Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 41 references

Epitaxial Sr-doped nickelate perovskite thin films and Ruddlesden-Popper phases grown by magnetron sputtering

T0 review · 4 major / 4 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 Epitaxial Nd0.8Sr0.2NiO3 perovskite films can be grown by off-axis RF magnetron sputtering at 520–560 °C, while 620–670 °C growth yields the Ruddlesden-Popper phase and NiO on SrTiO3(001).

desk verdict A useful sputtering route to nickelate perovskites, but the 'temperature-only' phase selection claim needs composition data before it fully lands. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.21110 v1 pith:VAB665GE submitted 2024-12-30 cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Changhwan Kim , Min Young Jung , Yeong Gwang Khim , Kyeong Jun Lee , Young Jun Chang , Seo Hyoung Chang This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords nickelatethinfilmsSr-dopedNdNiO3perovskitephaseRuddlesden-Popperoff-axisRFmagnetronsputteringepitaxialgrowthselectionmetal-insulatortransition
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

Sr-doped nickelate perovskite films, the precursors for infinite-layer superconducting nickelates, have been difficult to grow with sputtering because the required high nickel oxidation states are unstable and plasma damage degrades the films. This paper shows that with off-axis RF magnetron sputtering at low power, substrate temperature alone selects the phase: epitaxial Nd0.8Sr0.2NiO3 perovskite forms at 520 °C and 560 °C, whereas 620 °C and 670 °C produce the Ruddlesden-Popper phase (Nd,Sr)2NiO4 together with NiO on SrTiO3(001). The outcome is consistent with the bulk rare-earth-nickelate phase diagram extrapolated to the sputtering oxygen pressure, which predicts a decomposition boundary near 600–800 °C. If the claim holds, sputtering becomes a scalable route to both nickelate perovskite and Ruddlesden-Popper films, broadening access to materials for metal-insulator transition and high-pressure superconductivity studies.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is substrate-temperature-controlled nickel oxidation state during off-axis RF magnetron sputtering at 50 W with an Ar:O2 ratio of 3:1 and 50 mTorr total pressure. The off-axis geometry reduces the kinetic energy of plasma species at the substrate, allowing slow, low-temperature epitaxial growth. The phase outcome is governed by whether the nickel can be stabilized in the high oxidation states needed for the perovskite: perovskite Nd0.8Sr0.2NiO3 requires Ni3+ (and some Ni4+), while higher growth temperatures trigger decomposition into Ni2+-based Ruddlesden-Popper (Nd,Sr)2NiO4 and NiO, in line with the bulk rare-earth-nickelate phase diagram. The Ruddlesden-Popper phase, a layered structure with additional rock-salt-type layers between perovskite blocks, appears here with an out-of-plane spacing of about 12.13 Å.

What would settle it

Grow the same NSNO film at 620 °C while raising the oxygen partial pressure, for example by increasing the O2:Ar flow ratio at fixed total pressure, and check whether the perovskite phase is stabilized as the thermodynamic picture predicts; if the perovskite remains absent or the boundary does not move with oxygen pressure, the proposed thermodynamic control of phase selection is wrong.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

We report that epitaxial Sr-doped nickelate perovskite thin films, Nd1-xSrxNiO3, can be grown on SrTiO3(001) by off-axis RF magnetron sputtering when the substrate temperature is kept at 520 °C or 560 °C. At 620 °C and 670 °C the same deposition conditions instead produce the Ruddlesden-Popper phase (Nd,Sr)2NiO4 together with NiO, with a small amount of (Nd0.8Sr0.2)4Ni3O10 at 620 °C. The perovskite films are fully coherent and tensile strained to the substrate, with out-of-plane lattice parameters of 3.81 Å at 520 °C and 3.79 Å at 560 °C. The 560 °C film shows metallic transport with a metal-insulator transition near 90 K, whereas the higher-temperature films are insulating with activation energies of 79 meV and 131 meV. X-ray photoemission spectroscopy shows that the Ni2+/Ni3+ ratio marks the phase boundary, with Ni3+ content increasing as the growth temperature decreases.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the bulk rare-earth-nickelate thermodynamic phase diagram, evaluated at the nominal sputtering oxygen pressure, controls the phase formed in the plasma, and that the film's oxygen partial pressure and Nd/Sr-to-Ni cation stoichiometry match the nominal growth conditions; neither quantity is measured in situ.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Scalable sputtering can replace pulsed laser deposition and molecular beam epitaxy for epitaxial perovskite nickelate growth, lowering the barrier for large-area films.
  • Under fixed gas pressure and ratio, growth temperature alone determines whether the perovskite or the Ruddlesden-Popper-plus-NiO phase set appears.
  • The 560 °C film reproduces the expected metallic behavior and a metal-insulator transition near 90 K, so the sputtered perovskite films are electronically comparable to bulk Sr-doped NdNiO3.
  • The Ruddlesden-Popper films grown at 620–670 °C are insulating and follow activated conduction with activation energies of 79 meV and 131 meV, consistent with a mixture of RP phase and NiO.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Extension beyond the paper: if the phase boundary is thermodynamic, raising the oxygen partial pressure at fixed temperature should push the perovskite-to-RP transition to higher temperature; mapping that shift would directly test the proposed mechanism.
  • Extension beyond the paper: the 50 W off-axis geometry is likely load-bearing; at higher RF power or in an on-axis geometry, plasma damage may move the phase boundary or degrade crystallinity, so the reported temperature window may not transfer directly.
  • Extension beyond the paper: the 4.7–5.2% volume expansion of the perovskite films relative to bulk hints at cation off-stoichiometry or oxygen vacancies; measuring absolute compositions would determine whether the two-phase target actually delivers the nominal Nd/Sr and Ni contents.
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

