Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 76 references

Influence of Silicon Interlayers on Transition Layer Formation in Ti/Ni Multilayer Structures of Different Thicknesses

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 Silicon interlayers switch Ti/Ni interface chemistry from Ni3Ti intermetallic formation to titanium silicide, preserving the contrast these multilayer mirrors need.

desk verdict A competent, useful experimental study of Si interlayers in Ti/Ni multilayers, but the headline transition-layer thicknesses (1.2/0.6 nm) are slab-model fit outputs without error bars, not direct measurements. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.08569 v1 pith:6HSWDJDT submitted 2025-05-13 cond-mat.mtrl-sci

S. S. Sakhonenkov , A. U. Gaisin , A. S. Konashuk , A. V. Bugaev , R. S. Pleshkov , V. N. Polkovnikov , E. O. Filatova This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords Ti/NimultilayertransitionlayersNi3TiintermetallicsiliconinterlayertitaniumsilicideX-rayphotoelectronspectroscopyreflectometrymirrors
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 sets out to identify what actually forms where nickel meets titanium in Ti/Ni multilayer mirrors and whether ultra-thin silicon layers can prevent it. Using XPS, XRD, XRR, and magnetometry on 4 nm and 10 nm period structures, it argues that a transition layer up to 1.2 nm thick grows at the Ni-on-Ti interface and consists mainly of the intermetallic Ni3Ti, with a thinner ~0.6 nm layer at the Ti-on-Ni interface. Inserting ~0.3–0.4 nm silicon buffers replaces intermetallic formation with titanium silicide, preserving more pure Ni. The result matters for X-ray and neutron optics because transition layers degrade the optical contrast that makes Ti/Ni mirrors useful.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is a competition between two interfacial reactions: Ni + Ti forming Ni3Ti, which is thermodynamically favored and kinetically fastest among NixTi phases, versus Ti + Si forming titanium silicide, which is energetically even more favorable. The diagnostic machinery combines XPS core-level shifts (Ni 2p and Ti 2p positions and the Ni satellite splitting indicate Ni-rich intermetallic), XRD peak decomposition (Ni(111) vs Ni3Ti(004) and NiTi2(511)), XRR model fits that assign layers of NixTi and TiSiy with thicknesses, and SQUID magnetometry showing higher remanent magnetization when Ni is preserved.

What would settle it

Cross-sectional scanning transmission electron microscopy or atom-probe tomography across a Ni-on-Ti interface would directly test whether a roughly 1.2 nm layer of stoichiometric Ni3Ti exists as a plateau in the elemental profile; if the measured profile shows only a graded concentration change without a 3:1 Ni:Ti plateau, the central claim fails. A fitting competition that lets the XRR model choose between a discrete intermetallic layer and a continuous diffusion profile would settle the same question more cheaply.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the intermixed region at Ni–Ti interfaces in as-deposited Ti/Ni multilayers is not a diffuse alloy but an extended, asymmetric intermetallic layer: about 1.2 nm of Ni-rich NixTi, primarily Ni3Ti, at the Ni-on-Ti interface and about 0.6 nm at the Ti-on-Ni interface, in both 4 nm and 10 nm period samples. Silicon interlayers of 0.3–0.4 nm react preferentially with titanium to form titanium silicide, which suppresses Ni3Ti (and NiTi2 in the 10 nm structure) and leaves more elemental Ni; surface silicon also oxidizes to SiOx, passivating the top period. The paper thus claims a chemical mechanism, not just an empirical roughness reduction, for the barrier effect.

