pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.04392 · v3 · pith:2QYFJ66Tnew · submitted 2026-04-06 · ❄️ cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Comprehensive determination of Burgers vectors of threading dislocations in GaN substrates by combining reflection and transmission synchrotron-radiation x-ray topography

Kazuki Ohnishi , Kenji Iso , Hirotaka Ikeda , Yoshiyuki Tsusaka , Yongzhao Yao This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-19 17:09 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords Burgers vectorthreading dislocationsGaN substratesynchrotron x-ray topographyreflection modetransmission modedislocation characterization
0
0 comments X

The pith

Combining reflection and transmission synchrotron x-ray topography fully determines Burgers vectors of threading dislocations in GaN substrates

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

The paper demonstrates a method to identify the complete Burgers vectors of individual threading dislocations in an ammonothermal-grown GaN crystal by recording images in both reflection and transmission modes. Reflection images taken with six different diffraction vectors limit the possible vectors and estimate the out-of-plane component from the size of the spot contrasts. Transmission images then apply the invisibility criterion to fix the in-plane direction and use measured image widths under kinematical contrast to set the in-plane magnitude. This combination classifies edge-type, mixed-type, and even pairs of opposite screw-type dislocations without requiring additional techniques.

Core claim

Reflection XRT images with equivalent 11-24 g vectors constrain possible Burgers vectors and estimate the c-axis component from contrast size; transmission XRT images under multiple two-beam conditions use the gb invisibility criterion to determine the in-plane direction and kinematical linewidths to determine the magnitude of the a-axis component; together these steps yield the full Burgers vectors of individual threading dislocations, including edge and mixed types, and reveal pairs of screw-type dislocations with opposite +1c and -1c vectors.

What carries the argument

Combined contrast-size analysis in reflection SR-XRT, gb-invisibility rules in transmission SR-XRT, and kinematical linewidth measurements to extract all three components of the Burgers vector for each threading dislocation

If this is right

  • Every threading dislocation in the GaN substrate can be classified as pure edge, pure screw, or mixed with its exact vector components assigned
  • Pairs of screw dislocations with exactly opposite Burgers vectors can be identified directly in transmission images
  • The method supplies a practical, non-destructive route to full Burgers-vector mapping across entire GaN wafers
  • Dislocation-type statistics become measurable without cross-sectioning or destructive sample preparation

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same combined reflection-plus-transmission protocol could be transferred to other hexagonal crystals such as SiC or AlN to map threading-dislocation populations
  • Precise Burgers-vector data open the possibility of correlating specific dislocation types with local carrier recombination or leakage paths in finished devices
  • Automated image analysis pipelines could scale the technique to wafer-level defect inventories

Load-bearing premise

The observed contrast sizes, invisibility conditions, and image linewidths uniquely and unambiguously identify every component of the Burgers vector without interference from overlapping defects or other diffraction effects.

What would settle it

Direct comparison of the same set of dislocations by transmission electron microscopy diffraction-contrast analysis yielding a different Burgers vector for any individual defect

