3Siepitaxial ordering

0 comments

The pith

Solid-phase epitaxy of Ge on Fe₃Si produces an ordered layered tetragonal FeGe₂ phase with P4mm symmetry that does not exist in bulk.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper establishes that Ge(Fe,Si) films grown by solid phase epitaxy on Fe₃Si crystallize into a well-oriented, layered tetragonal FeGe₂ structure with space group P4mm. This phase is absent from bulk materials and arises specifically from the epitaxial process. The authors attribute the ordering to minimization of elastic energy in the film. A sympathetic reader cares because the result shows how interface-driven thin-film growth can access crystal structures unavailable through equilibrium bulk routes, with direct implications for multilayer stacks.

Core claim

Fe₃Si/Ge(Fe,Si)/Fe₃Si thin film stacks were grown by a combination of molecular beam epitaxy and solid phase epitaxy. The Ge(Fe,Si) films crystallize in the well oriented, layered tetragonal structure FeGe₂ with space group P4mm. This kind of structure does not exist as a bulk material and is stabilized by solid phase epitaxy of Ge on Fe₃Si. We interpret this as an ordering phenomenon induced by minimization of the elastic energy of the epitaxial film.

What carries the argument

The layered tetragonal FeGe₂ phase with space group P4mm, formed and oriented by solid-phase epitaxy on Fe₃Si and stabilized through elastic-energy minimization.

If this is right

The new phase integrates directly into Fe₃Si/Ge/Fe₃Si multilayer stacks.
Solid phase epitaxy can induce long-range order inaccessible in bulk crystals.
Elastic energy minimization acts as the primary driver for the observed atomic ordering.
The structure is confirmed across electron microscopy, electron diffraction, and synchrotron X-ray diffraction.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The same elastic-energy mechanism could stabilize related non-bulk phases in other metal-semiconductor epitaxial systems.
Quantitative strain-energy calculations would allow prediction of which compositions adopt the P4mm structure.
The oriented FeGe₂ layers may alter magnetic or transport properties within the Fe₃Si-based stacks.

Load-bearing premise

Electron and synchrotron X-ray diffraction patterns uniquely identify the space group as P4mm and the composition as FeGe₂ rather than a disordered or alternative phase.

What would settle it

Discovery of the same P4mm layered FeGe₂ structure in a bulk sample or absence of the predicted diffraction peaks in the epitaxial films.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1907.05189 by A Trampert, B Haas, B Jenichen, E Willinger, H Kirmse, J Herfort, M Hanke, S C Erwin, S Gaucher, X Huang.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: (Color online) Nano-beam diffraction patterns of the thin FeGe [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: (color online) Comparison of the measured [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: (color online) (a) Band structure of FeGe [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Fe$_{3}$Si/Ge(Fe,Si)/Fe$_{3}$Si thin film stacks were grown by a combination of molecular beam epitaxy and solid phase epitaxy (Ge on Fe$_{3}$Si). The stacks were analyzed using electron microscopy, electron diffraction, and synchrotron X-ray diffraction. The Ge(Fe,Si) films crystallize in the well oriented, layered tetragonal structure FeGe$_{2}$ with space group P4mm. This kind of structure does not exist as a bulk material and is stabilized by solid phase epitaxy of Ge on Fe$_{3}$Si. We interpret this as an ordering phenomenon induced by minimization of the elastic energy of the epitaxial film.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper reports a new thin-film P4mm FeGe2 phase stabilized by solid-phase epitaxy, but the abstract gives no patterns or refinements to check uniqueness.