Load-bearing premise

The claimed transition-layer thicknesses rest on an X-ray reflectivity model whose layer sequence is fixed in advance and whose base-layer densities are held at tabulated values, so if a different stacking or density profile fits the data equally well, the 1.2 nm and 0.6 nm numbers would not stand.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • At both 4 nm and 10 nm periods, the Ni-on-Ti interface carries about 1.2 nm of Ni3Ti, while the Ti-on-Ni interface carries about 0.6 nm, making the transition-layer asymmetry a robust feature of deposition order.
  • A 0.3–0.4 nm silicon buffer at each interface converts the intermetallic reaction into titanium silicide formation, shrinking the intermetallic layers to roughly 0.25–0.56 nm and increasing the effective pure-Ni thickness.
  • In the 4 nm-period system, silicon interlayers suppress titanium crystallization entirely; in the 10 nm system, the crystalline Ni3Ti and NiTi2 components are reduced.
  • Surface silicon oxidizes in air to SiOx and prevents oxidation of the top Ni/Ti period, whereas unprotected samples show NiO and TiO2 formation beneath the surface.
  • Because the transition region is dominated by intermetallic compounds rather than simple atomic mixing, strategies that block compound nucleation, not just diffusion smoothing, are the ones that preserve optical contrast.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same thermodynamic competition should apply to other strongly intermetallic-forming pairs such as Co/Ti or Fe/Ti: a silicide-forming buffer would likely suppress intermetallic nucleation wherever the buffer's reaction enthalpy beats the intermetallic's, which is testable with the same XPS/XRD recipe.
  • If Ni3Ti is the kinetically favored first phase, a barrier that forms an even more stable compound with titanium than silicides do may outperform silicon; comparing Si with B4C or carbide buffers on identical period stacks would separate thermodynamic from kinetic suppression.
  • The claim that surface SiOx passivates the top period implies a practical recipe: a sacrificial silicon cap could protect Ni/Ti mirrors during air transport, which one could verify by tracking O 1s, Ni 2p, and Ti 2p intensities over weeks of ambient exposure.
  • Because the transition-layer thicknesses come from one XRR model, an independent structural check by cross-sectional electron microscopy or atom-probe tomography would also reveal whether the 1.2 nm region is a stoichiometric Ni3Ti compound or a graded concentration profile, a distinction that matters for predicting neutron-optical contrast.
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 manuscript reports a multi-technique study of Ti/Ni multilayer structures with nominal period thicknesses of 4 nm and 10 nm, with and without ultra-thin Si interlayers. The authors use XPS, XRD, XRR, and SQUID magnetometry to characterize the interfacial transition layers. They identify asymmetric transition layers of approximately 1.2 nm at the Ni-on-Ti interface and 0.6 nm at the Ti-on-Ni interface, attribute them primarily to the intermetallic phase Ni3Ti (with a smaller NiTi2 contribution in the 10 nm-period sample), and argue that Si interlayers suppress intermetallic formation, likely by reacting with Ti to form titanium silicides. The paper also reports that a surface Si layer oxidizes in air and acts as a passivation layer. The abstract, results, and conclusions consistently present the XRR thicknesses as the quantitative basis for the asymmetry and suppression claims.

Significance. If the quantitative results hold, the manuscript provides useful interface-engineering guidance for Ti/Ni multilayer optics in X-ray and neutron applications, where interfacial intermixing degrades optical contrast. The qualitative conclusion that Si interlayers suppress Ni-Ti intermetallic formation is supported by converging evidence from XRD peak shifts, XPS line shapes, and magnetometry, and the authors are appropriately cautious about the limitations of XPS decomposition and about the missing elemental Si reference. The main weakness is that the central quantitative assertion—the 1.2 nm/0.6 nm transition-layer asymmetry and its reduction by Si—rests entirely on a slab-model XRR fit without uncertainty estimates or alternative-model validation. The paper would be significantly strengthened by adding such analysis, but the underlying qualitative mechanism is credible and worth publishing after revision.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 3.4, Table 4] The reported 1.2 nm and 0.6 nm transition-layer thicknesses are outputs of a slab-model fit in which the layer sequence is fixed a priori and the base-layer densities are fixed to bulk values, with only the NixTi and TiSiy densities varied inside narrow intervals. No uncertainty estimates, fit-quality metrics, or alternative structural models are given. Because XRR has a strong thickness-density correlation, the absolute values and the asymmetry claim are not yet established. Please add parameter confidence intervals or a correlation analysis, report fit residuals or chi-squared values, and test at least one alternative interface model (e.g., continuous grading or a different layer sequence) to show that the 1.2/0.6 nm result is not an artifact of the chosen model.
  2. [Section 3.4, Table 4] For the 4 nm-period Si-containing sample, the fitted period is 4.32 nm, about 8% above the nominal 4.0 nm, while the Si-free 4 nm sample fits to 4.09 nm. This discrepancy suggests that the slab model may be absorbing unmodeled roughness or interlayer grading into the fitted layer thicknesses. The authors should discuss how this affects the reliability of the individual layer thicknesses in that sample and, ideally, report the fitted period with an explicit uncertainty.
  3. [Section 3.1] The XPS-derived stoichiometry of the NixTi reference film ranges from x about 1.7-2.4 (as-deposited) to x about 3.0-4.2 (after sputtering) depending on the assumed analyzer transmission exponent, and the authors state that peak decomposition of the multilayer spectra would be 'unstable and potentially misleading.' While this caution is appropriate, it means the XPS data alone cannot confirm Ni3Ti as the dominant intermetallic. The paper should state more explicitly that the Ni3Ti identification rests primarily on the XRD data and literature precedents, not on the XPS quantification.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 2] The statement that the XPS setup provides 'an energy resolution of up to 2 meV' is implausible for a laboratory Al K-alpha source; please correct the unit (likely 2 eV or 0.2 eV).
  2. [Figure 4c caption] The binding energy '154.65 эВ' contains a Cyrillic character; replace with 'eV'.
  3. [Section 3.1] The phrase 'n ranges from 0.4 до 1.1' contains a Russian word; replace 'до' with 'to'.
  4. [Table 4] Please add explicit labels distinguishing the NixTi layer at the Ni-on-Ti interface from the NixTi layer at the Ti-on-Ni interface, since the asymmetry claim depends on this distinction.
  5. [Figure 8] The caption states that the fitted curves are red lines, but the curves are difficult to distinguish in the figure; use distinct line styles or colors that remain visible in grayscale.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the experimental claims are derived from independent measurements and external references.