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports the growth of Nd1-xSrxNiO3 (NSNO) thin films on SrTiO3(001) by off-axis RF magnetron sputtering, with substrate temperatures varied from 520 °C to 670 °C. Based on HR-XRD, the authors identify perovskite NSNO at 520 °C and 560 °C, and a mixture of the Ruddlesden-Popper phase (Nd,Sr)2NiO4, NiO, and possibly (Nd,Sr)4Ni3O10 at 620 °C and 670 °C. RSM shows the perovskite films to be epitaxial and coherently strained. Transport measurements show a metal-insulator transition near 90 K for the 560 °C sample and insulating, activated behavior with activation energies of ~79 meV and ~131 meV for the two higher-temperature samples. XPS indicates higher Ni3+ content in the lower-temperature films. The authors argue that the perovskite-to-RP decomposition boundary follows the bulk nickelate phase diagram and that substrate temperature alone controls the phase selection. The central claim is that temperature is the controlling parameter for phase formation in this sputtering system.

Significance. If the central claim is established, the work provides a practical route to perovskite and Ruddlesden-Popper nickelate films using a scalable sputtering method, which is of clear interest to the oxide-electronics community. The structural characterization is careful: HR-XRD and reciprocal space mapping support the perovskite phase assignment and epitaxial relationship, and the transport data are consistent with the expected MIT in Sr-doped nickelates. The paper also offers a useful empirical map of growth temperatures for phase selection. However, the as-stated claim that temperature alone controls phase selection is currently under-supported because the film cation stoichiometry is never measured, and the quantitative transport and structural parameters are reported without uncertainty estimates.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 3, Fig. 1(a) discussion] The central claim that substrate temperature alone selects the perovskite versus RP+NiO phase is not established because the cation stoichiometry (Nd, Sr, Ni ratio) of the films is never measured. The sputtering target is a two-phase composite of (Nd0.8Sr0.2)2NiO4 and NiO, and differential sputtering yields, temperature-dependent sticking coefficients, and re-evaporation can all change the film composition with growth temperature. If the high-temperature films become A-site enriched, the formation of RP (A/B = 2:1) plus NiO could occur even if the perovskite were thermodynamically stable. The paper itself, in the discussion of the 4.7-5.2% volume expansion of NSNO1/NSNO2, attributes the expansion to 'cation stoichiometry and oxygen vacancies' without measuring either. Composition measurements (e.g., RBS, EDX, or quantified XPS) on films grown at 520, 560, 620, and 670 °C are required to support the temperature-only phase-selection claim.
  2. [Section 3, Fig. 1(a) discussion] The extrapolation of the bulk La-Ni-O phase diagram to Nd0.8Sr0.2NiO3 films grown under sputtering plasma conditions is a load-bearing step that is not quantitatively justified. The paper states that the phase boundary can appear at 600-800 °C 'under our oxygen partial pressure of the sputtering condition, e.g., 1.6 × 10-5 bar,' but the actual oxygen partial pressure at the substrate surface in an RF plasma is not measured, and the plasma contains energetic species that can drive non-equilibrium oxidation. The authors should either measure the effective oxygen chemical potential during growth (or otherwise justify the assumption) or explicitly reframe the phase boundary as an empirical observation rather than a prediction from the bulk phase diagram.
  3. [Section 3, Fig. 3] The quantitative transport results are presented without uncertainty or reproducibility information. The activation energies E_a for NSNO3 and NSNO4 are reported as 79 meV and 131 meV with no error bars, and T_MI for NSNO2 is given as approximately 90 K also without an uncertainty. Since only one film is reported per growth temperature and no repeated growths are described, it is impossible to judge whether the differences between NSNO3 and NSNO4, or the exact position of the phase boundary, are statistically meaningful. At minimum, the authors should report the number of samples measured, the standard deviation or fitting error of each extracted quantity, and ideally repeat growths at the boundary temperatures.