read the letter

The main thing to know is that the authors grew Fe3Si/Ge(Fe,Si)/Fe3Si stacks by MBE plus solid-phase epitaxy and report that the middle layer forms a layered tetragonal FeGe2 structure with P4mm symmetry that does not exist in bulk. They attribute the stabilization to elastic-energy minimization during epitaxy. That is the concrete new observation here, and the experimental route is straightforward for anyone working on similar germanide or silicide films. The combination of electron microscopy, electron diffraction, and synchrotron XRD is the right set of tools for checking orientation and structure in these layers. The claim is presented cleanly without overreach in the abstract. The soft spot is exactly the one flagged in the stress-test note. The abstract supplies no diffraction patterns, no refinement statistics, no comparison to alternative models, and no measured Si content from the underlayer. Without those, it is impossible to judge whether P4mm FeGe2 is the only structure consistent with the data or whether a disordered or Si-substituted variant would fit equally well. The elastic-energy interpretation is also stated without any calculated strain values or comparison to interface kinetics. This paper is for people doing epitaxial growth of magnetic or semiconductor thin films who might want a specific example of a metastable ordered phase. It will not reorganize the subfield. A serious referee should see it because the experimental claim is narrow and falsifiable once the raw patterns and fits are examined; the work is coherent on its own terms even if the identification needs tightening. I would send it to review rather than desk-reject.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports growth of Fe₃Si/Ge(Fe,Si)/Fe₃Si stacks by MBE and solid-phase epitaxy, followed by characterization via electron microscopy, electron diffraction, and synchrotron X-ray diffraction. It claims that the Ge(Fe,Si) layer forms a well-oriented layered tetragonal FeGe₂ structure with space group P4mm that does not exist in bulk and is stabilized by the epitaxial process through an ordering phenomenon driven by elastic-energy minimization.

Significance. If the structural identification is confirmed with quantitative data, the result would illustrate epitaxial stabilization of a non-bulk ordered phase at a ferromagnet/semiconductor interface, offering a route to engineer metastable structures via solid-phase epitaxy. The combination of real-space imaging and reciprocal-space diffraction techniques is a positive aspect of the experimental design.

major comments (2)

[Abstract and Results] Abstract and main text: the assignment of space group P4mm and exact FeGe₂ stoichiometry (rather than a disordered variant or Si-substituted phase) is stated without presentation of the electron diffraction patterns, synchrotron X-ray data, Rietveld or simulated-pattern refinement statistics, R-factors, or error bars. This prevents independent verification that the observed reflections uniquely match P4mm FeGe₂.
[Discussion] Discussion: the claim that the ordering is induced by minimization of epitaxial elastic energy is presented as an interpretation without any quantitative strain-energy calculations, comparison of formation energies to bulk FeGe₂ or alternative phases, or assessment of competing mechanisms such as interface kinetics or chemical bonding preferences.

minor comments (1)

[Experimental] The Si content in the Ge(Fe,Si) layer (originating from the Fe₃Si underlayer) is not quantified; an estimate from EDX or similar would clarify the composition.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive assessment of our work and the constructive comments. We address each major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract and Results] Abstract and main text: the assignment of space group P4mm and exact FeGe₂ stoichiometry (rather than a disordered variant or Si-substituted phase) is stated without presentation of the electron diffraction patterns, synchrotron X-ray data, Rietveld or simulated-pattern refinement statistics, R-factors, or error bars. This prevents independent verification that the observed reflections uniquely match P4mm FeGe₂.

Authors: We agree that the manuscript would be strengthened by explicit inclusion of the supporting diffraction data. The electron diffraction patterns, synchrotron X-ray diffraction data, and associated analysis were used to assign the P4mm space group and FeGe₂ stoichiometry. In the revised manuscript we will add representative patterns together with refinement statistics and error estimates to enable independent verification. revision: yes
Referee: [Discussion] Discussion: the claim that the ordering is induced by minimization of epitaxial elastic energy is presented as an interpretation without any quantitative strain-energy calculations, comparison of formation energies to bulk FeGe₂ or alternative phases, or assessment of competing mechanisms such as interface kinetics or chemical bonding preferences.

Authors: The elastic-energy interpretation is offered as a qualitative explanation consistent with the observed epitaxial ordering that is absent in bulk. We acknowledge the absence of quantitative calculations. We will revise the discussion to present the mechanism as a plausible interpretation based on the structural results while explicitly noting that detailed energy comparisons lie outside the scope of the present study. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No derivation chain; purely experimental structure identification.

