Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 5 minor 52 references

Crystal Growth & Physical Property Characterization of Mixed Topological Insulator BiSbTe$_3$

T0 review · 5 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that a low Debye temperature of 82.64 K obtained from a resistance fit indicates low-temperature electron-phonon scattering, which suppresses the magnetoresistance of BiSbTe3 to about 150% at 2 K and 14 T while keeping…

desk verdict Solid characterization dataset with a load-bearing e-ph explanation that its own fit contradicts at 2 K. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.24471 v1 pith:2BY6RSPX submitted 2025-05-30 cond-mat.mtrl-sci cond-mat.str-el

Dinesh Kumar (Banasthali) , Kapil Kumar (CSIR-NPL) , N. K. Karn (CSIR-NPL) , Ganesh Gurjar (Ramajas - DU) , V.P.S. Awana (CSIR-NPL) , Sudesh (Banasthali) This is my paper
classification cond-mat.mtrl-scicond-mat.str-el
keywords topologicalinsulatorBiSbTe3magnetoresistanceelectron-phononinteractionDebyetemperatureHikami-Larkin-Nagaokaanalysisweakantilocalizationcrystalgrowth
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

This paper reports the growth of single-crystalline BiSbTe3 by a shortened melt-growth method and characterizes its structure and magneto-transport properties. It claims that the resulting crystal is stoichiometric, c-axis oriented, and metallic, with a residual resistance ratio of 3.64. The central claim is that a relatively low Debye temperature of 82.64 K, extracted from a fit of the resistance-temperature curve, signals effective electron-phonon scattering down to low temperatures, which the paper proposes as the reason the magnetoresistance of the mixed crystal is suppressed relative to the pure topological insulators Bi2Te3 and Sb2Te3. The paper also shows that the magnetoresistance remains non-saturating and roughly linear, and a modified Hikami-Larkin-Nagaoka analysis indicates coexisting surface, bulk, and quantum-scattering conduction channels.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the fit function $R_{xx}(T)=R_{xx}(0)+\beta\exp(-\theta/T)+\gamma T^2$ (Eq. 1 in the paper), where the exponential term is interpreted as electron-phonon scattering with $\theta$ as the Debye temperature; the paper's suppression explanation stands on that interpretation. The second piece of machinery is the modified Hikami-Larkin-Nagaoka equation $\Delta\sigma(H)=\mathrm{HLN}+\beta H^2+\gamma H$, which the paper uses to separate the 2D surface (weak antilocalization) contribution from bulk conduction and quantum or scattering corrections. The unmodified HLN term supplies $\alpha$ and the phase-coherence length $L_\varphi$; negative $\alpha$ is read as weak antilocalization.

What would settle it

Measure how much heat the same crystals absorb at very low temperatures and see whether the inferred vibration temperature matches 82.64 K; if it is much higher, the fit-based explanation for the smaller magnetoresistance fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that single-crystalline BiSbTe3 can be grown in about three days by a melt-growth route, with stoichiometry Bi0.98Sb1.04Te2.97, a rhombohedral R-3m structure, and c-axis-oriented (003n) diffraction. The magneto-transport claim is more specific: fitting the zero-field resistance to $R_{xx}(T)=R_{xx}(0)+\beta\exp(-\theta/T)+\gamma T^2$ yields $\theta=82.64$ K, which the authors read as a Debye temperature roughly half those of Bi2Te3 (165 K) and Sb2Te3 (160 K). On that basis they conclude that electron-phonon scattering remains effective down to low temperatures ($T^*\sim25$ K), raising the relative resistance and suppressing the low-temperature MR to $\sim150\%$ at 2 K and 14 T, compared with $\sim450\%$ for Bi2Te3 and $\sim550\%$ for Sb2Te3 at their reported conditions. The MR remains linear and non-saturating, and a modified Hikami-Larkin-Nagaoka fit with added $H^2$ and $H$ terms returns a negative $\alpha$ (weak antilocalization) with a phase-coherence length that decreases with temperature, which the authors attribute to coexisting surface, bulk, and quantum-scattering conduction channels.