  4. [Section 3, Fig. 4] The XPS analysis is used to support the valence-state interpretation, but the manuscript acknowledges that the Ni 2p3/2 fitting is limited by the negative charge transfer nature of rare-earth nickelates. The qualitative statement that 'the Ni3+ content increases steadily as the growth temperature decreases' is not backed by any numerical values or fitting parameters, and no cation stoichiometry is derived from the XPS data. Because the valence assignments (Ni2+, Ni3+, Ni4+) are central to the proposed mechanism of Ni2+ phase stabilization at high temperature, the authors should provide the fitted peak areas, the resulting Ni2+/Ni3+ ratios with uncertainties, and a discussion of how the fitting constraints handle the known satellite and screening effects.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Reference list] Reference [22] is cited in the text for the bulk Nd2NiO4 lattice parameter (12.11 Å) but is missing from the reference list; the list jumps from [21] to [23]. This needs to be corrected.
  2. [Section 3, Fig. 2 caption and text] The phrase 'within the error-bar, 0.05%' is unclear: the authors should specify what error bar is being used (e.g., the RSM pixel resolution or the standard deviation of multiple measurements).
  3. [Section 3, Fig. 1(b) paragraph] There are minor typographical errors: 'thinkness fringes' should be 'thickness fringes', and 'out-of-lane lattice parameter' should be 'out-of-plane lattice parameter'.
  4. [Section 3, XPS paragraph] The text says the satellite peak at approximately 972 eV corresponds to the O K-L1 edge; however, the O KLL Auger features typically appear at kinetic energies near 510 eV, so this assignment should be double-checked or clarified.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity found; the phase diagram argument is external and the resistivity fits are descriptive.

full rationale

This is an experimental synthesis and characterization paper with no derivation chain that reduces to its own inputs. The central observation (perovskite phase at 520 and 560 °C, RP+NiO phases at 620 and 670 °C) is made directly from HR-XRD data. The bulk La-Ni-O phase diagram from Refs. [19-21] is used as an external interpretive framework to rationalize the observed phase boundary, not fitted from the films; the phrase 'prediction' refers to an extrapolated bulk stability window that is independent of the film data. The Arrhenius activation energies in Eq. (1) are descriptive fits used to compare insulating films with literature values, not predictions forced by the model. XPS Ni2+/Ni3+ ratios are corroborating evidence, not the basis of the phase assignment. The self-citations ([18], [37], [38]) concern beamline measurements and machine-learning suggestions, and are not load-bearing. Potential concerns, such as unmeasured cation stoichiometry from a two-phase target, are correctness or robustness risks, not circularity. Therefore no specific circular step can be quoted, and the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new entities. The load-bearing assumptions are about the applicability of bulk phase diagrams to sputtered films and about the fidelity of film stoichiometry to the two-phase target. The free parameters are activation energies fitted to transport data, used descriptively.

free parameters (2)
  • Activation energy E_a for NSNO3 = 79 meV
    Fitted from Arrhenius plot of resistivity versus temperature for the insulating NSNO3 film (Fig. 3c).
  • Activation energy E_a for NSNO4 = 131 meV
    Fitted from Arrhenius plot of resistivity versus temperature for the insulating NSNO4 film (Fig. 3c).
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Bulk rare-earth nickelate phase diagrams (La-Ni-O) apply to Nd0.8Sr0.2NiO3 under sputtering plasma conditions.
    Used to interpret the observed perovskite-to-RP decomposition boundary as thermodynamic, but the sputtering environment is non-equilibrium and oxygen partial pressure is only inferred.
  • domain assumption The two-phase target (Nd0.8Sr0.2)2NiO4 + NiO yields the intended Nd/Sr to Ni 1:1 stoichiometry in the films.
    No composition measurement (e.g., RBS or EDX) is provided to verify film stoichiometry, so the film composition is assumed to match the target design.
  • domain assumption The small XRD shoulder near STO (002) corresponds to (Nd0.8Sr0.2)4Ni3O10.
    The assignment is based on a shoulder-like peak without reciprocal space mapping or detailed structural refinement, so it is an interpretation rather than a firmly established phase identification.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Epitaxial Sr-doped nickelate perovskite thin films and Ruddlesden-Popper phases grown by magnetron sputtering." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/VAB665GE