full rationale

The paper presents diffraction and microscopy data to identify the tetragonal P4mm FeGe2 phase in epitaxial films. No equations, models, fitted parameters, or predictions are introduced that could reduce to the inputs by construction. The elastic-energy interpretation is offered qualitatively without quantitative calculations or self-citation load-bearing steps. The central claim rests on experimental pattern matching rather than any self-referential derivation.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The claim rests on standard crystallographic identification of space group from diffraction data and on the assumption that elastic-energy minimization is the dominant stabilization mechanism; no free parameters, new entities, or ad-hoc axioms are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (2)

domain assumption Electron and synchrotron X-ray diffraction patterns can be indexed to assign space group P4mm and composition FeGe2
Invoked when the abstract states the films crystallize in that structure
ad hoc to paper The observed ordering is caused by minimization of epitaxial elastic energy
The interpretive sentence offered without supporting calculation

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5673 in / 1412 out tokens · 19733 ms · 2026-05-24T23:09:15.473869+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

51 extracted references · 51 canonical work pages

[1]

FeGe2 Fe3Si Fe Si Ge Sim.Sim

[110] Exp.Exp. FeGe2 Fe3Si Fe Si Ge Sim.Sim. Sim.Sim. Fe Si3 Figure 1. (color online) Comparison of the HAADF exper- imental cross-section micrographs (larger rectangles, Exp.) with the structural models of FeGe 2 P4mm and Fe3Si shown on the left side as well as the corresponding simulations (small squares, Sim.). The structure of Fe 3Si is well known, wh...

work page
[2]

(Color online) Nano-beam diﬀraction patterns of the thin FeGe 2 ﬁlm from [100] (left) and [110] (right) oriented samples

In the supplemental material the XRD reciprocal space map of the non-symmetric 20L crystal truncation rod is shown.[25] All relevant diﬀraction maxima of the reciprocal space map are positioned on a vertical line per- 4 Figure 2. (Color online) Nano-beam diﬀraction patterns of the thin FeGe 2 ﬁlm from [100] (left) and [110] (right) oriented samples. The c...

work page
[3]

T. S. Kuan, T. F. Kuech, W. I. Wang, and E. L. Wilkie, Phys. Rev. Lett. 54, 201 (1985)

work page 1985
[4]

Ourmazd and J

A. Ourmazd and J. C. Bean, Phys. Rev. Lett. 55, 765 (1985). 6

work page 1985
[5]

J. L. Martins and A. Zunger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 56, 1400 (1986)

work page 1986
[6]

A. A. Mbaye, L. G. Ferreira, and A. Zunger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 58, 49 (1987)

work page 1987
[7]

Gorsky, Z

W. Gorsky, Z. Phys. 50, 64 (1928)

work page 1928
[8]

E. J. Willliams, Proc. Roy. Soc. A 152, 231 (1935)

work page 1935
[9]

A. G. Khachaturyan, Phys. Stat. Sol. B 60, 9 (1973)

work page 1973
[10]

A. G. Khachaturyan, Theory of Structural Transforma- tions in Solids (John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, 1983)

work page 1983
[11]

A. V. Ruban and I. A. Abrikosov, Rep. Prog. Phys. 71, 046501 (2008)

work page 2008
[12]

I. A. Zhuravlev, J. M. An, and K. D. Belashchenko, Phys. Rev. B 90, 214108 (2014)

work page 2014
[13]

J. S. Wr ˆA´obel, D. Nguyen-Manh, M. Y. Lavrentiev, M. Muzyk, and S. L. Dudarev, Phys. Rev. B 91, 024108 (2015)

work page 2015
[14]

B. P. Tinkham, B. Jenichen, V. M. Kaganer, R. Shayduk, W. Braun, and K. H. Ploog, J. Cryst. Growth 310, 3416 (2008)

work page 2008
[15]

Jenichen, V

B. Jenichen, V. M. Kaganer, R. Shayduk, W. Braun, and A. Trampert, Phys. Stat. Sol. A 206, 1740 (2009)

work page 2009
[16]

Jenichen, V

B. Jenichen, V. M. Kaganer, J. Herfort, D. K. Satapathy, H.-P. Schonherr, W. Braun, and K. H. Ploog, Phys. Rev. B 72, 075329 (2005)

work page 2005
[17]

Yamada, K

S. Yamada, K. Tanikawa, M. Miyao, and K. Hamaya, Crystal Growth and Design 12, 4703 (2012)

work page 2012
[18]

Jenichen, J

B. Jenichen, J. Herfort, U. Jahn, A. Trampert, and H. Riechert, Thin Solid Films 556, 120 (2014)

work page 2014
[19]