Load-bearing premise

The whole explanation rests on assuming the exponential curve used to fit the resistance data really measures how strongly atomic vibrations scatter electrons; if that curve is just a generic fitting device, the claim that low-temperature vibrations explain the smaller magnetoresistance is unsupported.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A roughly three-day melt-growth schedule can produce stoichiometric, c-axis-oriented BiSbTe3 single crystals, shortening synthesis by about a factor of three relative to the cited parent-TI recipes.
  • The low fitted Debye temperature of 82.64 K implies electron-phonon scattering is active near 25 K in BiSbTe3, which, if the interpretation is right, is why its zero-field resistance is higher and its magnetoresistance is lower than in Bi2Te3 and Sb2Te3.
  • The non-saturating, roughly linear MR at 2 K up to 14 T persists in the mixed TI despite the suppression, consistent with topological surface transport.
  • Modified HLN fits indicate that conduction is not purely 2D surface transport: bulk carriers and quantum or elastic scattering contribute, and the phase-coherence length decreases as expected with rising temperature.
  • The same analysis path can be applied to other mixed tetradymites to see whether faster growth changes the phonon and magnetotransport balance.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial inference: the same R(T) exponential fit could serve as a cheap first screen for electron-phonon strength in other mixed tetradymites; the authors suggest heat-capacity and Raman follow-ups but do not perform them here.
  • Editorial inference: because the parent-compound MR values are taken at different temperatures and fields (5 K/14 T for Bi2Te3, 2 K/12 T for Sb2Te3), the apparent suppression factor is not yet a controlled quantitative comparison; measuring all three crystals at 2 K and 14 T under identical conditions would settle it.
  • Editorial inference: the fitted negative $\alpha\approx -0.1$ (rather than $-0.5$) implies a single 2D channel plus extra contributions; thinning or gating the same crystals could test whether the surface 2D channel can be isolated from the bulk linear term in the modified HLN fit.
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

5 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports the melt-growth synthesis of single-crystalline BiSbTe3, with structural, compositional, and vibrational characterization (XRD, Rietveld refinement, EDAX, SEM, Raman), and magneto-transport measurements down to 2 K and up to 14 T. The authors fit the zero-field resistance to Rxx(T)=Rxx(0)+β exp(-θ/T)+γT^2, extract a Debye temperature θ=82.64 K, and argue that this lower θ implies effective electron-phonon interaction at low temperatures, which explains the suppressed ~150% magnetoresistance at 2 K compared with Bi2Te3 and Sb2Te3. They further fit the magnetoconductivity with a modified HLN equation Δσ=HLN+βH^2+γH and conclude that surface, bulk, and quantum-scattering channels all contribute to conduction.

Significance. The growth and structural characterization are valuable: the synthesis is faster than conventional routes, the Rietveld refinement is documented, and the raw transport data appear measured over a wide field/temperature range. If the mechanistic interpretation were sound, the paper would add useful information on phonon and magnetotransport behavior in mixed topological insulators. However, the central causal claim—that the fitted Debye temperature explains the suppressed 2 K MR—is quantitatively inconsistent with the authors' own fitting parameters, and the modified-HLN conclusion is partly circular because the extra terms are assigned physical meanings before being fit. The data may still be useful as a characterization report, but the mechanistic claims need major revision or removal.