@misc{pith2026241221110,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Epitaxial Sr-doped nickelate perovskite thin films and Ruddlesden-Popper phases grown by magnetron sputtering},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/VAB665GE}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.21110}
}
read the original abstract

Sr-doped nickelate, Nd1-xSrxNiO3 (NSNO), perovskite thin films and Ruddlesden-Popper (RP) phases are actively investigated because of their physical properties, such as the metal-insulator transition and superconductivity. However, achieving epitaxial growth of NSNO perovskite and RP phase films in a sputtering system is challenging compared to pulsed laser deposition and molecular beam epitaxy, due to the difficulty in stabilizing nickel oxidation states and minimizing structural defects. Here, we used an off-axis radio frequency (RF) magnetron sputtering to fabricate epitaxial NSNO perovskite and RP phase thin films on SrTiO3 (001) substrates, systematically controlling the growth temperatures. We investigated the thermal stability of the perovskite phase and the structural and electronic characteristics of the RP phase films. These findings provide valuable insights into the synthesis of nickelate RP phase films using RF magnetron sputtering, paving the way for scalable thin films fabrication technologies.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.21110 by the authors.

Figure 4
Figure 4. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

41 extracted references · 41 canonical work pages

  1. [22]

    R. Kim, B. K. Choi, K. J. Lee, H. J. Kim, H. H. Lee, T. G. Rhee, Y . G. Khim, Y . J. Chang, S. H. Chang, Curr. Appl. Phys. 46, 70-75 (2023)

    work page 2023

  2. [1]

    Introduction Perovskite rare -earth nickelates, RNiO 3, have been intensively investigated due to their intriguing and tunable physical properties, such as metal-insulator transition (MIT), rich magnetic states, and charge disproportionation [1–3]. For instance, MIT transition temperatures, TMI, can be modulated by factors such as the ionic radius of rare...

    work page

  3. [2]

    The STO substrates were cleaned and ultrasonically washed with Isopropyl alcohol (IPA), acetone, and deionized (DI) water

    Experiment NSNO thin films were grown on (001)-oriented STO substrates using an off-axis RF sputtering system with growth temperatures controlled from 520 °C to 670 °C. The STO substrates were cleaned and ultrasonically washed with Isopropyl alcohol (IPA), acetone, and deionized (DI) water. The target (Toshima Co. Ltd.) was polycrystalline and consisted o...

    work page

  4. [3]

    4 Figure 1(a) shows a phase instability of NSNO thin films related to the possible decomposition at growth temperatures

    Results and discussion. 4 Figure 1(a) shows a phase instability of NSNO thin films related to the possible decomposition at growth temperatures. Bulk rare-earth nickelates can decompose from a perovskite to the Ruddlesden- Popper (RP) phases and NiO. For instance, it was reported that a bulk perovskite LaNiO3 was stable at the temperature lower than 1273 ...

    work page

  5. [4]

    By systematically controlling the growth temperature, we achieved the perovskite Nd1-xSrxNiO3 (NSNO) phase at 520 oC and 560 oC, as confirmed by HR- XRD

    Conclusions In summary, we fabricated epitaxial nickelate perovskite thin films grown on SrTiO 3 (STO) (001) substrate by using RF magnetron sputtering. By systematically controlling the growth temperature, we achieved the perovskite Nd1-xSrxNiO3 (NSNO) phase at 520 oC and 560 oC, as confirmed by HR- XRD. At higher growth temperatures, the formation of th...

    work page 2021

  6. [5]

    J. B. Torrance, P. Lacorre, A. Nazzal, E. J. Ansaldo, C. Niedermayer, Phys. Rev. B 45, 8209-8212 (1992)

    work page 1992

  7. [6]