Kawano, M

M. Kawano, M. Ikawa, K. Arima, S. Yamada, T. Kanashima, and K. Hamaya, J. Appl. Phys. 119, 045302 (2016)

work page 2016
[20]

Gaucher, B

S. Gaucher, B. Jenichen, J. Kalt, U. Jahn, A. Trampert, and J. Herfort, Appl. Phys. Lett. 110, 102103 (2017)

work page 2017
[21]

Sakai, M

S. Sakai, M. Kawano, M. Ikawa, H. Sato, S. Yamada, and K. Hamaya, Semicond. Sci. Technol. 320, 094005 (2017)

work page 2017
[22]

Kawano, M

M. Kawano, M. Ikawa, K. Santo, S. Sakai, H. Sato, S. Ya- mada, and K. Hamaya, Phys. Rev. Materials 1, 034604 (2017)

work page 2017
[23]

Hamaya, Y

K. Hamaya, Y. Baba, G. Takemoto, K. Kasahara, S. Ya- mada, K. Sawano, and M. Miyao, J. Appl. Phys. 113, 183713 (2013)

work page 2013
[24]

Wu, US Patent , 6963121B2 (2005)

K. Wu, US Patent , 6963121B2 (2005)

work page 2005
[25]

Yuasa and D

S. Yuasa and D. D. Djayaprawira, J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 40, R337 (2007)

work page 2007
[26]

Oogane and S

M. Oogane and S. Mizukami, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 369, 3037 (2011)

work page 2011
[27]

Supplemental material which includes a more detailed de- scription of the TEM and XRD experiments as well as the results of energy dispersive X-ray (EDX) spectroscopy, HAADF original data, and XRD reciprocal space map- ping (2018)

work page 2018
[28]

Stadelmann, Electron Microscopy Simulation JEMS (http://www.jems-saas.ch/, Lausanne, 2016)

P. Stadelmann, Electron Microscopy Simulation JEMS (http://www.jems-saas.ch/, Lausanne, 2016)

work page 2016
[29]

CrystalMaker, software for interactive crystal/molecular structures: modelling and diﬀraction by CrystalMaker Software Limited, http://www.crystalmaker.com/ (2017)

work page 2017
[30]

S. A. Stepanov, Collection of x-ray software (http://sergey.gmca.aps.anl.gov/ , Chicago, 1997)

work page 1997
[31]

J. P. Perdew, K. Burke, and M. Ernzerhof, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 3865 (1996)

work page 1996
[32]

Kresse and J

G. Kresse and J. Furthmuller, Phys. Rev. B 54, 11169 (1996)

work page 1996
[33]

Kresse and J

G. Kresse and J. Furthmueller, Comput. Mater. Sci. 6, 15 (1996)

work page 1996
[34]

J. P. Perdew, M. Ernzerhof, and K. Burke, J. Chem. Phys. 105, 9982 (1996)

work page 1996
[35]

J. Heyd, G. E. Scuseria, and M. Ernzerhof, J. Chem. Phys. 118, 8207 (2003)

work page 2003
[36]

Herfort, A

J. Herfort, A. Trampert, and K. H. Ploog, Int. J. Mat. Res. 97, 1026 (2006)

work page 2006
[37]

We neglect this in the present work, because we do not know the position of the Si atoms in the lattice

The Si content of 5 atom percent can lead in principle to a lattice contraction of about 0.4 percent. We neglect this in the present work, because we do not know the position of the Si atoms in the lattice. (2018)

work page 2018
[38]

Jaafar, D

R. Jaafar, D. Berling, D. S´ ebilleau, and G. Garreau, Phys. Rev. B 81, 155423 (2010)

work page 2010
[39]

N. S. Satyamurthy, R. J. Begum, C. S. Somanathan, and M. R. Murthy, Sol. State Com. 3, 113 (1965)

work page 1965
[40]

S. J. Pennycook and D. E. Jesson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 64, 938 (1990)

work page 1990
[41]

VanAert, K

S. VanAert, K. J. Batenburg, M. D. Rossel, R. Erni, and G. VanTendeloo, Nature 470, 374 (2011)

work page 2011
[42]

J.-M. Zuo, A. Shah, H. Kim, Y. Meng, W. Gao, and J.-L. Rouvi ˜A c⃝re, Ultramicroscopy 136, 50 (2014)

work page 2014
[43]