full rationale

The paper's central claims—formation of a Ni3Ti-rich transition layer at Ni-Ti interfaces and its suppression by Si interlayers—are supported by four independent experimental techniques (XPS, XRD, XRR, SQUID magnetometry). The XRR analysis fits layer thicknesses and densities within a slab model whose layer sequence is informed by XPS/XRD, but the reported transition-layer thicknesses (1.2 nm and 0.6 nm) are fitted outputs, not preset inputs. The identification of Ni3Ti is triangulated from XPS binding-energy shifts, XRD peak decomposition, and the fitted XRR density (8.1 g/cm3 vs. the Ni3Ti value 8.17 g/cm3) rather than being imposed by the model. The only self-citations ([16], [19], [20]) concern prior experimental setup and prior results on Si interlayers; these are motivational context, not load-bearing derivation. The VASP formation energies are taken from the external Materials Project [25]. No equation defines a predicted quantity in terms of itself, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. Hence the derivation chain is self-contained and non-circular.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central quantitative claims rest on XRR model fitting with several free parameters and literature-based phase assignments; no independent structural verification or raw data is provided.

free parameters (5)
  • XRR fitted NixTi transition-layer thickness at Ni-on-Ti interface = 1.21 nm (d=10 nm), 1.15 nm (d=4 nm)
    Inferred from fitting reflectivity curves in Section 3.4; the headline claim depends on this number, reported without uncertainty.
  • XRR fitted NixTi transition-layer thickness at Ti-on-Ni interface = 0.66 nm (d=10 nm), 0.50 nm (d=4 nm)
    Second fitted intermetallic thickness; the reported interface asymmetry is based on this fit.
  • XRR fitted TiSiy interlayer thickness = 0.60 nm (d=10 nm), 0.27 nm (d=4 nm)
    Thickness of the assumed silicide layers in Si-containing samples; values fitted with densities allowed to vary.
  • XRR fitted densities of NixTi and TiSiy layers = 7.0-8.1 g/cm3 (NixTi), 4.3-4.5 g/cm3 (TiSiy)
    Densities varied within tabulated bounds during fitting; not independently measured.
  • XPS analyzer transmission exponent n = 0.4 to 1.1
    Used to compute stoichiometry x in NixTi films; the broad range propagates into x estimates (1.7-4.2), so the 'Ni-rich' conclusion is robust but the exact stoichiometry is not.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption The XRR model's layer sequence and fixed density values for elemental layers adequately represent the physical stack.
    Section 3.4; all reported layer thicknesses inherit this model choice.
  • domain assumption XPS binding-energy shift systematics for NixTi intermetallics from Refs. [28-30] transfer to these sputtered multilayers.
    Section 3.1; used to judge the intermetallic as Ni-rich, but the reference spectra were measured on films with suboxide overlap.
  • domain assumption The weak XRD feature at 2theta = 41.3-41.5 degrees is fcc-NiTi2 (511) as assigned from PDF card 00-018-0898 and prior annealed multilayer studies.
    Section 3.2; the assignment is borrowed from literature, not proven by a reference pattern in this work.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Influence of Silicon Interlayers on Transition Layer Formation in Ti/Ni Multilayer Structures of Different Thicknesses." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/6HSWDJDT

@misc{pith2026250508569,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Influence of Silicon Interlayers on Transition Layer Formation in Ti/Ni Multilayer Structures of Different Thicknesses},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/6HSWDJDT}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.08569}
}
read the original abstract