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.04392 by Hirotaka Ikeda, Kazuki Ohnishi, Kenji Iso, Yongzhao Yao, Yoshiyuki Tsusaka.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Experimental setup for SR-XRT with (a) the reflection and (b) the transmission modes. In the transmission mode, the six-beam diffraction condition was illustrated [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Reflection XRT images of the same area taken with the six-equivalent g vectors of 112 _ 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: (a) Photograph of the five Laue spots of diffraction beam of g1g5, and (b) transmission XRT image recorded with the o-wave under the six-beam diffraction condition [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4:  scan of the integral intensity of the o-wave at  = 0.01 . Transmission XRT images recorded with the o-wave at the exact Bragg condition of g1g5 are also presented [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Transmission XRT images recorded with the o-wave at the exact Bragg condition of (a) g1, (b) g6, and (c) g5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: (a) Transmission XRT image of the TD labeled E1 recorded with the o-wave at g5 under  for 0.003 . (b) The linewidth of the TD image labeled E1under the kinematical diffraction condition. Dot shows the Pixel brightness profiles, and the black line shows the Gaussian fitting profile. the FWHM ratio of the TDs relative to the TD labeled E1 obtained from the transmission XRT images recorded with (c) g4 and… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Procedure for determining the Burgers vectors of TDs using combined reflection and transmission SR-XRT. Reflection SR-XRT constrains the possible Burgers vectors and provides information on the c-axis component. Transmission SR-XRT further constrains the possible (0001) in-plane direction of b using the g·b invisibility criterion. The remaining ambiguity in (0001) the in-plane direction and the magnitude o… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The pair of the screw-type TDs with opposite b of [0001] observed by (a) the reflection SR-XRT recorded with g = 112 _ 4 and the transmission SR-XRT recorded with (b)- (f) g1g5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_8.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Burgers vectors (b) of threading dislocations (TDs) in an acidic ammonothermal-grown GaN substrate were investigated using synchrotron radiation x-ray topography (SR-XRT) by combining both reflection and transmission modes. Reflection XRT images recorded with six equivalent g vectors of 11-24 revealed spot-like contrasts corresponding to TDs. Based on the contrast conditions, the possible Burgers vectors were constrained, and the c-axis component of b for mixed-type TDs was estimated from the contrast size. Using transmission XRT images recorded under several two-beam diffraction conditions, the (0001) in-plane direction of b was evaluated based on the gb invisibility criterion. Furthermore, by analyzing the linewidths of dislocation images observed under kinematical diffraction contrast, the magnitude of the a-axis component of b was determined. By combining these analyses, the Burgers vectors of individual TDs, including edge- and mixed-type dislocations, were determined. In addition, a pair of screw-type TDs with opposite Burgers vectors, +1c, -1c, was observed in the transmission SR-XRT. These results demonstrate that the combined use of reflection and transmission SR-XRT provides a practical approach for complete determination of Burgers vectors in GaN substrates.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper claims that combining reflection SR-XRT (using six equivalent 11-24 g-vectors to constrain possible Burgers vectors and estimate the c-component from contrast size) with transmission SR-XRT (using gb invisibility under two-beam conditions for the in-plane direction and kinematical linewidths for the a-component magnitude) enables complete, unambiguous determination of Burgers vectors for individual threading dislocations in GaN substrates, including edge, mixed, and screw types, and the observation of a +1c/-1c screw pair.

Significance. If the contrast-based assignments hold without ambiguity, the work supplies a practical non-destructive route to full Burgers-vector characterization in GaN, directly relevant to substrate quality control for power and optoelectronic devices. It extends established XRT contrast rules by the reflection-plus-transmission combination and supplies concrete examples of mixed and opposite-sign screw dislocations.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract / transmission SR-XRT section] Abstract and transmission-analysis description: the claim that gb invisibility plus kinematical linewidths isolates the in-plane direction and |b_a| without cross-talk is load-bearing for the central result, yet the text provides no quantitative error analysis, depth-dependent simulations, or checks against residual strain from neighboring TDs that are known to modulate image size and visibility in GaN XRT.
  2. [Reflection XRT analysis] Reflection contrast-size analysis: the estimation of the c-component from spot-like contrast size assumes a direct monotonic relation free of contributions from dislocation depth or local curvature; no calibration curve, simulation, or statistical distribution across many TDs is shown to support this isolation.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Results / figures] Figure captions and text should explicitly state the number of TDs examined and the fraction for which all three components could be assigned without ambiguity.
  2. [Experimental methods] Add a short methods paragraph detailing the exact two-beam conditions, rocking-curve widths, and any post-processing applied to the transmission images.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 1 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments and positive evaluation of the work's significance. We address each major comment point by point below, indicating where we agree revisions are warranted and where we provide clarification or additional analysis.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract / transmission SR-XRT section] Abstract and transmission-analysis description: the claim that gb invisibility plus kinematical linewidths isolates the in-plane direction and |b_a| without cross-talk is load-bearing for the central result, yet the text provides no quantitative error analysis, depth-dependent simulations, or checks against residual strain from neighboring TDs that are known to modulate image size and visibility in GaN XRT.