major comments (5)
  1. [Results and Discussion, Eq. (1) and Fig. 6(a)] The central claim that the fitted Debye temperature θ=82.64 K implies effective electron-phonon interaction that suppresses the 2 K magnetoresistance is quantitatively contradicted by the paper's own fit. At T=2 K, β exp(-θ/T) = 1.19 mΩ × exp(-41.32) ≈ 1.3×10^-18 mΩ, while γT^2 = 7.76×10^-8 Ω K^-2 × 4 K^2 = 3.1×10^-4 mΩ; the e-ph term is ~14 orders of magnitude smaller. The paper's own crossover T*~25 K states that e-e dominates below T* and e-ph only above T*. Since the MR is quoted at 2 K, the fitted exponential term cannot be the cause of the suppression. This load-bearing explanation should be removed or replaced with a mechanism operating at 2 K.
  2. [Results and Discussion, Eq. (1)] The Debye temperature is a free parameter in a four-parameter fit to R(T), and no independent thermal or phonon verification is provided. The authors themselves state in the Results and in the Conclusion that heat-capacity or temperature/power-dependent Raman measurements are needed to quantify electron-phonon interaction. Without such verification, the statement that 'a lower θ implies effective e-ph interaction at low temperatures' is not established; θ could simply be a fitting parameter absorbing other temperature dependences.
  3. [Results and Discussion, modified HLN fit] The conclusion that conduction involves surface states, bulk carriers, and quantum scattering is already encoded in the fitting function Δσ(H)=HLN+βH^2+γH. The paper assigns β to 'elastic scattering and spin-orbit scattering (quantum scattering)' and γ to 'bulk contribution' before fitting, and then after fitting concludes that these channels contribute. This is a circular argument: any smooth magnetoconductivity can be represented by such terms, and the fit does not independently establish the physical channels. Please provide a derivation or independent experimental basis for these assignments, or soften the conclusion.
  4. [Results and Discussion, MR comparison] The comparison of MR suppression uses unmatched conditions: Bi2Te3 is quoted at 5 K and 14 T, Sb2Te3 at 2 K and 12 T, while BiSbTe3 is at 2 K and 14 T. Because MR depends strongly on both temperature and field, this comparison does not quantitatively support the claim that BiSbTe3 shows suppressed MR. The sentence 'the observed MR at 2 K is ~450% for Bi2Te3 at 5 K' also contains an internal inconsistency between the stated temperature and the referenced measurement temperature.
  5. [Table 3] The low-field (±1 T) HLN fit and the modified HLN fit give mutually inconsistent parameters: at 50 K, Lφ changes from 0.37 nm (low-field) to 45.9 nm (modified); at 100 K, α changes from -0.8195 to -0.0614. Such large discrepancies suggest the fits are not robust, undermining the specific α and Lφ values used to discuss weak antilocalization. Please include error bars, fit-range sensitivity, and a discussion of why the two fits disagree by orders of magnitude at some temperatures.
minor comments (5)
  1. [General] There are several typos and inconsistencies: 'magnto-conductivity' should be 'magneto-conductivity', 'homogenious' should be 'homogeneous', 'palletized' should be 'pelletized', and 'modified HNL model' should be 'modified HLN model'.
  2. [Results and Discussion, equations] Equation numbering is duplicated: the irreducible representation is labelled Eq. (1), and the R(T) fit equation is also labelled Eq. (1). Please renumber the equations sequentially.
  3. [Results and Discussion, R(T) fit parameters] The fitted parameters mix units: Rxx(0)=1.474 mΩ and β=1.19 mΩ, but γ=7.76×10^-8 Ω K^-2. Please use consistent unit prefixes throughout the text and Table 4.
  4. [Fig. 6(a) caption] The caption lists temperatures 2 K, 10 K, 50 K, 100 K, and 200 K, but the figure shows curves without distinct symbols; please clarify the correspondence between curves and temperatures in the figure or caption.
  5. [Raman analysis, Table 2] The observed Raman peaks are fitted with seven Lorentzian peaks for the three expected modes; the assignment of the shoulder peaks to specific Te-Bi-Te and Te-Sb-Te bonds would benefit from a more explicit justification, since the apparent peak positions and widths could also reflect alloy disorder.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

The Debye-temperature explanation of MR is a fitted-parameter interpretation, and the modified-HLN conclusion restates the added beta H^2 and gamma H terms; the central interpretive claims partly reduce to the fitting assumptions.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Results and Discussion, Eq. (1), Fig. 5(a); MR discussion, Fig. 6(a)]
    "A lower theta implies the effective e-ph interaction being present in mixed TI at low temperatures in comparison to pure TI ... The reduced MR% in mixed TIs is associated with the presence of e-ph coupling effect in BiSbTe3 at low temperatures leads to an increased residual resistance (Rxx(0)) resulting in reduced MR%."

