Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 71 references

First-principles Spin and Optical Properties of Vacancy Clusters in Lithium Fluoride

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper shows that hybrid functional calculations with tuned parameters reproduce the optical wavelengths of most lithium fluoride color centers to within about 100 nanometers, and identifies triplet states as the emitters for two…

desk verdict A careful HSE study of LiF color centers with real new results, but the central accuracy claim rests on a crude delta-SCF singlet approximation whose error is not quantified. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.21060 v2 pith:E47Z7SGR submitted 2024-12-30 cond-mat.mtrl-sci quant-ph

Mariano Guerrero Perez , Keegan Walkup , Jordan Chapman , Pranshu Bhaumik , Giti A. Khodaparast , Brenden A. Magill , Patrick Huber , Vsevolod Ivanov This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mtrl-sciquant-ph
keywords lithiumfluoridecolorcentersF-centerhybridfunctionalgeneralizedKoopman'stheoremopticalabsorptionandemissiontripletstatesdelta-SCF
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

The paper tries to establish that a computationally affordable hybrid-functional approach can predict the optical and spin properties of vacancy-cluster color centers in lithium fluoride well enough for quantum-applications screening. By tuning the Heyd-Scuseria-Ernzerhof parameters $\alpha_{\mathrm{HSE}}$ and $\mu_{\mathrm{HSE}}$ so that the computed band gap matches the experimental 14.0 eV and the generalized Koopman's theorem is satisfied, the authors compute absorption and emission wavelengths for the F, F$_2$, and F$_3$ centers. With the exception of $F_2^+$ and $F_3^-$, the computed transitions fall within about 100 nm of measured values. The paper further argues that the spin-triplet ($S=1$) states of $F_3^-$ and $F_3^+$ are the likely sources of the observed emission from these defects. If correct, the work offers a lightweight protocol for identifying and characterizing quantum-relevant color centers in polar insulators.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the Heyd-Scuseria-Ernzerhof (HSE) hybrid functional, whose fraction of exact exchange $\alpha_{\mathrm{HSE}}$ and range-separation parameter $\mu_{\mathrm{HSE}}$ are tuned together so that the band gap of LiF stays at the experimental value of about 14.0 eV. The generalized Koopman's theorem is used as a self-consistent constraint: the HOMO energy of the $N$-electron defect, the LUMO energy of the ionized $N-1$ state, and the vertical ionization energy are required to align, which cancels self-interaction error and fixes the defect level positions. Excited states are computed with the constrained-occupation $\Delta$-SCF method, using half-electron occupations in both spin channels to represent spin-conserving singlet excitations and to prevent the charge-transfer instability that would otherwise break convergence in aggregate defects such as $F_2$ and $F_3$.

What would settle it

Compare the half-electron $\Delta$-SCF wavelengths for $F_2^+$ and $F_3^-$ against GW+BSE or TDDFT results; if the rigorous method matches experiment where $\Delta$-SCF does not, the half-electron approximation is the weak link.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that a tuned hybrid functional plus a careful constrained-occupation treatment reproduces most of the known optical transitions of LiF color centers to an accuracy of about 100 nm, and that the correct functional parameters differ from defect to defect. For example, the computed absorption of the neutral $F$ center is 204 nm versus 250 nm experimentally; for the $F_2^0$ singlet, computed absorption is 501 nm (443 nm experiment) and emission is 649 nm (678 nm experiment); for $F_3^+$, computed absorption is 440 nm (443 nm experiment) and emission 471 nm (542 nm experiment). The parameters that satisfy the generalized Koopman's theorem vary strongly, from $\alpha_{\mathrm{HSE}}=0.45$, $\mu_{\mathrm{HSE}}=0.125$ for $F^0$ to $\alpha_{\mathrm{HSE}}=0.368$, $\mu_{\mathrm{HSE}}=0.010$ for $F_3^+$, even though all lie on the same 14.0 eV band-gap isoline. The paper also reports a previously unnoticed symmetry-breaking distortion that splits the $p$-like excited state of the $F$-center, and a spin-dependent Jahn-Teller-like instability in aggregate centers that is controlled by using half-electron excitations in each spin channel. These results establish the hybrid-functional approach as an accurate and computationally lightweight tool for color-center properties in polar materials.