Hashimoto, A

M. Hashimoto, A. Trampert, J. Herfort, and K. H. Ploog, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 25, 1453 (2007)

work page 2007
[44]

Heinke, M

H. Heinke, M. O. M¨ oller, D. Hommel, and G. Landwehr, J. Cryst. Growth 135, 41 (1994)

work page 1994
[45]

DFT yielded the lattice parameters of ﬁrst a hypothet- ical primitive Ge lattice: a = 0.268 nm (a = 0.272 nm) and second a hypothetical CsCl-type GeFe lattice: a = 0.288 nm (a = 0.290 nm) correspondingly for HSE(PBE) functional. The halved lattice-parameter a/2 of Fe 3Si of 0.2827 nm lies between those values of the DFT calculations for the hypothetical p...

work page 2018
[46]

Hornstra and W

J. Hornstra and W. J. Bartels, J. Cryst. Growth 44, 513 (1978)

work page 1978
[47]

Rotjanapittayakul, W

W. Rotjanapittayakul, W. Pijitrojana, T. Archer, S. San- vito, and J. Prasongkit, Sci. Rep. 8, 4779 (2018)

work page 2018
[48]

G. R. Stewart, Rev. Mod. Phys. 83, 1589 (2011)

work page 2011
[49]

Miiller, J

W. Miiller, J. M. Tomczak, J. W. Simonson, G. Smith, G. Kotliar, and M. C. Aronson, J. Phys.: Condens. Mat- ter 27, 175601 (2015)

work page 2015
[50]

Ge, Z.-L

J.-F. Ge, Z.-L. Liu, C. Liu, C.-L. Gao, D. Qian, Q.-K. Xue, Y. Liu, and J.-F. Jia, Nature Mat. 14, 285 (2015)

work page 2015
[51]

Y. Zhou, L. Miao, P. Wang, F. F. Zhu, W. X. Jiang, S. W. Jiang, Y. Zhang, B. Lei, X. H. Chen, H. F. Ding, H. Zheng, W. T. Zhang, J. F. Jia, D. Qian, and D. Wu, Phys. Rev Lett. 120, 097001 (2018)

work page 2018

[1] [1]

FeGe2 Fe3Si Fe Si Ge Sim.Sim

[110] Exp.Exp. FeGe2 Fe3Si Fe Si Ge Sim.Sim. Sim.Sim. Fe Si3 Figure 1. (color online) Comparison of the HAADF exper- imental cross-section micrographs (larger rectangles, Exp.) with the structural models of FeGe 2 P4mm and Fe3Si shown on the left side as well as the corresponding simulations (small squares, Sim.). The structure of Fe 3Si is well known, wh...

work page

[2] [2]

(Color online) Nano-beam diﬀraction patterns of the thin FeGe 2 ﬁlm from [100] (left) and [110] (right) oriented samples

In the supplemental material the XRD reciprocal space map of the non-symmetric 20L crystal truncation rod is shown.[25] All relevant diﬀraction maxima of the reciprocal space map are positioned on a vertical line per- 4 Figure 2. (Color online) Nano-beam diﬀraction patterns of the thin FeGe 2 ﬁlm from [100] (left) and [110] (right) oriented samples. The c...

work page

[3] [3]

T. S. Kuan, T. F. Kuech, W. I. Wang, and E. L. Wilkie, Phys. Rev. Lett. 54, 201 (1985)

work page 1985

[4] [4]

Ourmazd and J

A. Ourmazd and J. C. Bean, Phys. Rev. Lett. 55, 765 (1985). 6

work page 1985

[5] [5]

J. L. Martins and A. Zunger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 56, 1400 (1986)

work page 1986

[6] [6]

A. A. Mbaye, L. G. Ferreira, and A. Zunger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 58, 49 (1987)

work page 1987

[7] [7]

Gorsky, Z

W. Gorsky, Z. Phys. 50, 64 (1928)

work page 1928

[8] [8]

E. J. Willliams, Proc. Roy. Soc. A 152, 231 (1935)

work page 1935

[9] [9]

A. G. Khachaturyan, Phys. Stat. Sol. B 60, 9 (1973)

work page 1973

[10] [10]