    The Debye temperature theta is not measured independently; it is a fit parameter of Eq. (1), where the exponential term is labeled electron-phonon by assumption. The same fitted theta is then used to assert that e-ph is effective at low temperatures and to explain the suppressed 2 K MR. This is a fitting-to-interpretation loop: the physical conclusion is read back out of the parameter that was generated by the assumed functional form, with no heat-capacity or phonon measurement validating the e-ph channel.

  2. ansatz smuggled in via citation [Results and Discussion, modified HLN analysis, Fig. 6(c); Conclusion]
    "a modified HNL model [49] Dsigma(H)=HLN+beta H2+gamma H has been employed to fit the magneto-conductivity in the entire range +/-14 Tesla. Here, beta is the coefficient of the quadratic term that accounts for the elastic scattering and spin-orbit scattering (quantum scattering) in the topological insulator at higher magnetic fields. The linear term with coefficient gamma represents the bulk contribution in overall conductivity. Overall, the HLN analysis reveals that in low temperature regime, the conduction mechanism involves surface and bulk state conduction and quantum scattering effects."

    The modified HLN fitting function was constructed by adding beta H^2 and gamma H terms that the text explicitly defines as quantum scattering and bulk contributions, respectively, and the model is imported from the authors' own prior work (ref [49]). After fitting the data to this function, the paper concludes that bulk and quantum-scattering channels contribute to conduction. That conclusion is semantically contained in the ansatz used to build the fitting function: nonzero fitted beta and gamma merely confirm that the added terms improve the fit; they do not independently establish the physical existence or relative importance of those channels. The physical labels are supplied by the authors' earlier model, not derived from the data or from an independent microscopic calculation.

full rationale

The structural, compositional, and baseline transport characterization (XRD, EDAX, Raman, RRR, and the measured MR curves themselves) is largely self-contained and is not circular. The circularity is concentrated in two interpretive steps. First, the Debye temperature is obtained from a fit of Eq. (1) whose exponential term is labeled electron-phonon by assumption, and the same fitted theta is then used as evidence for effective low-temperature e-ph coupling and as the cause of the reduced 2 K MR. This is a fitted parameter used as if it were an independent physical measurement, and the paper's own fit parameters make the explanation numerically inconsistent at 2 K: the e-ph term is about 10^-18 mOhm while the e-e term is about 3e-4 mOhm. Second, the modified HLN analysis adds beta H^2 and gamma H terms explicitly defined as quantum scattering and bulk contributions, then concludes that those channels contribute; that conclusion is already present in the fitting ansatz, which is taken from the authors' prior work (ref [49]). The comparison MR values for Bi2Te3 and Sb2Te3 are also taken from the authors' own earlier papers (refs [40,41]), but those are external baseline measurements rather than logical inputs that force the present conclusion, so they raise only a minor self-citation concern. Overall, the interpretive claims partially reduce to the fit assumptions, but the measured data and structural results retain independent content. Score 6 reflects this partial, construction-level circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 8 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on several fitted coefficients from the R(T) fit and the HLN fits, on the assumption that the fitted theta is a real Debye temperature, on the interpretation of added HLN terms as bulk and quantum channels, and on unmatched literature comparisons. No new particles, forces, or other entities are introduced.