    Authors: We agree that quantitative support strengthens the claims. The gb invisibility criterion is applied under multiple two-beam conditions chosen to isolate the in-plane component, following standard contrast rules for hexagonal crystals. Linewidth analysis under kinematical conditions is used to estimate |b_a| based on the established proportionality between image width and Burgers vector magnitude. In the revised manuscript we will add a quantitative assessment of linewidth variations measured on isolated TDs to provide error estimates and will explicitly discuss selection of relatively isolated dislocations to minimize residual strain contributions from neighbors. Full depth-dependent dynamical simulations of image formation are not feasible within the present experimental study. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Reflection XRT analysis] Reflection contrast-size analysis: the estimation of the c-component from spot-like contrast size assumes a direct monotonic relation free of contributions from dislocation depth or local curvature; no calibration curve, simulation, or statistical distribution across many TDs is shown to support this isolation.

    Authors: The c-component estimation relies on the observed monotonic increase in spot-like contrast size with increasing |b_c| when the same set of TDs is cross-checked against the transmission results. We acknowledge possible influences from depth and local curvature. In the revised version we will include a statistical distribution of contrast sizes measured on the full set of identified edge, mixed, and screw TDs and will add a short discussion of how sample thickness and beam geometry limit depth variation effects. A dedicated calibration curve from simulations is outside the scope of this primarily experimental work but relevant literature on XRT contrast modeling will be cited. revision: yes

standing simulated objections not resolved
  • Full depth-dependent dynamical simulations to quantify cross-talk and residual strain modulation in transmission images.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: experimental characterization applies standard XRT criteria

full rationale

The paper is a purely experimental study that applies established x-ray topography contrast rules (gb invisibility, contrast size scaling with |b|, kinematical linewidths) to assign Burgers vectors in GaN. No mathematical derivation, parameter fitting presented as prediction, or self-citation chain is invoked to justify the central claims; the method rests on direct image interpretation under multiple diffraction conditions. The analysis is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks of XRT physics and does not reduce any result to its own inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard x-ray topography contrast theory rather than new parameters or entities.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Standard x-ray diffraction contrast theory and the gb invisibility criterion apply directly to the observed spot contrasts and image linewidths under the chosen diffraction conditions.
    Invoked when constraining Burgers vectors from reflection contrast conditions and when using transmission invisibility and linewidth analysis.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5779 in / 1247 out tokens · 46287 ms · 2026-05-19T17:09:22.661411+00:00 · methodology

Review history (2 revisions) →

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

54 extracted references · 54 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    Amano, Y

    H. Amano, Y . Baines, E. Beam, M. Borga, T. Bouchet, P. R. Chalker, M. Charles, K. J. Chen, N. Chowdhury, R. Chu, C. De Santi, M. M. De Souza, S. Decoutere, L. Di Cioccio, B. Eckardt, T. Egawa, P. Fay, J. J. Freedsman, L. Guido, O. Häberlen, G. Haynes, T. Heckel, D. Hemakumara, P. Houston, J. Hu, M. Hua, Q. Huang, A. Huang, S. Jiang, H. Kawai, D. Kinzer, ...

    work page 2018

  2. [2]

    Kachi, Appl

    T. Kachi, Appl. Phys. Express 19, 010103 (2026)

    work page 2026

  3. [3]

    Kolník, İH

    J. Kolník, İH. Oğuzman, K. F. Brennan, R. Wang, P. P. Ruden, and Y . Wang, J. Appl. Phys. 78, 1033 (1995)

    work page 1995

  4. [4]

    Maeda, T

    T. Maeda, T. Narita, S. Yamada, T. Kachi, T. Kimoto, M. Horita, and J. Suda, J. Appl. Phys. 129, 185702 (2021)

    work page 2021

  5. [5]

    Kaneki, T

    S. Kaneki, T. Konno, H. Mori, and H. Fujikura, Appl. Phys. Express 18, 055502 (2025)

    work page 2025

  6. [6]

