Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 42 references

Extrinsic Dopants as Growth Modifiers in Cu-Cr-O delafossites: A Study of Incorporation Limits and Film Properties

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Extrinsic dopants introduced at 5 at% via MOCVD mostly fail to incorporate into CuCrO2, leaving oxygen non-stoichiometry as the true driver of the films' conductivity.

desk verdict Useful dataset, but the paper's central 'far below nominal' claim rests on comparing cation-based targets with oxygen-inclusive XPS at%; Sc is actually fully incorporated. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.13540 v1 pith:UO7RPONZ submitted 2025-06-16 cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Marco Moreira , Yves Fleming , Patrick Grysan , Christele Vergne , Adrian Marie Philippe , Petru Lunca-Popa This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords CuCrO2delafossiteextrinsicdopingMOCVDoxygenoff-stoichiometryXPSdepthprofilingp-typetransparentconductorsthinfilmstrain
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

Cu-Cr-O delafossite films grown with six extrinsic dopants at a nominal 5 at% incorporate almost none of them: X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy finds only aluminum (~1.5 at%) and scandium (~2.2 at%) above detection, while magnesium is absent and manganese, yttrium, and zinc sit near the 0.5 at% limit. The paper argues that what is often called 'doping' in this system is really self-doping by excess oxygen, giving CuCrO2 with $\delta \approx 0.15$, and that this off-stoichiometry produces the high p-type conductivity (35–70 S/cm) regardless of which dopant precursor was used. The only systematic optical effect of adding any dopant precursor is a ~20 nm redshift of the absorption edge, attributed to strain and subtle structural disorder rather than to dopant electronic states. This matters because p-type transparent conductors are a bottleneck in transparent electronics, and because many doping claims in this material family rest on nominal precursor ratios rather than on measured lattice incorporation. The paper thus establishes that MOCVD with THD precursors is not an effective route to substitutional doping of CuCrO2, while dopant precursors still act as growth modifiers.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by a defect concept and two measurement tools. The defect concept is oxygen-excess self-doping: off-stoichiometric CuCrO2 with $\delta \approx 0.15$ supplies the p-type carriers, so conductivity is insensitive to which dopant was intended. The two tools are XPS depth profiling with manufacturer sensitivity factors, which establishes how little dopant actually entered the film, and the XRD $\sin^2 \psi$ method, which shows compressive residual strain. The use of one chelating ligand, THD (2,2,6,6-tetramethyl-3,5-heptanedionate), for all metal precursors makes the comparison fair by isolating each metal centre's incorporation barrier from ligand-related effects.

What would settle it

Measure the same films with Rutherford backscattering spectrometry or calibrated secondary-ion mass spectrometry; finding magnesium, yttrium, or zinc at several at% in the bulk would overturn the low-incorporation claim. Alternatively, grow Mg-doped films with fixed oxygen flow and show conductivity rising with Mg precursor concentration while XPS still reports no lattice Mg, which would force a different carrier mechanism.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that extrinsic dopants introduced into Cu-Cr-O delafossite films by MOCVD with identical THD precursors are mostly not incorporated into the lattice. XPS depth profiling, after removing surface contamination, shows that only aluminum (~1.5 at%) and scandium (~2.2 at%) appear above the 0.5 at% detection limit against a 5 at% target; magnesium is not detected at all. Instead the films are oxygen-rich, CuCrO2+$\delta$ with $\delta \approx 0.15$, and this off-stoichiometry sets the hole concentration: all films, doped or undoped, show p-type conductivity in the 35–70 S/cm range with no statistically significant dopant dependence. The consistent ~20 nm redshift of the absorption edge across every doped film, uncorrelated with dopant identity or ionic radius, points to a strain- or disorder-mediated growth effect rather than a dopant-specific electronic one. On c-plane sapphire the films are epitaxial only in the first ~20 nm and then relax to polycrystalline, and XRD $\sin^2 \psi$ measurements show compressive residual strain, both consistent with growth-related rather than chemical modification of the films.