Load-bearing premise

The entire accuracy claim rests on the assumption that representing a singlet excitation by half an electron in each spin channel is a faithful enough model of the correlated excited state; if that approximation shifts vertical transition energies by more than about 100 nm, the central claim fails.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The hybrid-functional protocol with gKT constraints can be applied to other charge states and vacancy aggregates in LiF without re-fitting to experiment, enabling predictions for defects that have not yet been measured.
  • The reported spin-triplet assignments for $F_3^-$ and $F_3^+$ give specific emission wavelengths and lifetimes (e.g., about 1.6 $\mu$s for $F_3^+$), which can be checked by time-resolved photoluminescence and magnetic-field experiments.
  • If the weak dependence of optical properties on HSE parameters holds for other polar insulators, high-throughput computational screening of color centers in such materials becomes feasible.
  • The computed large zero-field splittings of the triplet ground states identify LiF color centers as candidate spin-photon interfaces for quantum information.
  • The symmetry-breaking distortion of the F-center excited state suggests that at low temperature, emission peaks may split; this is a concrete, testable signature.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The success of the same HSE framework across multiple charge states suggests that gKT tuning, rather than a universal functional, is the transferable part of the method; this may be the main methodological takeaway for other materials.
  • The $F_2^+$ and $F_3^-$ failures could indicate that the half-electron approximation is most accurate when the excited state is strongly lattice-coupled; testing that correlation across a wider defect set would refine the method's domain.
  • The identification of triplet states as emitters implies that control of the singlet-triplet intersystem crossing rate could tune LiF color centers as single-photon sources, a route not explored in the paper.
  • Because the gKT-optimal parameters vary per charge state, a single fixed HSE parameter set will not be predictive; future database-driven defect screening may need to store per-defect functional parameters.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper reports hybrid-functional (HSE) calculations of vacancy-cluster color centers in LiF, covering the F center and the F2 and F3 vacancy aggregates in several charge and spin states. The HSE parameters αHSE and μHSE are tuned along the 14 eV band-gap isoline and then further constrained per defect by the generalized Koopmans' theorem. Excited states are computed with a constrained-occupation ΔSCF scheme, using half-electron excitations in both spin channels to mimic spin-conserving singlet excitations and avoid charge-transfer instabilities. The authors report absorption/emission wavelengths, transition dipole moments, radiative lifetimes, and zero-field splittings, and they compare to experiment. They claim that most of the computed optical transitions agree with experiment within about 100 nm, with the F2+ and F3- centers as acknowledged exceptions, and they propose that S=1 states of F3+ and F3- account for the observed emission from those centers.

Significance. If the accuracy claim holds, the work provides a computationally light hybrid-functional route for color centers in wide-gap polar materials, with a parameter-selection protocol that does not fit the optical transitions themselves. The systematic comparison across charge states of the same vacancy clusters, the treatment of symmetry-lowering distortions, and the spin-state assignments for triplet emission are valuable contributions to the color-center literature. The paper is also honest about the per-defect nature of the gKT tuning and about the acknowledged failures. However, the central claim of ~100 nm accuracy rests on an excited-state method whose systematic error is not quantified, and no convergence tests are reported, so the generality of the claim is not yet established.