free parameters (8)
  • Residual resistance Rxx(0) = 1.474 mΩ
    From the R(T) fit in Fig. 5(a); contributes to the metallic and relative-resistance comparison.
  • Exponential prefactor beta = 1.19 mΩ
    Coefficient of exp(-theta/T) in Eq. (1), attributed to electron-phonon scattering.
  • Debye temperature theta = 82.64 K
    Extracted from the same R(T) fit, then used as evidence of enhanced low-temperature electron-phonon interaction; not independently measured.
  • Electron-electron coefficient gamma = 7.76e-8 Ω K^-2
    Quadratic coefficient in Eq. (1), attributed to e-e interaction.
  • HLN alpha coefficient = -0.014 to -0.117 (modified fit); -0.016 to -0.82 (low-field fit)
    Free parameter in HLN fits; sign used to claim weak antilocalization.
  • Phase coherence length Lphi = 30.3 to 45.9 nm (modified fit); 0.37 to 27.2 nm (low-field fit)
    Free parameter in HLN fits; temperature trend used to support dephasing interpretation.
  • Quadratic HLN coefficient beta = -4.9e-5 to 0.817 mT^-2 e^2/h
    Added term in modified HLN model, assigned to quantum, elastic, and spin-orbit scattering.
  • Linear HLN coefficient gamma = -0.031 to -0.002 T^-1 e^2/h
    Added linear-in-H term, assigned to bulk contribution.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Equation (1), R(T) = R(0) + beta exp(-theta/T) + gamma T^2, is an appropriate model for BiSbTe3 and theta is the Debye temperature.
    Invoked in Results after Fig. 5(a); the physical interpretation of theta as Debye temperature and exp(-theta/T) as e-ph term is assumed from prior work, not derived or verified by heat capacity.
  • domain assumption The HLN equation and modified polynomial terms beta H^2 + gamma H describe the magnetoconductivity, with beta and gamma mapping to quantum scattering and bulk conduction respectively.
    Used in Results, Fig. 6(c); the assignments of the added terms are assumed from ref [49], not derived from a microscopic model.
  • domain assumption A non-saturating linear MR is a signature of topological surface states.
    Used in the abstract and Results to infer topological nature; linear MR can also arise from mobility fluctuations or disorder in non-topological materials.
  • domain assumption Melt-growth at 900 C for 48 h with cooling at 60 C/h produces a single crystal with nominal Bi:Sb:Te = 1:1:3 in the R-3m structure.
    Assumed from the synthesis and Rietveld model; the refinement supports the structure, but Bi/Sb site disorder is not independently resolved.
  • domain assumption Literature values for Bi2Te3 and Sb2Te3 Debye temperatures and MR are directly comparable to the present data.
    Used in Fig. 5(b) and the MR suppression comparison; conditions such as 5 K/14 T and 2 K/12 T differ from the 2 K/14 T measurement of BiSbTe3.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Crystal Growth & Physical Property Characterization of Mixed Topological Insulator BiSbTe$_3$." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2BY6RSPX

@misc{pith2026250524471,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Crystal Growth & Physical Property Characterization of Mixed Topological Insulator BiSbTe$_3$},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2BY6RSPX}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.24471}
}
abstract

This article reports the synthesis of a single crystalline mixed topological insulator (TI) BiSbTe$_3$ and its detailed structural and magneto-transport properties. The single crystalline samples of BiSbTe$_3$ are grown by the melt-growth process and characterized by X-ray diffraction (XRD), Energy dispersive X-ray analysis (EDAX) and Raman spectroscopy. The single crystal XRD peaks dictated the growth direction along the c-axis. The Raman spectrum elucidated the characteristic peaks of the mixed topological insulator. The broadening of Raman peaks exhibited the formation of Te-Bi-Te and Te-Sb-Te bonds and associated vibrational modes. The single crystals are characterized by magneto-transport measurements down to 2 K and up to 14 Tesla transverse magnetic field. The residual resistance ratio (R200 K/R0 K) is found to be 3.64, which endorses the metallic nature of the synthesized crystal. The relative resistance turns out to be higher for the mixed TI than the pure TIs i.e., Bi$_2$Te$_3$ or Sb$_2$Te$_3$. The lower Debye temperature (82.64 K) of BiSbTe$_3$ connotes the presence of effective electron-phonon interaction at quite low temperatures in comparison to pure TI, which explains the observed suppression in magnetoresistance (MR) for the mixed TI. At 2 K, an MR of 150 percent is observed for BiSbTe$_3$, which is suppressed in contrast to the pure TIs i.e., Bi$_2$Te$_3$ or Sb$_2$Te$_3$. Though the MR% is suppressed significantly, its non-saturating linear behavior indicates the topological nature of the studied mixed TI. The modified Hikami-Larkin-Nagaoka (HLN) equation analysis of magneto-conductivity of mixed TI revealed that the conductivity has not only a surface states driven 2D component but also contributions from the bulk charge carriers and quantum scattering.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.24471 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The heat treatment diagram followed for the synthesis of BiSbTe3 single crystals. The inset shows the silvery shiny chunk of obtained crystals [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_1.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