Load-bearing premise

The conclusion that dopants are mostly not incorporated rests on XPS quantification using manufacturer-provided sensitivity factors and a 0.5 at% detection limit; if those sensitivity factors are systematically wrong the absolute concentrations could shift, although the qualitative finding of very limited incorporation would likely survive.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Any future doping study of CuCrO2 must verify bulk composition with depth-resolved methods; precursor ratios alone are not evidence of substitutional doping.
  • High conductivity reported for 'doped' CuCrO2 elsewhere may be dominated by oxygen off-stoichiometry, so undoped films grown with identical oxygen flow are the necessary control.
  • Because every dopant shifts the absorption edge by roughly the same amount, the optical edge in this system is tuned by growth strain and disorder, not by the dopant's electronic structure.
  • The thinner Y-doped film (200 nm vs 300 nm for Sc) under identical deposition conditions shows that dopant precursor chemistry alters growth kinetics even when the cation does not enter the lattice.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A testable consequence left implicit: if the redshift is strain-driven, varying film thickness or substrate mismatch for a fixed dopant should move the absorption edge by a comparable amount without any dopant present.
  • The roughly constant $\delta \approx 0.15$ across all dopants implies oxygen uptake is set by deposition conditions; varying oxygen partial pressure and tracking conductivity against delta, not dopant type, would test this directly.
  • Re-reading earlier Mg-doped CuCrO2 reports through this lens, some reported conductivity enhancements may be partly oxygen-stoichiometry effects; re-measuring those exact films with XPS would clarify.
  • Because Mg and Zn, the acceptor candidates, are the ones that fail to incorporate, the ceiling appears to be a kinetic or thermodynamic solubility limit rather than charge compensation; post-annealing or sputtering in a dopant-rich vapor might exceed it.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper reports an MOCVD growth study of Cu-Cr-O delafossite thin films with six extrinsic dopants (Al, Mg, Mn, Sc, Y, Zn) targeted at 5 at.% of total cation content. XPS depth profiles show that only Al (~1.5 at.%) and Sc (~2.2 at.%) are present above the stated detection limit, while Mg is absent and Mn, Y, and Zn are near or below detection. Films are oxygen-rich (CuCrO2+δ, δ≈0.15), show no secondary phases, and exhibit p-type conductivity of 35–70 S/cm attributed to oxygen excess rather than doping. A small (~20 nm) optical absorption-edge redshift is observed for all doped films and attributed to strain or growth-induced disorder. The paper argues that actual dopant incorporation is far below nominal values and that dopant precursors act mainly as growth modifiers.

Significance. If the central incorporation claim were correct, the paper would provide a valuable cautionary result for the delafossite community: even with identical THD-based precursors, most intended dopants are not incorporated into the CuCrO2 lattice, and the film properties are dominated by oxygen off-stoichiometry. The work is strong in its systematic comparison across six dopants, its use of direct compositional depth profiling (XPS) and nanoscale mapping (STEM-EDS), and its candid discussion of the limitations of nominal-vs-actual composition. The emphasis on reporting measured rather than nominal dopant concentrations is a useful methodological message. However, the quantitative basis of the central claim is flawed, and the conclusions as written do not follow from the data.

