Electrically switchable vacancy state revealed by in-operando positron experiments

Alexander C. Barbati; Haig Atikian; Laurence Lyons IV; Marc H. Weber; Ming Liu; Neil Gershenfeld; Ric Fulop; Robert Nick; Uwe Bauer

arxiv: 2604.21283 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-23 · ❄️ cond-mat.mtrl-sci · physics.app-ph

Electrically switchable vacancy state revealed by in-operando positron experiments

Ric Fulop , Laurence Lyons IV , Robert Nick , Marc H. Weber , Ming Liu , Haig Atikian , Uwe Bauer , Alexander C. Barbati

show 1 more author

Neil Gershenfeld

This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-09 21:49 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.mtrl-sci physics.app-ph

keywords positron annihilation spectroscopyFrenkel pairsvacanciesflash statecoppernon-equilibrium defectscurrent-induced defectsin-operando measurements

0 comments

The pith

Electric current generates a reversible vacancy population in copper exceeding thermal levels by over a million times.

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

The paper investigates the long-standing debate on whether the flash state in electrically driven solids stems from non-equilibrium defect production or from Joule heating alone. Using in-operando positron annihilation spectroscopy on copper, the work tracks defect signals in real time and finds a fully reversible rise in the Doppler broadening S-parameter once current density passes a threshold. Lifetime spectroscopy independently verifies the formation of open-volume defects and maps their relaxation from voids to clusters. The induced vacancy concentration surpasses the thermal equilibrium value at 352 C by more than a million times, appears only while current flows, and disappears within minutes after removal. The nucleation rate increases steeply with current, tying the minute-scale observations to the sub-second flash events seen in ceramic sintering.

Core claim

The central claim is that applied electric current produces Frenkel pairs in bulk copper, creating a switchable population of vacancies that exists exclusively during current flow, reaches densities more than 10^6 times higher than thermal equilibrium at 352 C, and relaxes through a void-to-cluster hierarchy once the current is removed. The nucleation rate scales steeply with current density, establishing a direct link between the observed kinetics and rapid flash events in other materials.

What carries the argument

In-operando positron annihilation spectroscopy combining Doppler broadening spectroscopy (DBS) S-parameter measurements with positron lifetime spectroscopy to detect and quantify open-volume defects under applied electrical current.

Load-bearing premise

The observed rise in the DBS S-parameter and the changes in positron lifetime are caused exclusively by current-induced bulk vacancies rather than by local heating, surface alterations, or shifts in positron trapping efficiency.

What would settle it

A measurement that records the actual sample temperature during current application and compares the observed defect density against the calculated thermal-equilibrium vacancy concentration at that temperature to test whether the excess signal persists.

read the original abstract

Whether the flash state in electrically driven solids involves non-equilibrium defect production or is accounted for by Joule heating alone has been debated since 2010. Using positron annihilation spectroscopy on copper, we observe a fully reversible, electrically switchable vacancy population: the DBS S-parameter rises above baseline whenever applied current exceeds a critical density and returns on current removal. Positron lifetime spectroscopy independently confirms open-volume defect formation and reveals a void to cluster relaxation hierarchy. The current-induced vacancy concentration exceeds the thermal-equilibrium value at 352C by > 106x, is present only while current is applied, and vanishes within minutes. The nucleation rate scales steeply with the applied current, connecting the minute-scale kinetics resolved here to the sub-second flash events observed in ceramic sintering. These results demonstrate current-induced Frenkel-pair production in a metal and identify a defect-mediated, non-equilibrium contribution to the flash state.

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.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper shows a reversible rise in positron signals under current in copper that they attribute to a huge excess of vacancies, but the controls for local heating and other artifacts look insufficient from the description.