A. G. Khachaturyan, Theory of Structural Transforma- tions in Solids (John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, 1983)

work page 1983

[11] [11]

A. V. Ruban and I. A. Abrikosov, Rep. Prog. Phys. 71, 046501 (2008)

work page 2008

[12] [12]

I. A. Zhuravlev, J. M. An, and K. D. Belashchenko, Phys. Rev. B 90, 214108 (2014)

work page 2014

[13] [13]

J. S. Wr ˆA´obel, D. Nguyen-Manh, M. Y. Lavrentiev, M. Muzyk, and S. L. Dudarev, Phys. Rev. B 91, 024108 (2015)

work page 2015

[14] [14]

B. P. Tinkham, B. Jenichen, V. M. Kaganer, R. Shayduk, W. Braun, and K. H. Ploog, J. Cryst. Growth 310, 3416 (2008)

work page 2008

[15] [15]

Jenichen, V

B. Jenichen, V. M. Kaganer, R. Shayduk, W. Braun, and A. Trampert, Phys. Stat. Sol. A 206, 1740 (2009)

work page 2009

[16] [16]

Jenichen, V

B. Jenichen, V. M. Kaganer, J. Herfort, D. K. Satapathy, H.-P. Schonherr, W. Braun, and K. H. Ploog, Phys. Rev. B 72, 075329 (2005)

work page 2005

[17] [17]

Yamada, K

S. Yamada, K. Tanikawa, M. Miyao, and K. Hamaya, Crystal Growth and Design 12, 4703 (2012)

work page 2012

[18] [18]

Jenichen, J

B. Jenichen, J. Herfort, U. Jahn, A. Trampert, and H. Riechert, Thin Solid Films 556, 120 (2014)

work page 2014

[19] [19]

Kawano, M

M. Kawano, M. Ikawa, K. Arima, S. Yamada, T. Kanashima, and K. Hamaya, J. Appl. Phys. 119, 045302 (2016)

work page 2016

[20] [20]

Gaucher, B

S. Gaucher, B. Jenichen, J. Kalt, U. Jahn, A. Trampert, and J. Herfort, Appl. Phys. Lett. 110, 102103 (2017)

work page 2017

[21] [21]

Sakai, M

S. Sakai, M. Kawano, M. Ikawa, H. Sato, S. Yamada, and K. Hamaya, Semicond. Sci. Technol. 320, 094005 (2017)

work page 2017

[22] [22]

Kawano, M

M. Kawano, M. Ikawa, K. Santo, S. Sakai, H. Sato, S. Ya- mada, and K. Hamaya, Phys. Rev. Materials 1, 034604 (2017)

work page 2017

[23] [23]

Hamaya, Y

K. Hamaya, Y. Baba, G. Takemoto, K. Kasahara, S. Ya- mada, K. Sawano, and M. Miyao, J. Appl. Phys. 113, 183713 (2013)

work page 2013

[24] [24]

Wu, US Patent , 6963121B2 (2005)

K. Wu, US Patent , 6963121B2 (2005)

work page 2005

[25] [25]

Yuasa and D

S. Yuasa and D. D. Djayaprawira, J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 40, R337 (2007)

work page 2007

[26] [26]

Oogane and S

M. Oogane and S. Mizukami, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A 369, 3037 (2011)

work page 2011

[27] [27]

Supplemental material which includes a more detailed de- scription of the TEM and XRD experiments as well as the results of energy dispersive X-ray (EDX) spectroscopy, HAADF original data, and XRD reciprocal space map- ping (2018)

work page 2018

[28] [28]

Stadelmann, Electron Microscopy Simulation JEMS (http://www.jems-saas.ch/, Lausanne, 2016)

P. Stadelmann, Electron Microscopy Simulation JEMS (http://www.jems-saas.ch/, Lausanne, 2016)

work page 2016

[29] [29]

CrystalMaker, software for interactive crystal/molecular structures: modelling and diﬀraction by CrystalMaker Software Limited, http://www.crystalmaker.com/ (2017)

work page 2017

[30] [30]

S. A. Stepanov, Collection of x-ray software (http://sergey.gmca.aps.anl.gov/ , Chicago, 1997)

work page 1997

[31] [31]