52 extracted references · 52 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Moore, J.E., Nature, 464(7286), 194 (2010)

    work page 2010

  2. [2]

    and Wang, Y ., Materials, 10(7), 814 (2017)

    Tian, W., Yu, W., Shi, J. and Wang, Y ., Materials, 10(7), 814 (2017)

    work page 2017

  3. [3]

    and Catlow, C.R.A., Adv

    Scanlon, D.O., King, P.D.C., Singh, R.P., de la Torre, A., Walker, S.M., Balakrishnan, G., Baumberger, F. and Catlow, C.R.A., Adv. Mat., 24(16), 2154 (2012)

    work page 2012

  4. [4]

    Ando, Y ., J. Phys. Soc. Jap., 82(10),102001(2013)

    work page 2013

  5. [5]

    and Kane, C.L., Rev

    Hasan, M.Z. and Kane, C.L., Rev. Mod. Phys., 82(4), 3045 (2010)

    work page 2010

  6. [6]

    and Ando, Y ., Phys

    Ren, Z., Taskin, A.A., Sasaki, S., Segawa, K. and Ando, Y ., Phys. Rev. B, 82(24), 241306 (2010)

    work page 2010

  7. [7]

    and Zhang, S.C., Rev

    Qi, X.L. and Zhang, S.C., Rev. Mod. Phys., 83(4), 1057(2011)

    work page 2011

  8. [8]

    and Hasan, M.Z., Nat

    Xia, Y ., Qian, D., Hsieh, D., Wray, L., Pal, A., Lin, H., Bansil, A., Grauer, D.H.Y .S., Hor, Y .S., Cava, R.J. and Hasan, M.Z., Nat. Phys., 5(6), 398 (2009)

    work page 2009

Show all 52 references
  1. [9]

    and Wang, K.L., In Spin (V ol

    Fan, Y . and Wang, K.L., In Spin (V ol. 6, No. 02, 1640001). World Scientific Publishing Company

  2. [10]

    and He, Q.L., Front

    He, M., Sun, H. and He, Q.L., Front. Phys., 14, 1 (2019) 13 | P a g e

    2019

  3. [11]

    and MacDonald, A.H., Nat

    Pesin, D. and MacDonald, A.H., Nat. Mat., 11(5), 409 (2012)

    2012

  4. [12]

    and Chen, Y .P., Phys

    Cao, H., Tian, J., Miotkowski, I., Shen, T., Hu, J., Qiao, S. and Chen, Y .P., Phys. Rev. Lett., 108(21), 216803 (2012)

    2012

  5. [13]

    and Mukhopadhyay, S.C., Smart Sensors, Measurement and Instrumentation, 6(1), 1(2013)

    Reig, C., Cardoso, S. and Mukhopadhyay, S.C., Smart Sensors, Measurement and Instrumentation, 6(1), 1(2013)

    2013

  6. [14]

    and Zhang, X.X., Sci

    Wang, W., Du, Y ., Xu, G., Zhang, X., Liu, E., Liu, Z., Shi, Y ., Chen, J., Wu, G. and Zhang, X.X., Sci. Rep., 3(1), 2181 (2013)

    2013

  7. [15]

    and Ong, N.P., Phys

    Xiong, J., Luo, Y ., Khoo, Y ., Jia, S., Cava, R.J. and Ong, N.P., Phys. Rev. B, 86(4), 045314 (2012)

    2012

  8. [16]

    and Mandrus, D., Sci

    Wang, H., Liu, H., Li, Y ., Liu, Y ., Wang, J., Liu, J., Dai, J.Y ., Wang, Y ., Li, L., Yan, J. and Mandrus, D., Sci. Adv., 4(11), eaau5096 (2018)

    2018

  9. [17]

    and Bharathi, A., J Phys.: Cond

    Amaladass, E.P., Devidas, T.R., Sharma, S., Sundar, C.S., Mani, A. and Bharathi, A., J Phys.: Cond. Matt., 28(7), 075003 (2016)