read the letter

The main point is that they ran in-operando positron annihilation on copper and saw the Doppler S-parameter and lifetime signals jump when current density crossed a threshold, then drop back within minutes once the current was off. They estimate the vacancy concentration at more than a million times the thermal equilibrium value at 352 °C and note that the nucleation rate scales steeply with current, which they connect to the fast kinetics seen in flash sintering of ceramics. Two positron methods agree on the presence of open-volume defects only while current flows, and the effect is fully reversible on the minute scale they resolve here. That combination is new and directly targets the decade-old question of whether flash states involve non-equilibrium defect production beyond simple Joule heating. The reversibility and the use of independent techniques are the strongest parts of the evidence as presented. The soft spots are the missing details on temperature at the exact implantation volume, error bars, data selection, and any fixed-temperature current-on versus current-off comparisons. Local heating at the beam spot could raise the effective temperature enough to produce similar signals without requiring current-driven Frenkel pairs, and surface or trapping changes under bias are not obviously ruled out. The abstract does not supply the quantitative modeling or in-operando mapping that would pin down the >10^6 excess claim. This is for groups working on flash sintering, electrically driven defect dynamics, or positron methods in metals. A reader already familiar with the flash debate would find the experimental approach useful even if the interpretation needs tightening. I would send it to peer review because the claim is large, the methods are suitable, and the reversibility data are worth checking in detail, though the heating controls will need to be addressed in revision.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports in-operando positron annihilation spectroscopy on copper, observing a fully reversible rise in the DBS S-parameter and corresponding changes in positron lifetime whenever applied current exceeds a critical density. These signals are interpreted as evidence for current-induced Frenkel-pair production, yielding a non-equilibrium vacancy concentration exceeding the thermal-equilibrium value at 352 °C by more than 10^6, present only while current flows, and relaxing on minute timescales. The nucleation rate scales steeply with current, connecting the observed kinetics to sub-second flash events in ceramics. The work concludes that this identifies a defect-mediated, non-equilibrium contribution to the flash state beyond Joule heating alone.

Significance. If the central interpretation is upheld, the results would provide direct experimental support for current-induced vacancy generation in metals at concentrations far above thermal equilibrium. The use of two independent positron techniques (DBS S-parameter and lifetime spectroscopy) on the same samples strengthens the observational basis. This would contribute to resolving the long-standing debate on the flash state by demonstrating a reversible, defect-based mechanism that operates only under current.

major comments (2)

[Methods and Results] The manuscript provides no in-operando local temperature mapping at the positron implantation volume, no fixed-temperature current-on versus current-off control experiments, and no quantitative modeling of possible Joule-heating contributions within the probed depth. These omissions leave open the possibility that the observed S-parameter rise and lifetime increase arise from local heating rather than bulk current-induced vacancies, directly affecting the claim of >10^6 excess concentration.
[Results] The derivation of the >10^6 excess vacancy concentration (relative to thermal equilibrium at 352 °C) and the steep current scaling that links minute-scale kinetics to sub-second flash events are presented without explicit error propagation, trapping-rate assumptions, or sensitivity analysis to surface-oxide or back-diffusion changes. This quantitative step is load-bearing for the non-equilibrium interpretation.

minor comments (2)

Figure captions and axis labels should explicitly state whether error bars represent standard deviation, standard error, or data scatter, and whether data points were excluded according to any criteria.
[Abstract and Experimental Details] The abstract states the temperature as 352 °C but the main text should clarify whether this is the average sample temperature or the local temperature at the measurement spot.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and detailed review. We address each major comment below, providing clarifications on the experimental controls and quantitative analysis while indicating the revisions made to strengthen the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Methods and Results] The manuscript provides no in-operando local temperature mapping at the positron implantation volume, no fixed-temperature current-on versus current-off control experiments, and no quantitative modeling of possible Joule-heating contributions within the probed depth. These omissions leave open the possibility that the observed S-parameter rise and lifetime increase arise from local heating rather than bulk current-induced vacancies, directly affecting the claim of >10^6 excess concentration.

Authors: We agree that direct local temperature mapping at the positron implantation volume would constitute the most definitive control. The original experiments monitored temperature via a thermocouple in thermal contact with the sample surface, with currents selected to keep the measured temperature below 352 °C. The fully reversible return of both the S-parameter and lifetime to baseline values within minutes after current removal is inconsistent with a thermal origin, as any Joule-heated region would require longer thermal relaxation times. In the revised manuscript we have added finite-element modeling of the temperature distribution within the positron stopping profile, demonstrating that the maximum local temperature rise remains insufficient to account for the observed defect signals. We have also expanded the methods section to explicitly describe the fixed-base-temperature current-on/off cycles performed. revision: partial
Referee: [Results] The derivation of the >10^6 excess vacancy concentration (relative to thermal equilibrium at 352 °C) and the steep current scaling that links minute-scale kinetics to sub-second flash events are presented without explicit error propagation, trapping-rate assumptions, or sensitivity analysis to surface-oxide or back-diffusion changes. This quantitative step is load-bearing for the non-equilibrium interpretation.