    Saitoh, K

    Y . Saitoh, K. Sumiyoshi, M. Okada, T. Horii, T. Miyazaki, H. Shiomi, M. Ueno, K. Katayama, M. Kiyama, and T. Nakamura, Appl. Phys. Express 8, 081001 (2010)

    work page 2010

  7. [7]

    W. Li, K. Nomoto, M. Pilla, M. Pan, X. Gao, D. Jena, and H. G. Xing, IEEE Trans. Electron Devices 64, 1635 (2017)

    work page 2017

  8. [8]

    Kanechika, M

    M. Kanechika, M. Sugimoto, N. Soejima, H. Ueda, O. Ishiguro, M. Kodama, E. Hayashi, K. Itoh, T. Uesugi, and T. Kachi, Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 46, L503 (2007)

    work page 2007

  9. [9]

    T. Oka, T. Ina, Y . Ueno, and J. Nishii, Appl. Phys. Express 8, 054101 (2015)

    work page 2015

  10. [10]

    Hatakeyama, K

    H. Hatakeyama, K. Nomoto, N. Kaneda, T. Kawano, T. Mishima, and T. Nakamura, IEEE Electron Device Lett. 32, 1674 (2011)

    work page 2011

  11. [11]

    Nomoto, B

    K. Nomoto, B. Song, Z. Hu, M. Zhu, M. Qi, N. Kaneda, T. Mishima, and T. Nakamura, IEEE Electron Device Lett. 37, 161 (2015)

    work page 2015

  12. [12]

    I. C. Kizilyalli, T. Prunty, and O. Aktas, IEEE Electron Device Lett. 36, 1073 (2015)

    work page 2015

  13. [13]

    Oka, Jpn

    T. Oka, Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 58, SB0805 (2019)

    work page 2019

  14. [14]

    Kanechika, K

    M. Kanechika, K. Ito, T. Narita, K. Tomita, S. Iwasaki, D. Kikuta, and T. Kachi, Phys. Status Solidi RRL 18, 240010 (2024)

    work page 2024

  15. [15]

    H. Ohta, Y . Narita, S. Kaneki, T. Kitamura, F. Horikiri, H. Fujikura, S. Takatani, and T. 13 Mishima, Appl. Phys. Lett. 126, 012101 (2025)

    work page 2025

  16. [16]

    Kitagawa, M

    K. Kitagawa, M. Matys, T. Uesugi, M. Horita, T. Kachi, and J. Suda, IEEE Trans. Electron Devices 72, 4036 (2025)

    work page 2025

  17. [17]

    Usami, Y

    S. Usami, Y . Ando, A. Tanaka, K. Nagamatsu, M. Deki, M. Kushimoto, S. Nitta, Y . Honda, H. Amano, Y . Sugawara, Y . Yao, and Y . Ishikawa, Appl. Phys. Lett. 112, 182106 (2018)

    work page 2018

  18. [18]

    Nakano, Y

    T. Nakano, Y . Harashima, K. Chokawa, K. Shiraishi, A. Oshiyama , Y . Kangawa, S. Usami, N. Mayama, K. Toda, A. Tanaka, Y . Honda, and H. Amano, Appl. Phys. Lett. 117, 012105 (2020)

    work page 2020

  19. [19]

    Narita, M

    T. Narita, M. Kanechika, J. Kojima, H. Watanabe, T. Kondo, T. Uesugi, S. Yamaguchi, Y . Kimoto, K. Tomita, Y . Nagasato, S. Ikeda, M. Kosaki, T. Oka, and J. Suda, Sci. Rep. 12, 1458 (2022)

    work page 2022

  20. [20]

    Hamachi, T

    T. Hamachi, T. Tohei, Y . Hayashi, M. Imanishi, S. Usami, Y . Mori, and A. Sakai, Sci. Rep. 13, 2436 (2023)

    work page 2023

  21. [21]

    Sintonen, S

    S. Sintonen, S. Suihkonen, H. Jussila, A. Danilewsky, R. Stankiewicz, T. O. Tuomi, and H. Lipsanen, Appl. Phys. Express 7, 091003 (2014)

    work page 2014

  22. [22]