major comments (3)
  1. [Details of optical properties (Fig. 5) and Table I] The half-electron ΔSCF representation of singlet excitations is a spin-mixed ensemble, not a pure singlet. The paper reports ground-state singlet–triplet splittings of 290 meV for F2 and 266 meV for F3-; for a two-electron/two-orbital model the half-electron energy is the average of the singlet and triplet energies, so the error in a nominally singlet transition can be as large as half the relevant excited-state singlet–triplet splitting. That is tens of nm in the visible, a substantial fraction of the claimed ~100 nm accuracy. No reference calculation (e.g., BSE, TDDFT, or a spin-pure constrained-DFT calculation) is provided to bound this error for any of the reported transitions. Since F2+ and F3- already deviate by 100–340 nm, the possibility of a systematic methodological bias is not ruled out. Please provide a quantitative estimate of this bias for at least one center, or re-scope the accuracy claim accordingly.
  2. [Table I and Discussion] The statement that 'with the exception of F2+ and F3-, our computed absorption/emission wavelengths compare well with experimental values to within ~100 nm' is supported by only four favorable comparisons: F0 (204 vs 250 nm), F2- (912/1048 vs 956/1113 nm), F2 singlet (501/649 vs 443/678 nm), and F3+ singlet/triplet (440/471 vs 443/542 nm and 497/563 nm). The paper attributes the F2+ and F3- failures to weak lattice coupling, but no supporting calculation or alternative excited-state treatment is offered. To substantiate the generality claim, the authors should analyze whether the two failures are consistent with the half-electron ΔSCF bias or with a missing physical mechanism, rather than treating them as isolated exceptions.
  3. [Methods and Computational Details] No convergence tests are reported for supercell size (a single 216-atom Gamma-only cell), plane-wave cutoff, or finite-size corrections for charged defects beyond the brief charge-correction term in the generalized Koopmans' theorem section. For a polar insulator with strongly localized defect states, supercell-size effects on vertical transition energies can be a few tenths of an eV. At minimum, a comparison of the F0 and F2 optical transitions in a 3×3×3 supercell with a larger cell (or a 2×2×2 k-point sampling) should be provided to establish numerical error bars for the reported wavelengths and for the ~100 nm accuracy claim.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Introduction / Figure 1] The text states that the green and red emission bands at 528 nm and 670 nm are associated with the M band (F2 center), while Figure 1's caption says the ~525 nm and ~650 nm peaks correspond to the F2 center and F3+ center, respectively. Please reconcile these attributions.
  2. [Generalized Koopmans' theorem] The sentence 'the vertical ionization energy along the 14 eV isoline, chosen to reproduce the LiF bandgap, expectedly remains constant' would benefit from a one-sentence justification, since the vertical ionization energy is generally a function of αHSE and μHSE even at fixed band gap.
  3. [Table I] The spin states in Table I are listed as S=0, 1/2, 1 in a column, but the column header is not explicit; consider adding a clear 'S' heading and placing all transitions for each defect in a single contiguous block.
  4. [References] References [37] and [56] are the same article (Okuda, J. Phys. Soc. Japan 16, 1746 (1961)) and should be merged or cited separately with distinct note.
  5. [Section 'Spin-dependent Jahn-Teller instability'] The heading uses 'Jahn-Teller' for an instability that is avoided by half-electron occupations, but no Jahn-Teller energy or distortion coordinate is actually computed; a more neutral heading such as 'Excited-state occupation instabilities' would describe the content more accurately.
  6. [Throughout] Several minor typographical issues appear, including 'an M -center formed from two associated F -centers' (missing 'from'), 'V ASP' spacing in the VASP program name, and inconsistent hyphenation of 'generalized Koopmans’ theorem.'