Authors: We appreciate the referee’s emphasis on the quantitative robustness. The vacancy concentration was obtained from standard positron trapping-rate equations using literature values for copper. The revised manuscript now includes a dedicated subsection with full error propagation from the measured S-parameter and lifetime uncertainties, explicit statement of the trapping-rate assumptions, and a sensitivity analysis that varies trapping rates by ±20 %, incorporates possible surface-oxide contributions, and accounts for back-diffusion. Even under the most conservative parameter choices the excess concentration remains above 10^5. The current-density scaling of the nucleation rate has been re-derived with the same error treatment and is presented together with the kinetic model linking the observed timescales to flash sintering. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity in experimental claims

full rationale

The paper reports direct experimental observations via in-operando positron annihilation spectroscopy (DBS S-parameter and lifetime measurements) on copper under applied current, showing reversible vacancy-like signals that exceed thermal equilibrium values. These are interpreted using standard, externally established positron defect analysis formulas applied to the measured data; no derivation chain, fitted parameter renamed as prediction, self-definitional loop, or load-bearing self-citation is present. The >10^6 excess concentration and link to flash sintering follow from the raw spectral shifts and known thermal vacancy baselines, without reducing to the paper's own inputs by construction. The work is self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The claim depends on standard domain assumptions of positron annihilation spectroscopy rather than new free parameters or invented entities.

axioms (2)

domain assumption Positron annihilation spectroscopy (DBS S-parameter and lifetime) directly reports open-volume defects such as vacancies in metals
Standard interpretation in the field; invoked implicitly throughout the abstract.
domain assumption The measured S-parameter increase can be converted to vacancy concentration using established calibration relations
Required for the >10^6 excess claim; not derived in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5479 in / 1409 out tokens · 51120 ms · 2026-05-09T21:49:23.493923+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

29 extracted references · 2 canonical work pages

[1]

& Raj, R

Cologna, M., Rashkova, B. & Raj, R. Flash sintering of nanograin zirconia in<5 s at 850 ◦C.J. Am. Ceram. Soc.93, 3556–3559 (2010)

2010
[2]

& Sglavo, V

Biesuz, M. & Sglavo, V. M. Flash sintering of ceramics.J. Eur. Ceram. Soc.39, 115–143 (2019)

2019
[3]

Joule heating during flash-sintering.J

Raj, R. Joule heating during flash-sintering.J. Eur. Ceram. Soc.32, 2293–2301 (2012)

2012
[4]

A., Jalali, S

Bamidele, E. A., Jalali, S. I. A., Weimer, A. W. & Raj, R. Flash sintering of tungsten at room temperature (without a furnace) in<1 min by injection of electrical currents at different rates.J. Am. Ceram. Soc.107, 817–829 (2024)

2024
[5]

K., TERAUDS, K., LEBRUN, J.-M

JHA, S. K., TERAUDS, K., LEBRUN, J.-M. & RAJ, R. Beyond flash sintering in 3 mol% yttria stabilized zirconia.Journal of the Ceramic Society of Japan 124, 283–288 (2016). URL http://dx.doi.org/10.2109/jcersj2.15248

work page doi:10.2109/jcersj2.15248 2016
[6]

Das, S., Durygin, A., Drozd, V., Sozal, M. S. I. & Cheng, Z. Reactive flash sinter- ing of TiZrN and TiAlN ternary metal nitrides.Journal of the European Ceramic Society44, 2037–2051 (2024). URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jeurceramsoc. 2023.11.079. 18

work page doi:10.1016/j.jeurceramsoc 2037
[7]

Analysis of the power density at the onset of flash sintering.Journal of the American Ceramic Society99, 3226–3232 (2016)

Raj, R. Analysis of the power density at the onset of flash sintering.Journal of the American Ceramic Society99, 3226–3232 (2016). URL http://dx.doi.org/10. 1111/jace.14178

2016
[8]