major comments (3)
  1. [Methods ('5 atomic% of the total cation content') and Results, Figure 2] The nominal dopant level is defined as 5% of the total cation content (Cu+Cr+dopant), but the XPS concentrations in Figure 2 are absolute at.% of all atoms, including oxygen. With Cu+Cr summing to roughly 42 at.%, 5 cation% corresponds to about 2.1 absolute at.%. Therefore the reported Sc value of ~2.2 at.% absolute corresponds to full, not partial, incorporation on the cation basis, and Al at ~1.5 at.% absolute corresponds to ~3.4 cation% (about 70% of nominal). The abstract's statement that 'actual dopant incorporation is well below the nominal 5%' and the conclusion that 'none of the doped samples approached the targeted 5 at.%' are not supported for Al and Sc. Please recompute all concentrations on a consistent cation basis and revise the interpretation accordingly.
  2. [Results, Chemical Composition and Dopant Incorporation; Figure 2] The stated XPS detection limit of ~0.5 at.% absolute is itself about 1.2% of the cation content (0.5/(42+0.5)), so 'not detected' for Mn, Y, and Zn does not establish that incorporation is 'well below nominal' — it only places an upper limit near 1.2 cation%. The sentence 'Mn, Y, and Zn were detected only at trace levels close to 0.5 at.% detection limit' conflates absolute and relative scales. Report detection limits in cation% and provide uncertainties for the quantified concentrations, especially since the sensitivity factors are manufacturer-provided and no calibration against standards is described.
  3. [Results, Electrical Properties; Figure 10] The p-type assignment is asserted without any direct measurement on these films (no Hall effect, Seebeck, or hot-probe data). Since the paper's central interpretation is that conductivity is governed by oxygen excess rather than by the (purported) lack of dopants, direct carrier-type and carrier-concentration evidence is needed to support the p-type claim and the attribution of carrier generation. In addition, the conductivity range 35–70 S/cm is presented without error bars; the text mentions thickness non-uniformity as an uncertainty source but does not quantify it, which weakens the conclusion that 'no statistically significant change' occurred.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract and Results, Microstructure Analysis] The abstract states that films on sapphire relax into a polycrystalline structure beyond 20 nm, while the Results text also says 'beyond a certain thickness (~20 nm)' but the abstract in the full-text version says 'beyond ~40 nm'. Please harmonize the thickness at which the epitaxial-to-polycrystalline transition occurs.
  2. [Figure 3 caption] The caption describes '(b) on a Si substrate' but does not identify the dopant; the text indicates that panel (b) is the Y-doped film on silicon. Please correct the caption to name the dopant.
  3. [Results, XRD and strain analysis] The weak feature near 41.7° 2θ is mentioned as a possible artifact but is not identified or discussed further; a brief explanation of whether it could arise from the substrate or a minority phase would strengthen the claim of 'no secondary phases.'
  4. [Discussion, strain analysis] The sin²ψ data are shown as d vs sin²ψ, but the conversion from slopes to stress is not presented because elastic constants are lacking; please state explicitly that only qualitative strain state is inferred and caution that the (012) reflection is not necessarily sensitive to the claimed plane-specific doping effect.
  5. [Optical Properties] The Tauc analysis assumes a direct allowed transition (n=2) despite the acknowledged small-polaron conduction; the extracted 'band gap' values should be labeled as apparent optical gaps, and the analysis should include a justification for the chosen transition index or a discussion of how polaronic absorption affects the extrapolation.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the conclusions are direct experimental measurements, not derivations from fitted or self-referential inputs.