This study presents a comprehensive investigation of chemical, structural, and magnetic properties of Ti/Ni multilayer systems with period thicknesses of 4 nm and 10 nm. Particular attention was paid to the characterization of the transition layers at Ni-Ti interfaces and the influence of thin silicon barrier layers on their formation. A combination of X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS), X-ray diffraction (XRD), X-ray reflectometry (XRR), and SQUID magnetometry was employed for analysis. Extended transition layers up to 1.2 nm in thickness were identified at the Ni-Ti interfaces, primarily composed of the intermetallic Ni3Ti phase. The insertion of ultra-thin silicon buffer layers at the interfaces significantly suppressed the formation of intermetallic compounds, most likely due to the formation of titanium silicides. Additionally, it was observed that the use of Si layer on the sample surface leads to the formation of silicon oxide after exposure to the ambient environment, which acts as a passivation layer and inhibits oxidation of Ni and Ti layers within the topmost period of the multilayer structure.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.08569 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Formation energy for various NixTi intermetallics [25]. The stoichiometry of NixTi intermetallic compounds can be evaluated using X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) by analyzing the binding energy shifts of Ni 2p and Ti 2p core-level peaks relative to their positions in pure metals. According to [28], a higher Ni content in the intermetallic phase results in a smaller Ni 2p shift but a more pronounced Ti 2p shif… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. (a) Ni 2p3/2 and (b, c) Ti 2p photoelectron spectra of Ni, Ti and NixTi films. Spectra in (a) and (c) were obtained after cleaning the film surfaces by argon ion sputtering. An additional confirmation of this conclusion can be derived by analyzing the intensity ratios of the Ni 2p3/2 and Ti 2p3/2 peaks related to the NixTi intermetallic. The stoichiometry of thin films is determined using the following relation: 𝑛𝑎 … view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Photoelectron spectra of (a) Ni 2p3/2, (b) Ti 2p and (c) Si 2s, obtained for multilayer structures [Ti/Ni]105 and [Ti/Si/Ni/Si]105 with a 4 nm period. In the system with period thickness of 10 nm the nominal thickness of silicon layers is equal to 0.4 nm. The Ni 2p, Ti 2p, and Si 2s spectra exhibit trends identical to those observed previously: absence of titanium/nickel oxide contributions, presence of silicon oxid… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: XRD patterns of [Ti/Ni]42 and [Ti/Si/Ni/Si]42 multilayer structures with d = 10 nm (a) and their decomposition into components (b, c) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: XRD pattern of [Ti/Ni]105 and [Ti/Si/Ni/Si]105 multilayer structure with d = 4 nm. X-ray diffraction patterns of [Ti/Ni]105 and [Ti/Si/Ni/Si]105 multilayer structures with d = 4 nm are presented in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Volume magnetization as a function of the in-plane applied magnetic field for the [Ti/Ni]42 and [Ti/Si/Ni/Si]42 multilayers with period d=10 nm. 3.4 X-ray Reflectometry To evaluate the thicknesses of both transitional and base layers in the studied structures, a fittin…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Experimental reflectivity curves (dots) and corresponding fits (red lines) for [Ti/Ni] multilayer structures with and without Si barrier layers. The d values on the graph are nominal. The curves are vertically offset for clarity and ease of visual comparison [PITH_FUL…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

76 extracted references · 66 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Mertins, F

    H.-C. Mertins, F. Schäfers, H. Grimmer, D. Clemens, P . Böni, M. Horisberger, W/C, W/Ti, Ni/Ti, and Ni/V multilayers for the soft-x-ray range: experimental investigation with synchrotron radiation, Appl Opt 37 (1998) 1873. https://doi.org/10.1364/AO.37.001873

    work page doi:10.1364/ao.37.001873 1998

  2. [2]

    Underwood, T.W

    J.H. Underwood, T.W. Barbee, C. Frieber, X-ray microscope with multilayer mirrors, Appl Opt 25 (1986) 1730. https://doi.org/10.1364/AO.25.001730

    work page doi:10.1364/ao.25.001730 1986

  3. [3]

    Huang, Q

    Q. Huang, Q. Yi, Z. Cao, R. Qi, R.A. Loch, P . Jonnard, M. Wu, A. Giglia, W. Li, E. Louis, F. Bijkerk, Z. Zhang, Z. Wang, High Reflectance Nanoscale V/Sc Multilayer for Soft X-ray Water Window Region, Sci Rep 7 (2017) 12929. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-13222-5

    work page doi:10.1038/s41598-017-13222-5 2017

  4. [4]

    Kördel, A

    M. Kördel, A. Dehlinger, C. Seim, U. V ogt, E. Fogelqvist, J.A. Sellberg, H. Stiel, H.M. Hertz, Laboratory water-window x-ray microscopy, Optica 7 (2020) 658. https://doi.org/10.1364/OPTICA.393014

    doi:10.1364/optica.393014 2020

  5. [5]

    Di Fonzo, B.R

    S. Di Fonzo, B.R. Müller, W. Jark, A. Gaupp, F. Schäfers, J.H. Underwood, Multilayer transmission phase shifters for the carbon K edge and the water window, Review of Scientific Instruments 66 (1995) 1513–1516. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1145894

    work page doi:10.1063/1.1145894 1995

  6. [6]

    Zhong, W

    Z. Zhong, W. Zhan-Shan, Z. Jing-Tao, W. Feng-Li, W. Yong-Rong, Q. Shu-Ji, C. Ling-Yan, Design and Fabrication of Ni/Ti Multilayer for Neutron Supermirror, Chinese Physics Letters 23 (2006) 2678–

    work page 2006

  7. [7]

    Maruyama, D

    R. Maruyama, D. Yamazaki, T. Ebisawa, M. Hino, K. Soyama, Development of neutron supermirror with large-scale ion-beam sputtering instrument, Physica B Condens Matter 385–386 (2006) 1256–

    work page 2006

  8. [8]

    Y . Yang, R. Qi, Z. Zhang, Y . Yao, H. Ni, Z. Wang, H. Wu, X. Wang, Ni-Ti supermirror coated onto a curved substrate for nested neutron-focusing optics, Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res A 986 (2021) 164752. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.NIMA.2020.164752

    arXiv 2021

Show all 76 references
  1. [9]

    S. Zhao, J. Zhu, Z. Yang, Y . Zhu, H. Sun, L. Zhao, Interface and crystallization evolution induced by reactive nitrogen and oxygen sputtering in Ni/Ti multilayer, Surf Coat Technol 472 (2023) 129941. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SURFCOAT.2023.129941

    2023

  2. [10]

    Eriksson, N

    F. Eriksson, N. Ghafoor, S. Broekhuijsen, G. Greczynski, N. Schell, J. Birch, Morphology control in Ni/Ti multilayer neutron mirrors by ion-assisted interface engineering and B 4 C incorporation, Opt Mater Express 13 (2023) 1424. https://doi.org/10.1364/OME.476713

    2023 doi

  3. [11]

    Eriksson, N

    F. Eriksson, N. Ghafoor, D. Ostach, N. Schell, J. Birch, Ion-assisted magnetron sputter deposition of B4C-doped Ni/Ti multilayer mirrors, in: C. Morawe, A.M. Khounsary, S. Goto (Eds.), Advances in X- Ray/EUV Optics and Components XIII, SPIE, 2018: p. 6. https://doi.org/10.1117...