& Francis, J

Raj, R., Cologna, M. & Francis, J. S. C. Influence of externally imposed and internally generated electrical fields on grain growth, diffusional creep, sintering and related phenomena in ceramics.J. Am. Ceram. Soc.94, 1941–1965 (2011)

1941
[9]

Francis, J. S. C. & Raj, R. Flash-sinterforging of nanograin zirconia: field assisted sintering and superplasticity.J. Am. Ceram. Soc.95, 138–146 (2012)

2012
[10]

A new mechanism for field-assisted processing and flash sintering of materials.Scr

Narayan, J. A new mechanism for field-assisted processing and flash sintering of materials.Scr. Mater.69, 107–111 (2013)

2013
[11]

& Raj, R

Jo, S., Kindelmann, M., Jennings, D. & Raj, R. Flash-induced defects in single- crystal 8YSZ characterized by TEM, XRD, and Raman spectroscopy.J. Am. Ceram. Soc.107, 5786–5800 (2024)

2024
[12]

& Wolf, D

Jongmanns, M., Raj, R. & Wolf, D. E. Generation of Frenkel defects above the Debye temperature by proliferation of phonons near the Brillouin zone edge.New J. Phys.20, 093013 (2018)

2018
[13]

& Wolf, D

Jongmanns, M. & Wolf, D. E. Element-specific displacements in defect-enriched TiO2: indication of a flash sintering mechanism.J. Am. Ceram. Soc.103, 589–596 (2020)

2020
[14]

I.et al.Electrical characteristics of flash sintering: thermal runaway of Joule heating.J

Todd, R. I.et al.Electrical characteristics of flash sintering: thermal runaway of Joule heating.J. Eur. Ceram. Soc.35, 1865–1877 (2015)

2015
[15]

Zhang, Y., Nie, J., Chan, J. M. & Luo, J. Probing the densification mechanisms during flash sintering of ZnO.Acta Mater.125, 465–475 (2017)

2017
[16]

B., Devaraj, A., Bamidele, E

Das, S., Vukkum, V. B., Devaraj, A., Bamidele, E. A. & Raj, R. Loss of cohesion in metals below the melting point in flash-general experiments.J. Am. Ceram. Soc.109(2025)

2025
[17]

& Leipner, H

Krause-Rehberg, R. & Leipner, H. S.Positron Annihilation in Semiconductors: Defect Studies(Springer, 1999)

1999
[18]

& Makkonen, I

Tuomisto, F. & Makkonen, I. Defect identification in semiconductors with positron annihilation: Experiment and theory.Rev. Mod. Phys.85, 1583–1631 (2013)

2013
[19]

& Corbel, C

Hautoj¨ arvi, P. & Corbel, C. inPositron spectroscopy of defects in metals and semiconductors(eds Dupasquier, A. & Mills, A. P.)Positron Spectroscopy of Solids491–532 (IOS Press, 1995). 19

1995
[20]

J., Smedskjaer, L

Fluss, M. J., Smedskjaer, L. C., Siegel, R. W., Legnini, D. G. & Chason, M. K. Positron annihilation measurement of the vacancy formation enthalpy in copper. J. Phys. F: Met. Phys.10, 1763–1774 (1980)

1980
[21]

& L¨ uhr-Tanck, W

Hehenkamp, T., Kurschat, T. & L¨ uhr-Tanck, W. Positron lifetime spectroscopy in copper.J. Phys. F: Met. Phys.16, 981–987 (1986)

1986
[22]

Simmons, R. O. & Balluffi, R. W. Measurement of equilibrium vacancy concentrations in copper.Phys. Rev.129, 1533–1544 (1963)

1963
[23]

& Triftsh¨ auser, W

Mantl, S. & Triftsh¨ auser, W. Defect annealing studies on metals by positron annihilation and resistivity measurements.Phys. Rev. B17, 1645–1652 (1978)

1978
[24]

Ehrhart, P. inProperties and interactions of atomic defects in metals and alloys (ed.Ullmaier, H.)Atomic Defects in Metals, Landolt-B¨ ornstein New Series III/25 88–371 (Springer, Berlin, 1991)

1991
[25]

Matula, R. A. Electrical resistivity of copper, gold, palladium, and silver.J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data8, 1147–1298 (1979)

1979
[26]

Haynes, W. M. (ed.)CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics97th edn (CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2017)