full rationale

This paper is an experimental characterization study, and its central claims are direct measurements rather than derived predictions. The statements that dopant incorporation is low (XPS), that the films are oxygen-rich CuCrO2+δ with δ≈0.15 (XPS quantification), that no secondary phases appear (XRD/TEM), that conductivities are similar across samples (four-point probe), and that a small generic optical redshift occurs (UV-Vis/Tauc analysis) all rest on primary data taken in this work. No parameter is fitted to a subset of data and then reported as a prediction; no quantity is defined in terms of another claimed result in a way that would make the conclusion true by construction. The authors do cite their own prior work for deposition parameters [15,31,32], off-stoichiometry and defect behavior [19,20,23], strain-dependent electrical properties [30], and small-polaron transport models [39], but these citations supply experimental baselines and interpretive context; they are not the load-bearing justification for the present measurements. Even the concern raised in the skeptic headline—that nominal 5 at% is cation-based while XPS at% includes oxygen—is a quantification or interpretation issue, not a circularity: correcting the basis would alter the magnitude of the claimed under-incorporation but would not make the conclusion true by definition. Accordingly, the derivation chain is self-contained with respect to the evidence presented, and no circular step is identified.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on quantitative XPS (sensitivity factors, detection limits), on the assumption of p-type conduction without Hall measurement, and on simplified optical analysis (Tauc plot with n=2, neglected reflection). No free parameters or invented entities are introduced.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption XPS atomic concentrations computed with manufacturer sensitivity factors are accurate enough to conclude Al ~1.5 at% and Sc ~2.2 at%, with other dopants below ~0.5 at%.
    The entire low-incorporation claim rests on this calibration; absolute XPS errors can be tens of percent, though the order-of-magnitude conclusion is likely robust.
  • domain assumption The films are p-type, inferred from prior literature and oxygen excess rather than measured directly.
    Only four-point probe conductivity is reported; carrier sign is not established by Hall or Seebeck measurements in this work.
  • domain assumption The absorption coefficient from transmission data uses alpha = -(1/d) ln T (neglecting reflection), and the Tauc analysis uses n=2 for direct allowed transitions.
    These simplifications affect the absolute band gap and the reported ~20 nm redshift; the authors themselves note the exponent may deviate for polaronic systems.
  • domain assumption The sin squared psi strain analysis on the (006) and (012) reflections is meaningful despite the lack of reliable elastic constants for CuCrO2.
    The authors state that missing elastic stiffness values impede quantitative strain estimation; the interpretation of compressive strain is qualitative.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Extrinsic Dopants as Growth Modifiers in Cu-Cr-O delafossites: A Study of Incorporation Limits and Film Properties." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/UO7RPONZ

@misc{pith2026250613540,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Extrinsic Dopants as Growth Modifiers in Cu-Cr-O delafossites: A Study of Incorporation Limits and Film Properties},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/UO7RPONZ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.13540}
}
read the original abstract

Cu-Cr-O delafossite thin films were grown by metal-organic chemical vapor deposition with various extrinsic dopants (Al, Mg, Mn, Sc, Y, and Zn) targeted at 5 at % to investigate how such doping influences their structure and properties. X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy revealed that the actual dopant incorporation is well below the nominal 5 %, with only Al and Sc present above detection. An off-stoichiometric Cu-Cr-O composition is determined, with no secondary phases detected. Transmission electron microscopy indicates that films grown on c-plane sapphire are epitaxial near the substrate interface but relax into a polycrystalline structure beyond 20 nm, while films on silicon are polycrystalline throughout. All films show high p-type conductivity (on the order of 10-10^2 Scm-1) attributable to the excess oxygen, with no significant variation among different dopants. Optical transmission measurements indicate a slight red-shift (~20 nm) of the absorption edge for all doped films, likely arising from strain effects and subtle structural disorder introduced during growth. We discuss the influence of lattice strain (investigated by X-ray diffraction sin {\psi} squared measurements showing residual strain) and small polaron absorption behavior in these films. Despite limited incorporation of dopants, subtle structural and optical shifts suggest that dopant precursor chemistry and growth conditions play a significant role in influencing film stoichiometry and properties.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.13540 by the authors.

Figure 10
Figure 10. Electrical conductivity of non-doped and doped Cu-Cr-O samples on α-Al2O3 substrates [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_10.png] view at source ↗

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references · 35 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Nanomaterials 13:

    Chavan GT, Kim Y, Khokhar MQ, et al (2023) A Brief Review of Transparent Conducting Oxides (TCO): The Influence of Different Deposition Techniques on the Efficiency of Solar Cells. Nanomaterials 13:. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano13071226

    doi:10.3390/nano13071226 2023

  2. [2]

    ACS Omega 8:5475–5485

    Lunca-Popa P, Chemin JB, Adjeroud N, et al (2023) Study of Gallium-Doped Zinc Oxide Thin Films Processed by Atomic Layer Deposition and RF Magnetron Sputtering for Transparent Antenna Applications. ACS Omega 8:5475–5485. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.2c06574

    work page doi:10.1021/acsomega.2c06574 2023

  3. [3]