    Q. Song, S. Doyle, G. A. Pan, I. E. Baggari, D. F. Segedin, D. C. Carrizales, J. Nordlander, C. Tzschaschel, J. R. Ehrets, Z. Hasan, H. El -Sherif, J. Krishna, C. Hanson, H. LaBollita, A. Bostwick, C. Jozwiak, E. Rotenberg, S.-Y . Xu, A. Lanzara, A. T. N’Diaye, C. A. Heikes, Y . Liu, H. Paik, C. M. Brooks, B. Pamuk, J. T. Heron, P. Shafer, W. D. Ratcliff,...

    work page 2023

  8. [7]

    H.-S. Kim, S. H. Park, M. J. Han, Curr. Appl. Phys. 50, 53 (2023)

    work page 2023

Show all 41 references
  1. [8]

    Osada, B

    M. Osada, B. Y . Wang, B. H. Goodge, K. Lee, H. Yoon, K. Sakuma, D. Li, M. Miura, L. F. Kourkoutis, H. Y . Hwang, Nano Lett. 20, 5735-5740 (2020)

    2020

  2. [9]

    W. Wei, D. Vu, Z. Zhang, F. J. Walker, C. H. Ahn, Sci. Adv. 9, eadh3327 (2023)

    2023

  3. [10]

    J. L. Garcia-Munoz, M. Suaaidi, M. J. Martinez-Lope, J. A. Alonso, Phys. Rev. B 52, 13563-13569 (1995)

    1995

  4. [11]

    L. Wang, L. Chang, X. Yin, A. Rusydi, L. You, Y . Zhou, L. Fang, J. Wang, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 29, 025002 (2017)

    2017

  5. [12]

    D. Li, K. Lee, B. Y . Wang, M. Osada, S. Crossley, H. R. Lee, Y . Cui, Y . Hikita, H. Y . Hwang, Nat. 572, 624- 627 (2019)

    2019

  6. [13]

    Q. Gu, Y . Li, S. Wan, H. Li, W. Guo, H. Yang, Q. Li, X. Zhu, X. Pan, Y . Nie, H. H. Wen, Nat. Commun. 11, 6027 (2020)

    2020

  7. [14]

    T. Choi, Z. Zhang, H. Kim, S. Park, J.- W. Kim, K. J. Lee, Z. Islam, U. Welp, S. H. Chang, B. J. Kim , Adv. Mater. 34, 2200639 (2022)

    2022

  8. [15]

    H. Sun, M. Huo, X. Hu, J. Li, Z. Liu, Y . Han, L. Tang, Z. Mao, P. Yang, B. Wang, J. Cheng, D.-X. Yao, G.- M. Zhang, M. Wang, Nat. 621, 493-498 (2023)

    2023

  9. [16]

    K. Lee, B. H. Goodge, D. Li, M. Osada, B. Y . Wang, Y . Cui, L. F. Kourkoutis, H. Y . Hwang, APL Mater. 8, 041107 (2020)

    2020

  10. [17]

    S. Zeng, C. S. Tang, X. Yin, C. Li, M. Li, Z. Huang, J. Hu, W. Liu, G. J. Omar, H. Jani, Z. S. Lim, K. Han, D. Wan, P. Yang, S. J. Pennycook, A. T. S. Wee, A. Ariando, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 147003 (2020)

    2020

  11. [18]

    Y . Kim, Y . Choi, S. A. Lee, W. S. Choi, K. T. Kang, Curr. Appl. Phys. 68, 113 (2024)

    2024

  12. [19]

    J. H. Lee, G. Luo, I. C. Tung, S. H. Chang, Z. Luo, M. Malshe, M. Gadre, A. Bhattacharya, S. M. Nakhmanson, J. A. Eastman, H. Hong, J. Jellinek, D. Morgan, D. D. Fong, J. W. Freeland, Nat. Mater. 13, 879-883 (2014)

    2014

  13. [20]

    L. Wang, Z. Yang, X. Yin, S. D. Taylor, X. He, C. S. Tang, M. E. Bowden, J. Zhao, J. Wang, J. Liu, D. E. Perea, L. Wangoh, A. T. S. Wee, H. Zhou, S. A. Chambers, Y . Du, Sci. Adv. 7, eabe2866 (2021)

    2021

  14. [21]

    A. A. Bassou, P. J. Machado, M. M. Gomes, B. Manjunath, R. Vilarinho, B. Silva, J. Oliveira, B. Almeida, A. Almeida, J. R. Fernandes, L. S. Fernandes, J. A. Moreira, and P. B. Tavares, Mater. Today Commun. 28, 102663 (2021)