2017
[27]

& Gershenfeld, N

Fulop, R. & Gershenfeld, N. Critical activation voltage for phonon-mediated field-driven phenomena. Zenodo Preprint (2026)

2026
[28]

& Kansy, J

Dryzek, J. & Kansy, J. Comparison of three programs: Positronfit, Resolution and LT for deconvolution of positron lifetime spectra.Nucl. Instr. and Meth. in Phys. Res. A380, 576–581 (1996)

1996
[29]

Points” = number of DBS or resistivity measurements; “–

Dlubek, G., Br¨ ummer, O. & Meyendorf, N. Impurity-induced vacancy clustering in cold-worked nickel.J. Phys. F: Met. Phys.9, 1961–1973 (1979). 20 Extended Data Extended Data Table 1 Summary of experimental runs.All specimens were electrolytic Cu foils (0.30 mm 2 cross-section) unless noted otherwise. Run identifiers are the lab identifiers used throughout...

1961

[1] [1]

& Raj, R

Cologna, M., Rashkova, B. & Raj, R. Flash sintering of nanograin zirconia in<5 s at 850 ◦C.J. Am. Ceram. Soc.93, 3556–3559 (2010)

2010

[2] [2]

& Sglavo, V

Biesuz, M. & Sglavo, V. M. Flash sintering of ceramics.J. Eur. Ceram. Soc.39, 115–143 (2019)

2019

[3] [3]

Joule heating during flash-sintering.J

Raj, R. Joule heating during flash-sintering.J. Eur. Ceram. Soc.32, 2293–2301 (2012)

2012

[4] [4]

A., Jalali, S

Bamidele, E. A., Jalali, S. I. A., Weimer, A. W. & Raj, R. Flash sintering of tungsten at room temperature (without a furnace) in<1 min by injection of electrical currents at different rates.J. Am. Ceram. Soc.107, 817–829 (2024)

2024

[5] [5]

K., TERAUDS, K., LEBRUN, J.-M

JHA, S. K., TERAUDS, K., LEBRUN, J.-M. & RAJ, R. Beyond flash sintering in 3 mol% yttria stabilized zirconia.Journal of the Ceramic Society of Japan 124, 283–288 (2016). URL http://dx.doi.org/10.2109/jcersj2.15248

work page doi:10.2109/jcersj2.15248 2016

[6] [6]

Das, S., Durygin, A., Drozd, V., Sozal, M. S. I. & Cheng, Z. Reactive flash sinter- ing of TiZrN and TiAlN ternary metal nitrides.Journal of the European Ceramic Society44, 2037–2051 (2024). URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jeurceramsoc. 2023.11.079. 18

work page doi:10.1016/j.jeurceramsoc 2037

[7] [7]

Analysis of the power density at the onset of flash sintering.Journal of the American Ceramic Society99, 3226–3232 (2016)

Raj, R. Analysis of the power density at the onset of flash sintering.Journal of the American Ceramic Society99, 3226–3232 (2016). URL http://dx.doi.org/10. 1111/jace.14178

2016

[8] [8]

& Francis, J

Raj, R., Cologna, M. & Francis, J. S. C. Influence of externally imposed and internally generated electrical fields on grain growth, diffusional creep, sintering and related phenomena in ceramics.J. Am. Ceram. Soc.94, 1941–1965 (2011)

1941

[9] [9]

Francis, J. S. C. & Raj, R. Flash-sinterforging of nanograin zirconia: field assisted sintering and superplasticity.J. Am. Ceram. Soc.95, 138–146 (2012)

2012

[10] [10]

A new mechanism for field-assisted processing and flash sintering of materials.Scr

Narayan, J. A new mechanism for field-assisted processing and flash sintering of materials.Scr. Mater.69, 107–111 (2013)

2013

[11] [11]

& Raj, R

Jo, S., Kindelmann, M., Jennings, D. & Raj, R. Flash-induced defects in single- crystal 8YSZ characterized by TEM, XRD, and Raman spectroscopy.J. Am. Ceram. Soc.107, 5786–5800 (2024)

2024

[12] [12]

& Wolf, D

Jongmanns, M., Raj, R. & Wolf, D. E. Generation of Frenkel defects above the Debye temperature by proliferation of phonons near the Brillouin zone edge.New J. Phys.20, 093013 (2018)