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: optical predictions are compared against, not fitted to, experimental wavelengths; gKT and band-gap tuning target bulk and ground-state quantities, not the optical transitions.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained against external benchmarks. The HSE parameters alpha and mu are selected along the 14.0 eV band-gap isoline of bulk LiF, and the per-defect generalized Koopmans' theorem condition aligns ground-state HOMO/LUMO defect levels with ionization energies of the N and N-1 electron systems; these targets are distinct from the vertical absorption/emission energies later computed by Delta-SCF. Table I lists experimental wavelengths only as comparison columns, and the paper explicitly reports its two failures (F2+ and F3-) rather than hiding them, which is inconsistent with a fitted-input-then-renamed-prediction pattern. The half-electron two-spin-channel Delta-SCF construction, although acknowledged as 'a crude representation of the correlated state,' is an approximation whose accuracy is debatable; an uncontrolled bias is a correctness risk, not circularity. Self-citations to references [28] and [70] describe a workflow and a standard Delta-SCF practice, but the quantitative claims rest on VASP calculations tabulated against independent experimental values, so no load-bearing argument reduces to a self-citation. Thus no circular step can be exhibited.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard hybrid-DFT methodology, the gKT tuning criterion, experimental peak assignments, the delta-SCF half-electron approximation, and the adequacy of a 216-atom Gamma-point supercell. The only numbers fitted to data are alpha_HSE and mu_HSE; no new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (2)
  • alpha_HSE (exact exchange fraction) = 0.368 to 0.697 depending on defect (Table I)
    Tuned along the 14.0 eV band-gap isoline to satisfy the generalized Koopmans' theorem for each defect and charge state; not determined from first principles.
  • mu_HSE (range separation parameter) = 0.010 to 0.473 (Table I)
    Co-tuned with alpha_HSE to keep the LiF band gap at 14.0 eV while satisfying gKT; values vary strongly across charge states.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption HSE hybrid functional with PAW pseudopotentials, as implemented in VASP, provides accurate ground-state total energies and forces for LiF and its defects.
    Invoked throughout; the paper tunes HSE parameters but does not compare against higher-level methods such as quantum Monte Carlo or validate against exact results. Section 'HSE Tuning of the LiF Band Gap'.
  • domain assumption The generalized Koopmans' theorem criterion, with charge correction, is a valid constraint for selecting HSE parameters.
    Borrowed from Deak et al. [64,65]; the paper uses a practical variant that aligns delta_HOMO(N) and delta_LUMO(N-1). Section 'Generalized Koopman's Theorem'.
  • domain assumption The experimental assignment of optical absorption and emission peaks to specific defect charge states is correct.
    Used as the benchmark in Table I; based on prior experimental literature [38,74,77] and the paper's own PL spectrum, not established by the paper itself. Section 'Color Centers in LiF'.
  • domain assumption Constrained occupation (delta-SCF) with half-electron excitations yields vertical transition energies accurate enough for the claims.
    The paper relies on this method for all optical transitions and explicitly calls it a crude representation of the correlated state. Section 'Details of optical properties'.
  • domain assumption A 216-atom Gamma-point supercell with no finite-size correction is large enough to converge the computed defect levels and transition energies.
    The authors state the supercell is chosen to minimize periodic-image errors, but no convergence study is reported. Section 'F-center' computational details.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of First-principles Spin and Optical Properties of Vacancy Clusters in Lithium Fluoride." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/E47Z7SGR

@misc{pith2026241221060,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: First-principles Spin and Optical Properties of Vacancy Clusters in Lithium Fluoride},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/E47Z7SGR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.21060}
}
read the original abstract

Vacancy-cluster color centers in lithium fluoride have been studied in detail both theoretically and experimentally for over a century, giving rise to various applications in solid-state lasers, broadband photonic devices, and radiation dosimeters. These color centers are also attractive candidate platforms for applications in quantum information science, due to their spin properties and strong coupling to the crystal lattice, which allows their properties to be easily tuned. Here we present hybrid functional calculations of common vacancy defects in lithium fluoride, including their energetic, spin, and optical properties. We show that for a wide range of hybrid functional parameters tuned to match the experimental band gap, certain defects have little variation in their predicted optical properties. We further demonstrate that the parameters needed to satisfy the generalized Koopman's theorem and correctly position defect levels within the gap, can vary dramatically, even for different charge states of the same defect. Our work establishes the accuracy of the computationally lightweight hybrid-functional approach for predicting the optical and energetic properties of color centers in polar materials.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.21060 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Photoluminescence spectrum of LiF, showing two [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Electronic structures of vacancy centers in LiF. Formation energies as a function of chemical potential (a) for each [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Contour plot (a) showing the band gap of LiF as a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Plots of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

71 extracted references · 52 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Seitz, Rev

    F. Seitz, Rev. Mod. Phys. 18, 384 (1946), URL https: //link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/RevModPhys.18.384

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.18.384 1946

  2. [2]

    Piacentini, D

    M. Piacentini, D. W. Lynch, and C. G. Olson, Phys. Rev. B 13, 5530 (1976), URL https://link.aps.org/ doi/10.1103/PhysRevB.13.5530

    doi:10.1103/physrevb.13.5530 1976

  3. [3]

    Nichelatti, M

    E. Nichelatti, M. Piccinini, A. Ampollini, L. Picardi, C. Ronsivalle, F. Bonfigli, M. Vincenti, and R. Mon- tereali, Optical Materials 89, 414 (2019), ISSN 0925- 3467, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ article/pii/S0925346719300758

    work page 2019

  4. [5]