    PRX Energy 3:1

    Woods-Robinson R, Morales-Masis M, Hautier G, Crovetto A (2024) From Design to Device: Challenges and Opportunities in Computational Discovery of p -Type Transparent Conductors . PRX Energy 3:1. https://doi.org/10.1103/prxenergy.3.031001

    doi:10.1103/prxenergy.3.031001 2024

  4. [4]

    J Appl Phys 115:012014

    Lyons JL, Janotti A, Van De Walle CG (2014) Effects of hole localization on limiting p-type conductivity in oxide and nitride semiconductors. J Appl Phys 115:012014. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4838075

    work page doi:10.1063/1.4838075 2014

  5. [5]

    Chem Mater 29:2568–2573

    Varley JB, Miglio A, Ha VA, et al (2017) High-Throughput Design of Non-oxide p- Type Transparent Conducting Materials: Data Mining, Search Strategy, and Identification of Boron Phosphide. Chem Mater 29:2568–2573. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemmater.6b04663

    doi:10.1021/acs.chemmater.6b04663 2017

  6. [6]

    Brunin G, Rignanese G-M, Hautier G (2018) Are Small Polarons Always Detrimental to Transparent Conducting Oxides ? arxiv

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    J Mater Chem 21:3655

    Scanlon DO, Watson GW (2011) Understanding the p-type defect chemistry of CuCrO2. J Mater Chem 21:3655. https://doi.org/10.1039/c0jm03852k

    work page doi:10.1039/c0jm03852k 2011

  8. [8]

    Ingram BJ, Harder BJ, Hrabe NW, et al (2004) Transport and Defect Mechanisms in Cuprous Delafossites . 2 . CuScO2 and CuYO2. Chem Mater 16:5623–5629

    work page 2004

Show all 42 references
  1. [9]

    Surfaces and Interfaces 22:100824

    Bai Z, Chen SC, Lin SS, et al (2021) Review in optoelectronic properties of p-type CuCrO2 transparent conductive films. Surfaces and Interfaces 22:100824. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfin.2020.100824

    2021

  2. [10]

    Mater Today Adv 18:100366

    Afonso J, Greiner M, Lunca-Popa P, Raskin J-P (2023) Ultra-low-energy catalytic degradation of ozone by off-stoichiometric delafossite Cu- Cr-O for highly selective low-temperature solid-state O3 sensors. Mater Today Adv 18:100366. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mtadv.2023.100366

    2023

  3. [11]

    Nanotechnology 32:

    Xu S, Zhao T, Kong L, et al (2021) Gas-solid interfacial charge transfer in volatile organic compound detection by CuCrO2nanoparticles. Nanotechnology 32:. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6528/abfa55

    2021 doi

  4. [12]

    Appl Nano Mater

    Kong L, Xu S, Liu H, et al (2022) Hybridized Ag-CuCrO 2 Nanostructured Composites for Enhanced Gas Sensing. Appl Nano Mater. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsanm.2c02529

    2022 doi

  5. [13]

    Sci Rep 11:1–10

    Ahmadi M, Abrari M, Ghanaatshoar M (2021) An all-sputtered photovoltaic ultraviolet photodetector based on co-doped CuCrO2 and Al-doped ZnO heterojunction. Sci Rep 11:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-98273-5

    2021 doi

  6. [14]

    J Solid State Chem 185:56–61

    Poienar M, Hardy V, Kundys B, et al (2012) Revisiting the properties of delafossite CuCrO 2: A single crystal study. J Solid State Chem 185:56–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jssc.2011.10.047

    2012 doi

  7. [15]

    J Mater Sci Mater Electron 30:1760–1766

    Afonso J, Leturcq R, Lunca-Popa P, Lenoble D (2019) Transparent p- Cu0.66Cr1.33O2/n-ZnO heterojunction prepared in a five-step scalable process. J Mater Sci Mater Electron 30:1760–1766. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10854-018-0448-4