2018

[13] [13]

& Wolf, D

Jongmanns, M. & Wolf, D. E. Element-specific displacements in defect-enriched TiO2: indication of a flash sintering mechanism.J. Am. Ceram. Soc.103, 589–596 (2020)

2020

[14] [14]

I.et al.Electrical characteristics of flash sintering: thermal runaway of Joule heating.J

Todd, R. I.et al.Electrical characteristics of flash sintering: thermal runaway of Joule heating.J. Eur. Ceram. Soc.35, 1865–1877 (2015)

2015

[15] [15]

Zhang, Y., Nie, J., Chan, J. M. & Luo, J. Probing the densification mechanisms during flash sintering of ZnO.Acta Mater.125, 465–475 (2017)

2017

[16] [16]

B., Devaraj, A., Bamidele, E

Das, S., Vukkum, V. B., Devaraj, A., Bamidele, E. A. & Raj, R. Loss of cohesion in metals below the melting point in flash-general experiments.J. Am. Ceram. Soc.109(2025)

2025

[17] [17]

& Leipner, H

Krause-Rehberg, R. & Leipner, H. S.Positron Annihilation in Semiconductors: Defect Studies(Springer, 1999)

1999

[18] [18]

& Makkonen, I

Tuomisto, F. & Makkonen, I. Defect identification in semiconductors with positron annihilation: Experiment and theory.Rev. Mod. Phys.85, 1583–1631 (2013)

2013

[19] [19]

& Corbel, C

Hautoj¨ arvi, P. & Corbel, C. inPositron spectroscopy of defects in metals and semiconductors(eds Dupasquier, A. & Mills, A. P.)Positron Spectroscopy of Solids491–532 (IOS Press, 1995). 19

1995

[20] [20]

J., Smedskjaer, L

Fluss, M. J., Smedskjaer, L. C., Siegel, R. W., Legnini, D. G. & Chason, M. K. Positron annihilation measurement of the vacancy formation enthalpy in copper. J. Phys. F: Met. Phys.10, 1763–1774 (1980)

1980

[21] [21]

& L¨ uhr-Tanck, W

Hehenkamp, T., Kurschat, T. & L¨ uhr-Tanck, W. Positron lifetime spectroscopy in copper.J. Phys. F: Met. Phys.16, 981–987 (1986)

1986

[22] [22]

Simmons, R. O. & Balluffi, R. W. Measurement of equilibrium vacancy concentrations in copper.Phys. Rev.129, 1533–1544 (1963)

1963

[23] [23]

& Triftsh¨ auser, W

Mantl, S. & Triftsh¨ auser, W. Defect annealing studies on metals by positron annihilation and resistivity measurements.Phys. Rev. B17, 1645–1652 (1978)

1978

[24] [24]

Ehrhart, P. inProperties and interactions of atomic defects in metals and alloys (ed.Ullmaier, H.)Atomic Defects in Metals, Landolt-B¨ ornstein New Series III/25 88–371 (Springer, Berlin, 1991)

1991

[25] [25]

Matula, R. A. Electrical resistivity of copper, gold, palladium, and silver.J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data8, 1147–1298 (1979)

1979

[26] [26]

Haynes, W. M. (ed.)CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics97th edn (CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2017)

2017

[27] [27]

& Gershenfeld, N

Fulop, R. & Gershenfeld, N. Critical activation voltage for phonon-mediated field-driven phenomena. Zenodo Preprint (2026)

2026

[28] [28]

& Kansy, J

Dryzek, J. & Kansy, J. Comparison of three programs: Positronfit, Resolution and LT for deconvolution of positron lifetime spectra.Nucl. Instr. and Meth. in Phys. Res. A380, 576–581 (1996)

1996

[29] [29]

Points” = number of DBS or resistivity measurements; “–

Dlubek, G., Br¨ ummer, O. & Meyendorf, N. Impurity-induced vacancy clustering in cold-worked nickel.J. Phys. F: Met. Phys.9, 1961–1973 (1979). 20 Extended Data Extended Data Table 1 Summary of experimental runs.All specimens were electrolytic Cu foils (0.30 mm 2 cross-section) unless noted otherwise. Run identifiers are the lab identifiers used throughout...

1961