    V. V. Ter-Mikirtychev and T. Tsuboi, Progress in Quantum Electronics 20, 219 (1996), ISSN 0079- 6727, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ article/pii/0079672796000018

    arXiv 1996

  5. [6]

    Montereali, F

    R. Montereali, F. Bonfigli, E. Nichelatti, V. Nigro, M. Piccinini, and M. Vincenti, Journal of Physics: Con- ference Series 2298, 012001 (2022), URL https://dx. doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/2298/1/012001

    work page doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2298/1/012001 2022

  6. [8]

    Montereali, A

    R. Montereali, A. Ampollini, L. Picardi, C. Ronsivalle, F. Bonfigli, S. Libera, E. Nichelatti, M. Piccinini, and M. Vincenti, IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering 169, 012012 (2017), URL https://dx. doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/169/1/012012

    work page doi:10.1088/1757-899x/169/1/012012 2017

  7. [9]

    B. K. Cogswell, A. Goel, and P. Huber, Phys. Rev. Appl. 16, 064060 (2021), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/ 10.1103/PhysRevApplied.16.064060

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevapplied.16.064060 2021

  8. [10]

    Ottmer, Zeitschrift f¨ ur Physik 46, 798 (1928), ISSN 0044-3328, URL https://doi.org/10.1007/ BF01391017

    R. Ottmer, Zeitschrift f¨ ur Physik 46, 798 (1928), ISSN 0044-3328, URL https://doi.org/10.1007/ BF01391017

    work page 1928

Show all 71 references
  1. [11]

    Pringsheim and P

    P. Pringsheim and P. Yuster, Phys. Rev. 78, 293 (1950), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRev.78.293

    1950

  2. [12]

    C. C. Klick, Phys. Rev. 79, 894 (1950), URL https: //link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRev.79.894.2

    1950 doi

  3. [13]

    Uchida and H

    Y. Uchida and H. Yagi, Journal of the 9 Physical Society of Japan 7, 109 (1952), https://doi.org/10.1143/JPSJ.7.109, URL https: //doi.org/10.1143/JPSJ.7.109

    1952 doi

  4. [14]

    C. J. Delbecq and P. Pringsheim, The Jour- nal of Chemical Physics 21, 794 (1953), ISSN 0021-9606, https://pubs.aip.org/aip/jcp/article- pdf/21/5/794/18803101/794 1 online.pdf, URL https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1699035

    1953 doi

  5. [15]

    Bate and C

    R. Bate and C. Heer, Journal of Physics and Chemistry of Solids 7, 14 (1958), ISSN 0022- 3697, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ article/pii/0022369758901768

    1958

  6. [16]

    J. J. Gilman and W. G. Johnston, Jour- nal of Applied Physics 29, 877 (1958), ISSN 0021-8979, https://pubs.aip.org/aip/jap/article- pdf/29/6/877/18318182/877 1 online.pdf, URL https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1723322

    1958 doi

  7. [17]

    Kato, S.-i

    R. Kato, S.-i. Nakashima, K. Nakamura, and Y. Uchida, Journal of the Physical Society of Japan 15, 2111 (1960), https://doi.org/10.1143/JPSJ.15.2111, URL https:// doi.org/10.1143/JPSJ.15.2111

    1960 doi

  8. [18]

    D. A. Wiegand and R. Smoluchowski, Phys. Rev. 116, 1069 (1959), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRev.116.1069

    1959

  9. [19]

    Fischer, Zeitschrift f¨ ur Physik 154, 534 (1959), ISSN 0044-3328, URL https://doi.org/10.1007/ BF01337564

    F. Fischer, Zeitschrift f¨ ur Physik 154, 534 (1959), ISSN 0044-3328, URL https://doi.org/10.1007/ BF01337564

    1959

  10. [20]

    N. F. Mott and R. W. Gurney, Electronic Processes in Ionic Crystals (Oxford University Press, 1948)

    1948

  11. [21]

    J. V. R. Kaufman and C. D. Clark, The Jour- nal of Chemical Physics 38, 1388 (1963), ISSN 0021-9606, https://pubs.aip.org/aip/jcp/article- pdf/38/6/1388/18828455/1388 1 online.pdf, URL https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1733863