    2016

  10. [18]

    and Zhang, S.C., Nat

    Zhang, H., Liu, C.X., Qi, X.L., Dai, X., Fang, Z. and Zhang, S.C., Nat. Phys., 5(6), 438 (2009)

    2009

  11. [19]

    and Ando, Y ., Nat

    Arakane, T., Sato, T., Souma, S., Kosaka, K., Nakayama, K., Komatsu, M., Takahashi, T., Ren, Z., Segawa, K. and Ando, Y ., Nat. Commun., 3(1), 636 (2012)

    2012

  12. [20]

    and Tamegai, T., Phys

    Sun, Y ., Taen, T., Yamada, T., Pyon, S., Nishizaki, T., Shi, Z. and Tamegai, T., Phys. Rev. B, 89, 144512 (2014)

    2014

  13. [21]

    and Spivak, B.Z., Phys

    Son, D.T. and Spivak, B.Z., Phys. Rev. B, 88(10), 104412 (2013)

    2013

  14. [22]

    Phys.: X, 7(1), 2064230 (2022)

    Zhao, W., and Wang, X., Adv. Phys.: X, 7(1), 2064230 (2022)

    2022

  15. [23]

    and Dai, X., Phys

    Yu, R., Qi, X.L., Bernevig, A., Fang, Z. and Dai, X., Phys. Rev. B, 84(7), 075119 (2011)

    2011

  16. [24]

    Hikami, S., Larkin, A.I., Nagaoka, Y ., Prog. Theor. Phys., 63, 707 (1980)

    1980

  17. [25]

    and Awana, V .P.S., J Supercon

    Kumar, Y . and Awana, V .P.S., J Supercon. Nov. Mag., 34(5), 1303 (2021)

    2021

  18. [26]

    and Sau, J., Physica Scripta, 96(5), 055802 (2021)

    Gangwar, V .K., Kumar, S., Singh, M., Ghosh, L., Zhang, Y ., Shahi, P., Muntwiler, M., Patil, S., Shimada, K., Uwatoko, Y . and Sau, J., Physica Scripta, 96(5), 055802 (2021)

    2021

  19. [27]

    and Wu, K., Sci

    He, X., Li, H., Chen, L. and Wu, K., Sci. Rep., 5(1), 8830 (2015)

    2015

  20. [28]

    and Chou, M.C., Appl

    Huang, S.M., Wang, P.C., Lin, C., You, S.Y ., Lin, W.C., Lin, L.J., Yan, Y .J., Y u, S.H. and Chou, M.C., Appl. Phys. Lett., 112(20), 203103 (2018)

    2018

  21. [29]

    and Lakhani, A., Mat

    Rajput, I., Baral, S., Dasoundhi, M.K., Kumar, D. and Lakhani, A., Mat. Tod. Commun., 33, 104537 (2022)

    2022

  22. [30]

    Springer Science & Business Media (2010)

    Glicksman, M.E., Principles of solidification: an introduction to modern casting and crystal growth concepts. Springer Science & Business Media (2010)

    2010

  23. [31]

    and Ramamurthi, K., Mat

    Prabhakaran, S.P., Babu, R.R., Velusamy, P. and Ramamurthi, K., Mat. Res. Bullet., 46(11), (2011). 14 | P a g e

    2011

  24. [32]

    and Paramasivam, S., Zeitschrift für Physikalische Chemie, 238(11) (2024)

    Singaravel, S., Periyasamy, V ., Kim, I., Hasan, I. and Paramasivam, S., Zeitschrift für Physikalische Chemie, 238(11) (2024)

    2024

  25. [33]

    and Kumar, M., Mat

    Anoop, M.D., Yadav, N., Yadav, J., Singh, R., Jain, A., Ichikawa, T. and Kumar, M., Mat . Tod.: Proc., 31, 622 (2020)

    2020

  26. [34]

    and Blumberg, G., Phys

    Lee, A.C., Kung, H.H., Wang, X., Cheong, S.W. and Blumberg, G., Phys. Rev. B, 108(17), 174301 (2023)

    2023

  27. [35]

    Glazer, A.M., Applied Crystallography, 42(6), 1194 (2009)