    2021

  15. [23]

    Zinkevich, N

    M. Zinkevich, N. Solak, H. Nitsche, M. Ahrens, F. Aldinger, J. Alloys Compd. 438, 92-99 (2007)

    2007

  16. [24]

    Zinkevich, F

    M. Zinkevich, F. Aldinger, J. Alloys Compd. 375, 147-161 (2004)

    2004

  17. [25]

    Jaramillo, F

    R. Jaramillo, F. Schoofs, S. D. Ha, S. Ramanathan. J. Mater. Chem. C 1, 2455 (2013) 11

    2013

  18. [26]

    J. Bi, Y . Pei, R. Zhang, S. Peng, X. Wang, J. Sun, J. Feng, J. Yang, Y . Cao. AIP Adv. 11, 105107 (2021)

    2021

  19. [27]

    B. X. Wang, H. Zheng, E. Krivyakina, O. Chmaissem, P. P. Lopes, J. W. Lynn, L. C. Gallington, Y . Ren, S. Rosenkranz, J. F. Mitchell, D. Phelan, Phys. Rev. Materials 4, 084409 (2020)

    2020

  20. [28]

    H. Yang, Z. Wen, J. Shu, Y . Cui, Y . Chen, Y . Zhao, Solid State Commun. 336, 114420 (2021)

    2021

  21. [29]

    A. J. Hauser, E. Mikheev, N. E. Moreno, J. Hwang, J. Y . Zhang, S. Stemmer, Appl. Phys. Lett. 106, 092104 (2015)

    2015

  22. [30]

    J. L. Garcia-Munoz, J. Rodriguez-Carvajal, P. Lacorre, J. B. Torrance, Phys. Rev. B 46, 4414 (1992)

    1992

  23. [31]

    Breckenfeld, Z

    E. Breckenfeld, Z. Chen, A. R. Damodaran, L. W. Martin, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 6, 22436-22444 (2014)

    2014

  24. [32]

    J. A. Alonso, M. J. Martinez-Lope, M. A. Hidalgo, J. Solid State Chem. 116, 146-156 (1995)

    1995

  25. [33]

    Ortuno, F

    M. Ortuno, F. Estelles-Duart, A. M. Somoza, Phys. Status Solidi B 259, 2100340 (2022)

    2022

  26. [34]

    Catalan, R

    G. Catalan, R. M. Bowman, J. M. Gregg, Phys. Rev. B 62, 7892 (2000)

    2000

  27. [35]

    K. O. Egbo, C. E. Ekuma, C. P. Liu, K. M. Y u, Phys. Rev. Materials 4, 104603 (2020)

    2020

  28. [36]

    Preziosi, A

    D. Preziosi, A. Sander, A. Barthelemy, M. Bibes, AIP Adv. 7, 015210 (2017)

    2017

  29. [37]

    A. P. Grosvenor, M. C. Biesinger, R. St.C. Smart, N. S. McIntyre, Surf. Sci. 600, 1771-1779 (2006)

    2006

  30. [38]

    J. F. Marco, J. R. Gancedo, M. Gracia, J. L. Gautier, E. I. Rios, H. M. Palmer, C. Greaves, F. J. Berry, J. Mater. Chem. 11, 3087-3093 (2001)

    2001

  31. [39]

    L. Wang, J. Zhao, C. T. Kuo, B. E. Matthews, M. T. Oostrom, S. R. Spurgeon, Z. Yang, M. E. Bowden, L. W. Wangoh et al., S. J. Lee, J. S. Lee, E. J. Guo, J. Wang, S. A. Chambers, Y . Du, Phys. Rev. Materials 6, 075006 (2022)

    2022

  32. [40]

    H. J. Kim, M. Chong, T. G. Rhee, Y . G. Khim, M.-H. Jung, Y .-M. Kim, H. Y . Jeong, B. K. Choi, Y . J. Chang, Nano Converg. 10, 10 (2023)

    2023

  33. [41]

    Chong, T

    M. Chong, T. G. Rhee, Y . G. Khim, M.-H. Jung, Y .-M. Kim, H. Y , Jeong, H.-S. Kim, Y . J. Chang, H. J. Kim, Appl. Surf. Sci. 669, 160547 (2024) 12 C. Kim et al., Fig. 1. 13 C. Kim et al., Fig. 2. 14 C. Kim et al., Fig. 3. 15 C. Kim et al., Fig. 4

    2024

Pith tools

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