    2018 doi

  4. [12]

    Maruyama, D

    R. Maruyama, D. Yamazaki, T. Ebisawa, M. Hino, K. Soyama, Development of neutron supermirrors with large critical angle, Thin Solid Films 515 (2007) 5704–5706. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsf.2006.12.022

    2007 doi

  5. [13]

    Elsenhans, P

    O. Elsenhans, P. Böni, H.P. Friedli, H. Grimmer, P. Buffat, K. Leifer, J. Söchtig, I.S. Anderson, Development of Ni/Ti multilayer supermirrors for neutron optics, Thin Solid Films 246 (1994) 110–

    1994

  6. [14]

    Broekhuijsen, N

    S. Broekhuijsen, N. Ghafoor, A. V orobiev, J. Birch, F. Eriksson, Synthesis and characterization of 11 B 4 C containing Ni/Ti multilayers using combined neutron and X-ray reflectometry, Opt Mater Express 13 (2023) 1140. https://doi.org/10.1364/OME.481049

    2023 doi

  7. [15]

    Stendahl, N

    S. Stendahl, N. Ghafoor, A. Zubayer, M. Lorentzon, A. V orobiev, J. Birch, F. Eriksson, Material design optimization for large-m 11B4C-based Ni/Ti supermirror neutron optics, Mater Des 243 (2024) 113061. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2024.113061

    2024

  8. [16]

    Smertin, E

    R. Smertin, E. Antyushin, I. Malyshev, M. Zorina, N. Chkhalo, P. Y unin, S. Garakhin, V . Polkovnikov, Y . Vainer, Influence of silicon interlayers on the structural and reflective X-ray characteristics of Ni/Ti multilayer mirrors, J Appl Crystallogr 57 (2024) 1477–1483. https...

    2024 doi

  9. [17]

    Duerig, A

    T. Duerig, A. Pelton, D. Stöckel, An overview of nitinol medical applications, Materials Science and Engineering: A 273–275 (1999) 149–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-5093(99)00294-4

    1999 doi

  10. [18]

    Armitage, T.L

    D.A. Armitage, T.L. Parker, D.M. Grant, Biocompatibility and hemocompatibility of surface-modified NiTi alloys, J Biomed Mater Res A 66A (2003) 129–137. https://doi.org/10.1002/JBM.A.10549

    2003 doi

  11. [19]

    Polkovnikov, N.N

    V .N. Polkovnikov, N.N. Salashchenko, M. V Svechnikov, N.I. Chkhalo, Beryllium-based multilayer X- ray optics, Physics-Uspekhi 63 (2020) 83–95. https://doi.org/10.3367/UFNe.2019.05.038623

    2020 doi

  12. [20]

    Chkhalo, A

    N. Chkhalo, A. Lopatin, A. Nechay, D. Pariev, A. Pestov, V . Polkovnikov, N. Salashchenko, F. Schäfers, M. Sertsu, A. Sokolov, S. Mikhail, T. Nikolay, Z. Sergey, Beryllium-Based Multilayer Mirrors and Filters for the Extreme Ultraviolet Range, J Nanosci Nanotechnol 19 (2019) 5...

    2019

  13. [21]

    Repoux, Comparison of background removal methods for XPS, Surface and Interface Analysis 18 (1992) 567–570

    M. Repoux, Comparison of background removal methods for XPS, Surface and Interface Analysis 18 (1992) 567–570. https://doi.org/10.1002/sia.740180719

    1992 doi

  14. [22]

    Tougaard, Universality classes of inelastic electron scattering cross-sections, Surface and Interface Analysis 25 (1997) 137–154

    S. Tougaard, Universality classes of inelastic electron scattering cross-sections, Surface and Interface Analysis 25 (1997) 137–154. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9918(199703)25:3<137::AID- SIA230>3.0.CO;2-L

    1997 doi

  15. [23]

    Svechnikov, Multifitting: software for the reflectometric reconstruction of multilayer nanofilms, J Appl Crystallogr 53 (2020) 244–252

    M. Svechnikov, Multifitting: software for the reflectometric reconstruction of multilayer nanofilms, J Appl Crystallogr 53 (2020) 244–252. https://doi.org/10.1107/S160057671901584X

    2020 doi

  16. [24]

    M. Svechnikov, Multifitting 2 : software for reflectometric, off-specular and grazing-incidence small- angle scattering analysis of multilayer nanofilms, J Appl Crystallogr 57 (2024) 848–858. https://doi.org/10.1107/S1600576724002231

    2024 doi

  17. [25]

    Jain, S.P

    A. Jain, S.P. Ong, G. Hautier, W. Chen, W.D. Richards, S. Dacek, S. Cholia, D. Gunter, D. Skinner, G. Ceder, K.A. Persson, Commentary: The materials project: A materials genome approach to accelerating materials innovation, APL Mater 1 (2013) 11002. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4...