    1963 doi

  12. [22]

    G¨ orlich, H

    P. G¨ orlich, H. Karras, and G. K¨ otitz, physica status solidi (b) 3, 1629 (1963), https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/pssb.19630030909, URL https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10. 1002/pssb.19630030909

    1963 doi

  13. [23]

    Nahum and D

    J. Nahum and D. A. Wiegand, Phys. Rev. 154, 817 (1967), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRev.154.817

    1967

  14. [24]

    V. A. Norman, S. Majety, Z. Wang, W. H. Casey, N. Curro, and M. Radulaski, InfoMat 3, 869 (2021), https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/inf2.12128, URL https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10. 1002/inf2.12128

    2021 doi

  15. [25]

    M. R. Wasielewski, M. D. E. Forbes, N. L. Frank, K. Kowalski, G. D. Scholes, J. Yuen-Zhou, M. A. Baldo, D. E. Freedman, R. H. Goldsmith, T. Good- son, et al., Nature Reviews Chemistry 4, 490 (2020), ISSN 2397-3358, URL https://doi.org/10. 1038/s41570-020-0200-5

    2020

  16. [26]

    S. L. Bayliss, D. W. Laorenza, P. J. Mintun, B. D. Kovos, D. E. Freedman, and D. D. Awschalom, Science 370, 1309 (2020), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/science.abb9352, URL https://www.science.org/doi/abs/10.1126/ science.abb9352

    2020 doi

  17. [27]

    Duarte, I

    M. Duarte, I. M. Ranieri, and M. M. Vieira, Optical Ma- terials 3, 269 (1994), URL https://doi.org/10.1016/ 0925-3467(94)90040-x

    1994

  18. [28]

    Ivanov, A

    V. Ivanov, A. Ivanov, J. Simoni, P. Parajuli, B. Kant´ e, T. Schenkel, and L. Tan, Database of semiconductor point-defect properties for applications in quantum tech- nologies (2023), 2303.16283, URL https://arxiv.org/ abs/2303.16283

    2023 arXiv

  19. [29]

    Xiong, C

    Y. Xiong, C. Bourgois, N. Sheremetyeva, W. Chen, D. Dahliah, H. Song, J. Zheng, S. M. Griffin, A. Sipahigil, and G. Hautier, Science Advances 9, eadh8617 (2023), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/sciadv.adh8617, URL https://www.science.org/doi/abs/10.1126/ sciadv.adh8617

    2023 doi

  20. [30]

    Davidsson, V

    J. Davidsson, V. Iv´ ady, R. Armiento, and I. A. Abrikosov, Computer Physics Communications 269, 108091 (2021), ISSN 0010-4655, URL https://www.sciencedirect. com/science/article/pii/S0010465521002034

    2021

  21. [31]

    Heyd and G

    J. Heyd and G. E. Scuseria, The Journal of Chemical Physics 121, 1187 (2004), ISSN 0021-9606, https://pubs.aip.org/aip/jcp/article- pdf/121/3/1187/19171502/1187 1 online.pdf, URL https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1760074

    2004 doi

  22. [32]

    W. H. Duerig and J. J. Markham, Phys. Rev. 88, 1043 (1952), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRev.88.1043

    1952

  23. [33]

    Petroff, Zeitschrift f¨ ur Physik 127, 443 (1950), ISSN 0044-3328, URL https://doi.org/10.1007/ BF01329841

    S. Petroff, Zeitschrift f¨ ur Physik 127, 443 (1950), ISSN 0044-3328, URL https://doi.org/10.1007/ BF01329841

    1950

  24. [34]

    H. F. Ivey, Phys. Rev. 72, 341 (1947), URL https:// link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRev.72.341

    1947 doi

  25. [35]

    C. Z. van Doorn, Phys. Rev. Lett. 4, 236 (1960), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.4. 236

    1960 doi

  26. [36]

    B. J. Faraday, H. Rabin, and W. D. Compton, Phys. Rev. Lett. 7, 433 (1961), URL https://link.aps.org/ doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.7.433

    1961 doi

  27. [38]

    Baldacchini, Journal of Luminescence 100, 333 (2002), ISSN 0022-2313, URL https: //www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S002223130200460X