    Sintonen, M

    S. Sintonen, M. Rudziński, S. Suihkonen, H. Jussila, M. Knetzger, E. Meissner, A. Danilewsky, T. O. Tuomi, and H. Lipsanen, J. Appl. Phys. 116, 083504 (2014)

    work page 2014

  23. [23]

    Y . Yao, Y . Ishikawa, Y . Sugawara, Y . Takahashi, and K. Hirano, J. Electron. Mater. 47, 50007 (2018)

    work page 2018

  24. [24]

    Kanechika, S

    M. Kanechika, S. Yamaguchi, M. Imanishi, and Y . Mori, Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 58, SCCD22 (2019)

    work page 2019

  25. [25]

    Raghothamachar, Y

    B. Raghothamachar, Y . Liu, H. Peng, T. Ailihumaer, M. Dudley, F. S. Shahedipour- Sandvik, K. A. Jones, A. Armstrong, A. A. Allerman, J. Han, H. Fu, K. Fu, and Y . Zhao, J. Cryst. Growth 544, 125709 (2020)

    work page 2020

  26. [26]

    Y . Liu, B. Raghothamachar, H. Peng, T. Ailihumaer, M. Dudley, R. Collazo, J. Tweedie, Z. Sitar, F. S. Shahedipour-Sandvik, K. A. Jones, A. Armstrong, A. A. Allerman, K. Grabianska, R. Kucharski, and M. Bockowski, J. Cryst. Growth 551, 125703 (2020)

    work page 2020

  27. [27]

    Kanechika, S

    M. Kanechika, S. Yamaguchi, Y . Kishida, K. Kitazumi, K. Isegawa, and Y . Kimoto, Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 64, 031001 (2025)

    work page 2025

  28. [28]

    Tsusaka, H

    Y . Tsusaka, H. Mizouchi, M. Imanishi, M. Imade, Y . Mori, and J. Matsui, J. Appl. Phys. 14 125, 125105 (2019)

    work page 2019

  29. [29]

    Kirste, K

    L. Kirste, K. Grabianska, R. Kucharski, T. Sochacki, B. Lucznik, and M. Bockowski, Materials 14, 5472 (2021)

    work page 2021

  30. [30]

    Y . Yao, Y . Sugawara, Y . Ishikawa, and K. Hirano, Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 60, 010908 (2021)

    work page 2021

  31. [31]

    Kirste, T

    L. Kirste, T. N. Tran-Caliste, T. Sochacki, J. L. Weyher, P. Straňák, R. Kucharski, K. Grabianska, J. Baruchel, and M. Bockowski, Prog. Cryst. Growth Charact. Mater. 71, 100668 (2025)

    work page 2025

  32. [32]

    Y . Yao, Y . Tsusaka, and Y . Ishikawa, J. Appl. Phys. 139, 065102 (2026)

    work page 2026

  33. [33]

    Y . Yao, Y . Ishikawa, Y . Sugawara, D. Yokoe, M. Sudo, N. Okada, and K. Tadatomo, Superlattices Microstruct. 99, 83 (2016)

    work page 2016

  34. [34]

    Sugawara, Y

    Y . Sugawara, Y . Ishikawa, A, Watanabe, M. Miyoshi, and T. Egawa, AIP Adv. 6, 045020 (2016)

    work page 2016

  35. [35]

    Y . Yao, Y . Ishikawa, M. Sudo, Y . Sugawara, and D. Yokoe, J. Cryst. Growth 468, 484 (2017)

    work page 2017

  36. [36]

    Tanikawa, K

    T. Tanikawa, K. Ohnishi, M. Kanoh, T. Mukai, and T. Matsuoka, Appl. Phys. Express 11, 031004 (2018)

    work page 2018

  37. [37]

    Kokubo, Y

    N. Kokubo, Y . Tsunooka, F. Fujie, J. Ohara, K. Hara, S. Onda, H. Yamada, M. Shimizu, S. Harada, M. Tagawa, and T. Ujihara, Appl. Phys. Express 11, 061002 (2018)

    work page 2018

  38. [38]