    2013 doi

  18. [26]

    L. Hu, Y . Xue, F. Shi, Intermetallic formation and mechanical properties of Ni-Ti diffusion couples, Mater Des 130 (2017) 175–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2017.05.055

    2017 doi

  19. [27]

    Babaei-Dehkordi, M

    A. Babaei-Dehkordi, M. Soltanieh, M. Mirjalili, A. Mostafaei, Quantitative analysis of diffusion kinetics of intermetallic formation in Ni–Ti system, Journal of Materials Research and Technology 20 (2022) 4545–4555. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmrt.2022.09.017

    2022 doi

  20. [28]

    Senkovskiy, D.Yu

    B.V . Senkovskiy, D.Yu. Usachov, A.V . Fedorov, O.Yu. Vilkov, A.V . Shelyakov, V .K. Adamchuk, Electronic structure of Ti–Ni alloys: An XPS and NEXAFS study, J Alloys Compd 537 (2012) 190–

    2012

  21. [29]

    Petrović, D

    S. Petrović, D. Peruško, M. Mitrić, J. Kovac, G. Dražić, B. Gaković, K.P. Homewood, M. Milosavljević, Formation of intermetallic phase in Ni/Ti multilayer structure by ion implantation and thermal annealing, Intermetallics (Barking) 25 (2012) 27–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.i...

    2012 doi

  22. [30]

    Hillebrecht, J.C

    F.U. Hillebrecht, J.C. Fuggle, P.A. Bennett, Z. Zołnierek, Ch. Freiburg, Electronic structure of Ni and Pd alloys. II. X-ray photoelectron core-level spectra, Phys Rev B 27 (1983) 2179–2193. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.27.2179

    1983 doi

  23. [31]

    Hüfner, G.K

    S. Hüfner, G.K. Wertheim, Multielectron effects in the XPS spectra of nickel, Phys Lett A 51 (1975) 299–300. https://doi.org/10.1016/0375-9601(75)90457-0

    1975 doi

  24. [32]

    Wang, C.L

    R.M. Wang, C.L. Chu, T. Hu, Y .S. Dong, C. Guo, X.B. Sheng, P.H. Lin, C.Y . Chung, P.K. Chu, Surface XPS characterization of NiTi shape memory alloy after advanced oxidation processes in UV/H2O2 photocatalytic system, Appl Surf Sci 253 (2007) 8507–8512. https://doi.org/10.1016...

    2007 doi

  25. [33]

    Richardson, L.A

    D. Richardson, L.A. Hisscott, Many-electron structure in the XPS spectra of some transition metals and alloys, Journal of Physics F: Metal Physics 6 (1976) L127–L134. https://doi.org/10.1088/0305- 4608/6/4/009

    1976 doi

  26. [34]

    Kittel, Introduction to Solid State Physics

    C. Kittel, Introduction to Solid State Physics. 8th edition, 8th ed., John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 2005

    2005

  27. [35]

    Diebold, T.E

    U. Diebold, T.E. Madey, TiO2 by XPS, Surface Science Spectra 4 (1996) 227–231. https://doi.org/10.1116/1.1247794

    1996 doi

  28. [36]

    Barreca, A

    D. Barreca, A. Gasparotto, C. Maccato, C. Maragno, E. Tondello, TiO2 Thin Films by Chemical Vapor Deposition: An XPS Characterization, Surface Science Spectra 14 (2007) 27–33. https://doi.org/10.1116/11.20070902

    2007 doi

  29. [37]

    Biesinger, L.W.M

    M.C. Biesinger, L.W.M. Lau, A.R. Gerson, R.St.C. Smart, Resolving surface chemical states in XPS analysis of first row transition metals, oxides and hydroxides: Sc, Ti, V , Cu and Zn, Appl Surf Sci 257 (2010) 887–898. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2010.07.086

    2010 doi

  30. [38]

    Hashimoto, A

    S. Hashimoto, A. Tanaka, Alteration of Ti 2p XPS spectrum for titanium oxide by low-energy Ar ion bombardment, Surface and Interface Analysis 34 (2002) 262–265. https://doi.org/10.1002/sia.1296

    2002 doi

  31. [39]

    Biesinger, B.P

    M.C. Biesinger, B.P. Payne, B.R. Hart, A.P . Grosvenor, N.S. McIntryre, L.W.M. Lau, R.S.C. Smart, Quantitative chemical state XPS analysis of first row transition metals, oxides and hydroxides, J Phys Conf Ser 100 (2008) 012025. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/100/1/012025