    G. Baldacchini, Journal of Luminescence 100, 333 (2002), ISSN 0022-2313, URL https: //www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S002223130200460X

    2002

  28. [39]

    Seitz, Rev

    F. Seitz, Rev. Mod. Phys. 26, 7 (1954), URL https: //link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/RevModPhys.26.7

    1954 doi

  29. [40]

    R. C. Chaney, Phys. Rev. B14, 4578 (1976), URL https: //link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevB.14.4578

    1976 doi

  30. [41]

    M. R. Pederson and B. M. Klein, Phys. Rev. B 37, 10319 (1988), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevB.37.10319

    1988

  31. [42]

    Mallia, R

    G. Mallia, R. Orlando, C. Roetti, P. Ugliengo, and R. Dovesi, Phys. Rev. B 63, 235102 (2001), URL https: //link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevB.63.235102

    2001 doi

  32. [43]

    K¨ olmel and C

    C. K¨ olmel and C. S. Ewig, The Journal of Physical Chemistry B 105, 8538 (2001), https://doi.org/10.1021/jp012155e, URL https: //doi.org/10.1021/jp012155e

    2001 doi

  33. [44]

    C. S. Ewig, J. Tellinghuisen, and M. H. Mendenhall, Chemical Physics Letters 188, 501 (1992), ISSN 0009- 2614, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ article/pii/0009261492808567

    1992

  34. [45]

    Karsai, P

    F. Karsai, P. Tiwald, R. Laskowski, F. Tran, D. Koller, S. Gr¨ afe, J. Burgd¨ orfer, L. Wirtz, and P. Blaha, Phys. Rev. B 89, 125429 (2014), URL https://link.aps.org/ doi/10.1103/PhysRevB.89.125429

    2014 doi

  35. [46]

    C. S. Wang and B. M. Klein, Phys. Rev. B 24, 3393 (1981), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevB.24.3393. 10

    1981

  36. [47]

    Chen and A

    W. Chen and A. Pasquarello, Phys. Rev. B 88, 115104 (2013), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevB.88.115104

    2013

  37. [49]

    Momma and F

    K. Momma and F. Izumi, Journal of Applied Crystallog- raphy 44, 1272 (2011), URL https://doi.org/10.1107/ S0021889811038970

    2011

  38. [50]

    V. Wang, N. Xu, J.-C. Liu, G. Tang, and W.-T. Geng, Computer Physics Communications 267, 108033 (2021), ISSN 0010-4655, URL https://www.sciencedirect. com/science/article/pii/S0010465521001454

    2021

  39. [51]

    Meyer and R

    A. Meyer and R. F. Wood, Phys. Rev. 133, A1436 (1964), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRev.133.A1436

    1964

  40. [52]

    B. J. Faraday, H. Rabin, and W. D. Compton, Phys. Rev. Lett. 7, 57 (1961), URL https://link.aps.org/ doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.7.57

    1961 doi

  41. [53]

    T. Tsuboi, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B: Beam Interactions with Mate- rials and Atoms 166-167, 804 (2000), ISSN 0168- 583X, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ article/pii/S0168583X99010605

    2000

  42. [54]

    Lisitsyna, physica status solidi c 4, 1114 (2007), https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/pssc.200673715, URL https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10

    L. Lisitsyna, physica status solidi c 4, 1114 (2007), https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/pssc.200673715, URL https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10. 1002/pssc.200673715

    2007 doi

  43. [55]

    L. A. Lisitsyna, Russian Physics Journal 37, 1024 (1994), ISSN 1573-9228, URL https://doi.org/10. 1007/BF00559210

    1994

  44. [56]

    Okuda, Journal of the Physical Society of Japan 16, 1746 (1961), https://doi.org/10.1143/JPSJ.16.1746, URL https://doi.org/10.1143/JPSJ.16.1746

    A. Okuda, Journal of the Physical Society of Japan 16, 1746 (1961), https://doi.org/10.1143/JPSJ.16.1746, URL https://doi.org/10.1143/JPSJ.16.1746

    1961 doi

  45. [57]

    Duarte, I

    M. Duarte, I. M. Ranieri, and M. M. Vieira, Opti- cal Materials 3, 269 (1994), ISSN 0925-3467, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/ pii/092534679490040X