    2009

  28. [36]

    and Awana, V .P.S., Physica B: Cond

    Sharma, D., Sharma, M.M., Meena, R.S. and Awana, V .P.S., Physica B: Cond. Matt., 600, 412492 (2021)

    2021

  29. [37]

    and Hampel, S., J

    Abdelrahman, N., Charvin, T., Froeschke, S., Giraud, R., Dufouleur, J., Popov, A., Schiemenz, S., Wolf, D., Büchner, B., Mertig, M. and Hampel, S., J. of Mat. Chem. C, 12(45), 18416 (2024)

    2024

  30. [38]

    and Becker, C.R., Phys

    Richter, W. and Becker, C.R., Phys. Stat. Solidi (b), 84(2), 619 (1977)

    1977

  31. [39]

    and Das, P., Sci

    Mal, P., Das, B., Lakhani, A., Bera, G., Turpu, G.R., Wu, J.C., Tomy, C.V . and Das, P., Sci. Rep., 9(1), 7018 (2019)

    2019

  32. [40]

    and Awana, V .P .S., Physica B: Cond

    Kumar, Y ., Sultana, R. and Awana, V .P .S., Physica B: Cond. Matt., 609, 412759 (2021)

    2021

  33. [41]

    and Awana, V .P .S., J of Supercon

    Kumar, K., Kumar, Y . and Awana, V .P .S., J of Supercon. and Nov. Mag., 35(10), 2601 (2022)

    2022

  34. [42]

    and Kumar, S., New J

    Nivedan, A. and Kumar, S., New J. Phys., 26(3), 033044 (2024)

    2024

  35. [43]

    and Ganesan, V ., Appl

    Dutta, P., Bhoi, D., Midya, A., Khan, N., Mandal, P., Shanmukharao Samatham, S. and Ganesan, V ., Appl. Phys. Lett. 100, 251912 (2012)

    2012

  36. [44]

    and Chattopadhyay, K.K., J

    Bhattacharjee, S. and Chattopadhyay, K.K., J. Appl. Phys., 132(21), 215107 (2022)

    2022

  37. [45]

    and Heiman, D., Appl

    Assaf, B.A., Cardinal, T., Wei, P., Katmis, F., Moodera, J.S. and Heiman, D., Appl. Phys. Lett. 102, 012102 (2013)

    2013

  38. [46]

    Lu, H. Z. and Shen, S. Q., Proc. of SPIE, 9167, 91672E (2014)

    2014

  39. [47]

    and Fuhrer, M.S., Nat

    Kim, D., Syers, P., Butch, N.P., Paglione, J. and Fuhrer, M.S., Nat. Commun., 4(1), 2040 (2013)

    2013

  40. [48]

    and Li, Y .Q., Phys

    Chen, J., He, X.Y ., Wu, K.H., Ji, Z.Q., Lu, L., Shi, J.R., Smet, J.H. and Li, Y .Q., Phys. Rev. B, 83(24), 241304 (2011)

    2011

  41. [49]

    and Awana, V .P.S., SN Appl

    Kumar, Y ., Sultana, R., Sharma, P. and Awana, V .P.S., SN Appl. Sci., 3(4), 413 (2021)

    2021

  42. [50]

    and Glazman, L., Phys

    Garate, I. and Glazman, L., Phys. Rev. B, 86(3), 035422 (2012)

    2012

  43. [51]

    and Ma, X.C., Phys

    Matsuo, S., Koyama, T., Shimamura, K., Arakawa, T., Nishihara, Y ., Chiba, D., Kobayashi, K., Ono, T., Chang, C.Z., He, K. and Ma, X.C., Phys. Rev. B, 85(7), 075440 (2012)

    2012

  44. [52]

    Cha, J.J., Kong, D., Hong, S.S., Analytis, J.G., Lai, K. and Cui, Y ., Nano Lett., 12(2), 1107(2012) 15 | P a g e Figures Fig.1 60 oC/h Temperature(oC) Time(hours) 48 h 30 900 60 oC/h BiSbTe3 Fig.2 0 2 4 6 20 30 40 50 60 70-0.6 -0.3 0.0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 (0021) (0018) (0015) (00...

    2012

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.