    2008 doi

  32. [40]

    M. V . Kuznetsov, J.F. Zhuravlev, V .A. Zhilyaev, V .A. Gubanov, XPS study of the nitrides, oxides and oxynitrides of titanium, J Electron Spectros Relat Phenomena 58 (1992) 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/0368-2048(92)80001-O

    1992 doi

  33. [41]

    Brundle, B.V

    C.R. Brundle, B.V . Crist, X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy: A perspective on quantitation accuracy for composition analysis of homogeneous materials, Journal of Vacuum Science & Technology A 38 (2020) 041001. https://doi.org/10.1116/1.5143897

    2020 doi

  34. [42]

    TRZHASKOVSKAYA, V .I

    M.B. TRZHASKOVSKAYA, V .I. NEFEDOV , V .G. Y ARZHEMSKY , PHOTOELECTRON ANGULAR DISTRIBUTION PARAMETERS FOR ELEMENTS Z=1 TO Z=54 IN THE PHOTOELECTRON ENERGY RANGE 100–5000 eV , At Data Nucl Data Tables 77 (2001) 97–159. https://doi.org/10.1006/adnd.2000.0849

    2001

  35. [43]

    Tanuma, C.J

    S. Tanuma, C.J. Powell, D.R. Penn, Calculation of electron inelastic mean free paths (IMFPs) VII. Reliability of the TPP-2M IMFP predictive equation, Surface and Interface Analysis 35 (2003) 268–

    2003

  36. [44]

    L.T. Weng, G. Vereecke, M.J. Genet, P. Bertrand, W.E.E. Stone, Quantitative XPS. Part I: Experimental determination of the relative analyser transmission function of two different spectrometers — a critical assessment of various methods, parameters involved and errors introduc...

    1993 doi

  37. [45]

    Mansour, Characterization of NiO by XPS, Surface Science Spectra 3 (1994) 231–238

    A.N. Mansour, Characterization of NiO by XPS, Surface Science Spectra 3 (1994) 231–238. https://doi.org/10.1116/1.1247751

    1994 doi

  38. [46]

    Pagot, M

    G. Pagot, M. Benedet, C. Maccato, D. Barreca, V . Di Noto, XPS study of NiO thin films obtained by chemical vapor deposition, Surface Science Spectra 30 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1116/6.0003008

    2023 doi

  39. [47]

    W.Y . Yang, H. Iwakuro, H. Yagi, T. Kuroda, S. Nakamura, Study of Oxidation of TiSi 2 Thin Film by XPS, Jpn J Appl Phys 23 (1984) 1560. https://doi.org/10.1143/JJAP .23.1560

    1984 doi

  40. [48]

    P.L. Tam, Y . Cao, L. Nyborg, XRD and XPS characterisation of transition metal silicide thin films, Surf Sci 606 (2012) 329–336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.susc.2011.10.015

    2012 doi

  41. [49]

    Y . Cao, L. Nyborg, U. Jelvestam, XPS calibration study of thin‐film nickel silicides, Surface and Interface Analysis 41 (2009) 471–483. https://doi.org/10.1002/sia.3050

    2009 doi

  42. [50]

    Jensen, S.S

    D.S. Jensen, S.S. Kanyal, N. Madaan, M.A. Vail, A.E. Dadson, M.H. Engelhard, M.R. Linford, Silicon (100)/SiO2 by XPS, Surface Science Spectra 20 (2013) 36–42. https://doi.org/10.1116/11.20121101

    2013 doi

  43. [51]

    Desbiens, R

    E. Desbiens, R. Dolbec, M.A. El Khakani, Reactive pulsed laser deposition of high- k silicon dioxide and silicon oxynitride thin films for gate-dielectric applications, Journal of Vacuum Science & Technology A: Vacuum, Surfaces, and Films 20 (2002) 1157–1161. https://doi.org/1...

    2002 doi

  44. [52]

    Barr, An XPS study of Si as it occurs in adsorbents, catalysts, and thin films, Applications of Surface Science 15 (1983) 1–35

    T.L. Barr, An XPS study of Si as it occurs in adsorbents, catalysts, and thin films, Applications of Surface Science 15 (1983) 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-5963(83)90003-X

    1983 doi

  45. [53]

    Nakajima, S.P

    K. Nakajima, S.P. McGinnis, M.A. Kelly, Si by XPS, Surface Science Spectra 2 (1993) 61–66. https://doi.org/10.1116/1.1247726

    1993 doi

  46. [54]

    Lee, E.T

    S.M. Lee, E.T. Ada, H. Lee, J. Kulik, J.W. Rabalais, Growth of Ti and TiSi2 films on Si(111) by low energy Ti+ beam deposition, Surf Sci 453 (2000) 159–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0039- 6028(00)00339-3

    2000 doi

  47. [55]

    Osiceanu, An XPS study on ion beam induced oxidation of titanium silicide, Appl Surf Sci 253 (2006) 381–384

    P. Osiceanu, An XPS study on ion beam induced oxidation of titanium silicide, Appl Surf Sci 253 (2006) 381–384. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2006.06.018