J. P. Perdew, K. Burke, and M. Ernzerhof, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 3865 (1996)

work page 1996

[32] [32]

Kresse and J

G. Kresse and J. Furthmuller, Phys. Rev. B 54, 11169 (1996)

work page 1996

[33] [33]

Kresse and J

G. Kresse and J. Furthmueller, Comput. Mater. Sci. 6, 15 (1996)

work page 1996

[34] [34]

J. P. Perdew, M. Ernzerhof, and K. Burke, J. Chem. Phys. 105, 9982 (1996)

work page 1996

[35] [35]

J. Heyd, G. E. Scuseria, and M. Ernzerhof, J. Chem. Phys. 118, 8207 (2003)

work page 2003

[36] [36]

Herfort, A

J. Herfort, A. Trampert, and K. H. Ploog, Int. J. Mat. Res. 97, 1026 (2006)

work page 2006

[37] [37]

We neglect this in the present work, because we do not know the position of the Si atoms in the lattice

The Si content of 5 atom percent can lead in principle to a lattice contraction of about 0.4 percent. We neglect this in the present work, because we do not know the position of the Si atoms in the lattice. (2018)

work page 2018

[38] [38]

Jaafar, D

R. Jaafar, D. Berling, D. S´ ebilleau, and G. Garreau, Phys. Rev. B 81, 155423 (2010)

work page 2010

[39] [39]

N. S. Satyamurthy, R. J. Begum, C. S. Somanathan, and M. R. Murthy, Sol. State Com. 3, 113 (1965)

work page 1965

[40] [40]

S. J. Pennycook and D. E. Jesson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 64, 938 (1990)

work page 1990

[41] [41]

VanAert, K

S. VanAert, K. J. Batenburg, M. D. Rossel, R. Erni, and G. VanTendeloo, Nature 470, 374 (2011)

work page 2011

[42] [42]

J.-M. Zuo, A. Shah, H. Kim, Y. Meng, W. Gao, and J.-L. Rouvi ˜A c⃝re, Ultramicroscopy 136, 50 (2014)

work page 2014

[43] [43]

Hashimoto, A

M. Hashimoto, A. Trampert, J. Herfort, and K. H. Ploog, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 25, 1453 (2007)

work page 2007

[44] [44]

Heinke, M

H. Heinke, M. O. M¨ oller, D. Hommel, and G. Landwehr, J. Cryst. Growth 135, 41 (1994)

work page 1994

[45] [45]

DFT yielded the lattice parameters of ﬁrst a hypothet- ical primitive Ge lattice: a = 0.268 nm (a = 0.272 nm) and second a hypothetical CsCl-type GeFe lattice: a = 0.288 nm (a = 0.290 nm) correspondingly for HSE(PBE) functional. The halved lattice-parameter a/2 of Fe 3Si of 0.2827 nm lies between those values of the DFT calculations for the hypothetical p...

work page 2018

[46] [46]

Hornstra and W

J. Hornstra and W. J. Bartels, J. Cryst. Growth 44, 513 (1978)

work page 1978

[47] [47]

Rotjanapittayakul, W

W. Rotjanapittayakul, W. Pijitrojana, T. Archer, S. San- vito, and J. Prasongkit, Sci. Rep. 8, 4779 (2018)

work page 2018

[48] [48]

G. R. Stewart, Rev. Mod. Phys. 83, 1589 (2011)

work page 2011

[49] [49]

Miiller, J

W. Miiller, J. M. Tomczak, J. W. Simonson, G. Smith, G. Kotliar, and M. C. Aronson, J. Phys.: Condens. Mat- ter 27, 175601 (2015)

work page 2015

[50] [50]

Ge, Z.-L

J.-F. Ge, Z.-L. Liu, C. Liu, C.-L. Gao, D. Qian, Q.-K. Xue, Y. Liu, and J.-F. Jia, Nature Mat. 14, 285 (2015)

work page 2015

[51] [51]

Y. Zhou, L. Miao, P. Wang, F. F. Zhu, W. X. Jiang, S. W. Jiang, Y. Zhang, B. Lei, X. H. Chen, H. F. Ding, H. Zheng, W. T. Zhang, J. F. Jia, D. Qian, and D. Wu, Phys. Rev Lett. 120, 097001 (2018)

work page 2018