    2019 doi

  8. [16]

    ACS Appl Mater Interfaces

    Kim J, Kendall O, Ren J, et al (2022) Highly Conductive and Visibly Transparent p- Type CuCrO2 Films by Ultrasonic Spray Pyrolysis. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.1c24023

    2022 doi

  9. [17]

    Nanomaterials 9:1311

    Zhang B, Thampy S, Dunlap-Shohl WA, et al (2019) Mg Doped CuCrO2 as Efficient Hole Transport Layers for Organic and Perovskite Solar Cells. Nanomaterials 9:1311. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano9091311

    2019 doi

  10. [18]

    J Mater Chem C 9:11995–12009

    Willis J, Scanlon DO (2021) Latest directions in p-type transparent conductor design. J Mater Chem C 9:11995–12009. https://doi.org/10.1039/d1tc02547c

    2021 doi

  11. [19]

    Mater Adv 2:4721–4732

    Bottiglieri L, Resende J, Weber M, et al (2021) Out of stoichiometry CuCrO 2 films as a promising p-type TCO for transparent electronics. Mater Adv 2:4721–4732. https://doi.org/10.1039/d1ma00156f

    2021 doi

  12. [20]

    Appl Mater Today 9:184–191

    Lunca-Popa P, Crepelliere J, Nukala P, et al (2017) Invisible electronics: Metastable Cu-vacancies chain defects for highly conductive p-type transparent oxide. Appl Mater Today 9:184–191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmt.2017.07.004

    2017 doi

  13. [21]

    AIP Adv 8:4–11

    Norton E, Farrell L, Zhussupbekova A, et al (2018) Bending stability of Cu0.4CrO2 - A transparent p-type conducting oxide for large area flexible electronics. AIP Adv 8:4–11. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5027038

    2018 doi

  14. [22]

    Appl Phys Lett 107:1–7

    Farrell L, Norton E, O’Dowd BJ, et al (2015) Spray pyrolysis growth of a high figure of merit, nano-crystalline, p -type transparent conducting material at low temperature. Appl Phys Lett 107:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4927241

    2015 doi

  15. [23]

    Sci Rep 10:1416

    Lunca-Popa P, Botsoa J, Bahri M, et al (2020) Tuneable interplay between atomistic defects morphology and electrical properties of transparent p-type highly conductive off-stoichiometric Cu-Cr-O delafossite thin films. Sci Rep 10:1416. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-58312-z

    2020 doi

  16. [24]

    J Mater Sci 57:3114–3142

    Moreira M, Afonso J, Crepelliere J, et al (2022) A review on the p-type transparent Cu–Cr–O delafossite materials. J Mater Sci 57:3114–3142. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-021-06815-z

    2022 doi

  17. [25]

    J Phys Condens Matter 28:383002

    Zhang KHL, Xi K, Blamire MG, Egdell RG (2016) P -type transparent conducting oxides. J Phys Condens Matter 28:383002. https://doi.org/10.1088/0953- 8984/28/38/383002

    2016 doi

  18. [26]

    J Appl Phys 89:8022–8025

    Nagarajan R., Draeseke AD, Sleight AW, Tate J (2001) p-type conductivity in CuCr1- xMgxO2 films and powders. J Appl Phys 89:8022–8025. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1372636͔

    2001 doi

  19. [27]

    Appl Phys Lett 113:242101

    Ahmadi M, Asemi M, Ghanaatshoar M (2018) Mg and N co-doped CuCrO2 : A record breaking p-type TCO. Appl Phys Lett 113:242101. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5051730

    2018 doi

  20. [28]

    Materials (Basel) 13:2376

    Lin SS, Shi Q, Dai MJ, et al (2020) The optoelectronic properties of p-type Cr- deficient Cu[Cr0.95-xMg0.05]O2 films deposited by reactive magnetron sputtering. Materials (Basel) 13:2376. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma13102376