    2006 doi

  48. [56]

    K. Cai, M. Müller, J. Bossert, A. Rechtenbach, K.D. Jandt, Surface structure and composition of flat titanium thin films as a function of film thickness and evaporation rate, Appl Surf Sci 250 (2005) 252–

    2005

  49. [57]

    Aboulfadl, F

    H. Aboulfadl, F. Seifried, M. Stüber, F. Mücklich, Interdiffusion in as-deposited Ni/Ti multilayer thin films analyzed by atom probe tomography, Mater Lett 236 (2019) 92–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2018.10.085

    2019 doi

  50. [58]

    Hollanders, B.J

    M.A. Hollanders, B.J. Thijsse, E.J. Mittemeijer, Amorphization along interfaces and grain boundaries in polycrystalline multilayers: An x-ray-diffraction study of Ni/Ti multilayers, Phys Rev B 42 (1990) 5481–5494. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.42.5481

    1990 doi

  51. [59]

    W. Yan, H. Li, J. Liu, J. Guo, EPMA and XRD study on nickel metal thin film for temperature sensor, Sens Actuators A Phys 136 (2007) 212–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sna.2006.11.012

    2007 doi

  52. [60]

    Zhang, Z

    B. Zhang, Z. Zhang, T. Zhao, D. Zhang, J. Cheng, W. Wang, K. Qiao, Y . Yang, K. Wang, Effect of temperature on the interfacial evolution of Ti/Ni multi-layered composites fabricated by ARB, J Alloys Compd 803 (2019) 265–276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2019.06.092

    2019 doi

  53. [61]

    Jankowski, M.A

    A.F. Jankowski, M.A. Wall, Formation of face-centered cubic titanium on a Ni single crystal and in Ni/Ti multilayers, J Mater Res 9 (1994) 31–38. https://doi.org/10.1557/JMR.1994.0031

    1994

  54. [62]

    Singh, S

    S. Singh, S. Basu, P. Bhatt, A.K. Poswal, Kinetics of alloy formation at the interfaces in a Ni-Ti multilayer: X-ray and neutron reflectometry study, Phys Rev B Condens Matter Mater Phys 79 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.79.195435

    2009 doi

  55. [63]

    Shi, Z.H

    J. Shi, Z.H. Cao, Y . Liu, Z.P. Zhao, Size dependent alloying and plastic deformation behaviors of Ti/Ni nano-multilayers, J Alloys Compd 727 (2017) 691–695. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2017.08.158

    2017 doi

  56. [64]

    Bhatt, V

    P. Bhatt, V . Ganeshan, V . R. Reddy, S. M. Chaudhari, High temperature annealing effect on structural and magnetic properties of Ti/Ni multilayers, Appl Surf Sci 253 (2006) 2572–2580. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2006.05.036

    2006 doi

  57. [65]

    El-Eskandarany, Metallic glassy Ti 2 Ni grain-growth inhibitor powder for enhancing the hydrogenation/dehydrogenation kinetics of MgH 2, RSC Adv 9 (2019) 1036–1046

    M.S. El-Eskandarany, Metallic glassy Ti 2 Ni grain-growth inhibitor powder for enhancing the hydrogenation/dehydrogenation kinetics of MgH 2, RSC Adv 9 (2019) 1036–1046. https://doi.org/10.1039/C8RA08200F

    2019 doi

  58. [66]

    Patterson, The Scherrer Formula for X-Ray Particle Size Determination, Physical Review 56 (1939) 978

    A.L. Patterson, The Scherrer Formula for X-Ray Particle Size Determination, Physical Review 56 (1939) 978. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.56.978

    1939 doi

  59. [67]

    Bhatt, S.M

    P. Bhatt, S.M. Chaudhari, M. Fahlman, Influence of Ti layer thickness on solid state amorphization and magnetic properties of annealed Ti/Ni multilayer, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 19 (2007) 376210. https://doi.org/10.1088/0953-8984/19/37/376210

    2007 doi

  60. [68]

    Kraegermann, K

    S. Kraegermann, K. Chrzumnicka, F. Stobiecki, H. Rohrmann, K. Röll, Structural changes and solid state reactions in NiTi multilayers investigated by magnetic methods, J Magn Magn Mater 140–144 (1995) 593–594. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-8853(94)01563-5

    1995 doi

  61. [69]

    Arblaster, Selected Values of the Crystallographic Properties of Elements, ASM International,

    J.W. Arblaster, Selected Values of the Crystallographic Properties of Elements, ASM International,

  62. [119]

    https://doi.org/10.1016/0040-6090(94)90739-0

    doi

  63. [196]

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2012.05.059

    2012 doi

  64. [267]

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2005.01.013

    2005 doi

  65. [275]

    https://doi.org/10.1002/sia.1526

    doi

  66. [1258]

    https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PHYSB.2006.06.024

    2006 doi

  67. [2018]

    www.asminternational.org

  68. [2680]

    https://doi.org/10.1088/0256-307X/23/10/015

    doi

Pith tools

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