    1994

  46. [58]

    Tsuboi, Applied Physics B 69, 81 (1999), ISSN 1432- 0649, URL https://doi.org/10.1007/s003400050773

    T. Tsuboi, Applied Physics B 69, 81 (1999), ISSN 1432- 0649, URL https://doi.org/10.1007/s003400050773

    1999 doi

  47. [59]

    Wang and C

    S.-F. Wang and C. Chu, Phys. Rev. 147, 527 (1966), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRev. 147.527

    1966 doi

  48. [60]

    Sati, physica status solidi (b) 73, 353 (1976), https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/pssb.2220730135, URL https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10

    R. Sati, physica status solidi (b) 73, 353 (1976), https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/pssb.2220730135, URL https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10. 1002/pssb.2220730135

    1976 doi

  49. [61]

    Baldacchini, M

    G. Baldacchini, M. Cremona, G. d’Auria, R. M. Montereali, and V. Kalinov, Phys. Rev. B 54, 17508 (1996), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevB.54.17508

    1996

  50. [62]

    The Supplemental Material at [URL will be inserted by publisher] contains further details about the defect prop- erties and calculations

  51. [63]

    C. S. Wang and B. M. Klein, Phys. Rev. B 24, 3417 (1981), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevB.24.3417

    1981

  52. [64]

    De´ ak, B

    P. De´ ak, B. Aradi, T. Frauenheim, E. Janz´ en, and A. Gali, Phys. Rev. B 81, 153203 (2010), URL https: //link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevB.81.153203

    2010 doi

  53. [65]

    De´ ak, M

    P. De´ ak, M. Lorke, B. Aradi, and T. Frauenheim, Phys. Rev. B 99, 085206 (2019), URL https://link.aps.org/ doi/10.1103/PhysRevB.99.085206

    2019 doi

  54. [66]

    Iv´ ady, I

    V. Iv´ ady, I. A. Abrikosov, E. Janz´ en, and A. Gali, Phys. Rev. B 87, 205201 (2013), URL https://link.aps.org/ doi/10.1103/PhysRevB.87.205201

    2013 doi

  55. [68]

    Bernardi, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 32, 385501 (2020), URL https://dx.doi.org/10.1088/ 1361-648X/ab9409

    M. Bernardi, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 32, 385501 (2020), URL https://dx.doi.org/10.1088/ 1361-648X/ab9409

    2020

  56. [69]

    A. Gali, E. Janz´ en, P. De´ ak, G. Kresse, and E. Kaxi- ras, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 186404 (2009), URL https:// link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.103.186404

    2009 doi

  57. [71]

    R. M. Montereali, F. Bonfigli, F. Menchini, and M. A. Vincenti, Low Temperature Physics 38, 779 (2012), ISSN 1063-777X, https://pubs.aip.org/aip/ltp/article- pdf/38/8/779/15917553/779 1 online.pdf, URL https: //doi.org/10.1063/1.4740241

    2012 doi

  58. [72]

    G. m. H. Thiering and A. Gali, Phys. Rev. B 96, 081115 (2017), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevB.96.081115

    2017

  59. [73]

    ´Ad´ am Gali, Nanophotonics8, 1907 (2019), URL https: //doi.org/10.1515/nanoph-2019-0154

    2019 doi

  60. [74]

    L. Bosi, C. Bussolati, and G. Spinolo, Physics Letters A 32, 159 (1970), ISSN 0375-9601, URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/ pii/0375960170902525

    1970

  61. [75]

    Lany, physica status solidi (b) 248, 1052 (2011), URL https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10

    S. Lany, physica status solidi (b) 248, 1052 (2011), URL https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10. 1002/pssb.201046274

    2011

  62. [76]

    Lany and A

    S. Lany and A. Zunger, Phys. Rev. B 80, 085202 (2009), URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevB. 80.085202

    2009 doi

  63. [77]

    Kurobori, T

    T. Kurobori, T. Kanasaki, Y. Imai, and N. Takeuchi, Journal of Physics C: Solid State Physics 21, L397 (1988), URL https://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0022-3719/ 21/12/009

    1988 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.