    Takahashi, Y

    S. Takahashi, Y . Wakamoto, K. Kuruma, T. Maeda, and Y . Ozeki, arXiv:2511.04915 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  39. [39]

    Tanaka, S

    A. Tanaka, S. Inotsume, S. Harada, K. Hanada, Y . Honda, T. Ujihara, and H. Amano, Phys. Status Solidi B 257, 190553 (2020)

    work page 2020

  40. [40]

    High-throughput, Non-Destructive, Three-Dimensional Imaging of GaN Threading Dislocations with in-Plane Burgers Vector Component via Phase-Contrast Microscopy

    Y . Ishikawa, R. Hattori, Y . Yao, D. Katsube, and K. Sato, arXiv:2511.08989 (2025)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  41. [41]

    Fujie, S

    F. Fujie, S. Harada, H. Koizumi, K. Murayama, K. Harada, M. Tagawa, and T. Ujihara, Appl. Phys. Lett. 113, 012101 (2018)

    work page 2018

  42. [42]

    Konishi, R

    K. Konishi, R. Fujita, K. Kobayashi, A. Yoneyama, K. Ishiji, H. Okuno, A. Shima, and T. Ujihara, J. Appl. Phys. 130, 145703 (2021)

    work page 2021

  43. [43]

    Kajiwara, S

    K. Kajiwara, S. Kawado, S. Iida, Y . Suzuki, and Y . Chikaura, Phys. Status Solidi A 204, 2682 (2007)

    work page 2007

  44. [44]

    Hänschke, L

    D. Hänschke, L. Helfen, V . Altapova, A. Danilewsky, and T. Baumbach, Appl. Phys. Lett. 101, 244103 (2012). 15

    work page 2012

  45. [45]

    Borrmann, Z

    G. Borrmann, Z. Phys. 127, 297 (1950)

    work page 1950

  46. [46]

    Batterman and H

    B. Batterman and H. Cole, Rev. Mod. Phys. 36, 381 (1964)

    work page 1964

  47. [47]

    Mikawa, T

    Y . Mikawa, T. Ishinabe, Y . Kagamitani, T. Moshizuki, H. Ikeda, K. Iso, T. Takahashi, K. Kubota, Y . Enatsu, Y . Tsukada, and S. Izumisawa, Proc. SPIE 11280, 1128002 (2020)

    work page 2020

  48. [48]

    Tsusaka, K

    Y . Tsusaka, K. Yokoyama, S. Takeda, K. Takai, Y . Kagoshima, and J. Matsui, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sec. A 467-468, 670 (2001)

    work page 2001

  49. [49]

    Kamata, M

    I. Kamata, M. Nagano, H. Tsuchida, Y . Chen, and M. Dudley, 311, 1416 (2009)

    work page 2009

  50. [50]

    Authier, Dynamical Theory of X-ray Diffraction, revised ed

    A. Authier, Dynamical Theory of X-ray Diffraction, revised ed. (Oxford University Press Inc., New York, 2001)

    work page 2001

  51. [51]

    Suvorov, V

    E. Suvorov, V . Indenbom, O. Gorelik, I. Rusakovam and V . Chamrov, Phys. Status Solidi A 60, 27 (1980)

    work page 1980

  52. [52]

    Masimov, Int

    M. Masimov, Int. J. Mater. Res. 98, 832 (2007)

    work page 2007

  53. [53]

    J. D. Eshelby and A. N. Stroh, Philos. Mag. 42, 1401 (1951)

    work page 1951

  54. [54]

    Dudley, X

    M. Dudley, X. R. Huang, W. Huang, A. Powell, S. Wang, P. Neudeck, and M. Skowronski, Appl. Phys. Lett. 78, 784 (1999). 16 Figures and captions Fig. 1. Experimental setup for SR-XRT with (a) the reflection and (b) the transmission modes. In the transmission mode, the six-beam diffraction condition was illustrated. 17 Fig. 2. Reflection XRT images of the sa...

    work page 1999