    2020 doi

  21. [29]

    Nanomaterials 11:1–15

    Bottiglieri L, Nourdine A, Resende J, et al (2021) Optimized stoichiometry for CuCrO2 thin films as hole transparent layer in PBDD4T-2F: PC70BM organic solar cells. Nanomaterials 11:1–15. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano11082109

    2021 doi

  22. [30]

    J Phys Condens Matter 36:215702

    Moreira M, Crepelliere J, Leturcq R, et al (2024) Electrical properties of strained off- stoichiometric Cu – Cr – O delafossite. J Phys Condens Matter 36:215702

    2024

  23. [31]

    Thin Solid Films 612:194–201

    Lunca Popa P, Crêpellière J, Leturcq R, Lenoble D (2016) Electrical and optical properties of Cu – Cr – O thin fi lms fabricated by chemical vapour deposition. Thin Solid Films 612:194–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsf.2016.05.052

    2016 doi

  24. [32]

    University of Luxembourg

    Moreira MAM (2024) The Influence of Induced Strain on Electric Properties of Nonstoichiometric Copper Chromium Oxide, PhD Thesis. University of Luxembourg

    2024

  25. [33]

    Sci Rep 10:1–7

    Ohtake A, Mano T, Sakuma Y (2020) Strain relaxation in InAs heteroepitaxy on lattice-mismatched substrates. Sci Rep 10:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020- 61527-9

    2020 doi

  26. [34]

    Chem Mater 13:4701–4707

    Putkonen M, Nieminen M, Niinistö J, et al (2001) Surface-controlled deposition of Sc2O3 thin films by atomic layer epitaxy using β-diketonate and organometallic precursors. Chem Mater 13:4701–4707. https://doi.org/10.1021/cm011138z

    2001 doi

  27. [35]

    Chem Mater 23:1113–

    Sartori A, El Habra N, Bolzan M, et al (2011) Stability study of a magnesium β- diketonate as precursor for chemical vapor deposition of MgO. Chem Mater 23:1113–

    2011

  28. [36]

    Solid State Commun 151:1798–1801

    Guilmeau E, Poienar M, Kremer S, et al (2011) Mg substitution in CuCrO2 delafossite compounds. Solid State Commun 151:1798–1801. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssc.2011.08.023

    2011 doi

  29. [37]

    Solid State Ionics 177:607–612

    Mugnier E, Barnabe A, Tailhades P (2006) Synthesis and characterization of CuFeO2+ delafossite powders. Solid State Ionics 177:607–612. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssi.2005.11.026

    2006 doi

  30. [38]

    J Solid State Chem 182:2104–2110

    Miyasaka N, Doi Y, Hinatsu Y (2009) Synthesis and magnetic properties of ALnO2 (A=Cu or Ag; Ln=rare earths) with the delafossite structure. J Solid State Chem 182:2104–2110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jssc.2009.05.035

    2009 doi

  31. [39]

    J Phys D Appl Phys 58:015310

    Crepelliere J, Moreira M, Lunca-Popa P, Leturcq R (2025) On the charge transport models in high intrinsic defect doped transparent and conducting p-type Cu – Cr – O delafossite. J Phys D Appl Phys 58:015310

    2025

  32. [40]

    Inorg Chem Commun 162:

    Benreguia N, Rekhila G, Younes A, et al (2024) Optical and electrical properties of the delafossite CuCrO2 synthesized by co-precipitation. Inorg Chem Commun 162:. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inoche.2024.112154

    2024

  33. [41]

    Phys B Condens Matter 245:45–51

    Kim MR, Kim CH, Han BH (1998) Band-gap renormalization and strain effects in semiconductor quantum wells. Phys B Condens Matter 245:45–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0921-4526(97)00450-x

    1998 doi

  34. [1119]

    https://doi.org/10.1021/cm1020788

    doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.