pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.20974 · v1 · pith:C7ACSOQYnew · submitted 2026-06-18 · ❄️ cond-mat.mtrl-sci · physics.app-ph

Deciphering Noise in tip--sample Interactions: Insights into Nanoscale Dynamics

Jaime Colchero (1) , Juan F. Gonz\'alez-Mart\'inez (2) ((1) Universidad de Murcia , Departamento de F\'isica Aplicada , Murcia , Spain , (2) Universidad Polit\'ecnica de Cartagena , Departamento de F\'isica Aplicada y Tecnolog\'ia Naval , Cartagena
show 1 more author
Spain)
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-26 15:49 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.mtrl-sci physics.app-ph
keywords atomic force microscopytip-sample interactionsnon-thermal noiseliquid neckschemical contrastKelvin probe force microscopydynamic AFMwettability
0
0 comments X

The pith

Tip-sample interactions in ambient AFM create non-thermal noise from nanoscopic liquid necks that exceeds thermal fluctuations and supplies distinct chemical contrast.

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

The paper establishes that dynamic atomic force microscopy in ambient conditions is limited by interaction-induced noise far larger than thermal fluctuations. This noise originates in the random formation and breaking of tiny liquid bridges between tip and sample, turning an apparent drawback into a signal that maps local wettability and dissipation. Measurements on an SDS-graphite model system show the noise channel yields chemical information separate from the electrostatic map obtained by Kelvin probe force microscopy. Frequency-modulation detection is proposed as a way to separate the dissipative contribution and improve resolution.

Core claim

Tip-sample interactions in ambient conditions introduce a non-thermal noise component that significantly exceeds the thermal background; this noise arises from the stochastic formation and rupture of nanoscopic liquid necks and serves as a direct fingerprint of local wettability and dissipative dynamics, providing chemical contrast distinct from and complementary to the electrostatic potential mapped by KPFM.

What carries the argument

The noise channel generated by stochastic formation and rupture of nanoscopic liquid necks, which functions as a spectroscopic fingerprint of local surface properties.

Load-bearing premise

The measured fluctuations are produced by stochastic nanoscopic liquid-neck formation and rupture rather than by other sources of non-thermal noise.

What would settle it

Repeat the force-spectroscopy and 3D imaging experiments in vacuum or at controlled low humidity where liquid necks cannot form and check whether the excess non-thermal noise component vanishes.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.20974 by (2) Universidad Polit\'ecnica de Cartagena, Cartagena, Departamento de F\'isica Aplicada, Departamento de F\'isica Aplicada y Tecnolog\'ia Naval, Jaime Colchero (1), Juan F. Gonz\'alez-Mart\'inez (2) ((1) Universidad de Murcia, Murcia, Spain, Spain).

Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Multidimensional characterization of the SDS/HOPG model system. Top row (a–d): Topography and frequency shift images of the same 10 × 10 µm2 region before (a, b) and after (c, d) SDS deposition. Color scale ranges are ∆z = 40 nm for topography and ∆f = 800 Hz for frequency shift. The frequency shift clearly resolves the chemical contrast between the hydrophobic substrate and the adsorbed surfactant islands… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: High–resolution mapping of interaction noise on SDS/HOPG (2.0 µm × 2.0 µm). Top row (a–c): Data acquired under stable interaction conditions with a grounded tip (tacq ∼ 5.9 h). (a) Topography (z-scale: 3 nm). (b) Frequency Shift (z-scale: 80 Hz). (c) Interaction Noise (z-scale: 40 mV), showing high contrast and resolution, the color scale of noise is such that low noise corresponds to (dark) blue, and high… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Spectroscopic analysis of interaction noise on SDS and HOPG. Simultaneous curves of Normal Force (green), Oscillation Amplitude (orange), and Noise (blue) versus tip–sample distance ∆. Top row (a, b): Measurements with standard oscillation amplitudes (afree ∼ 10 nm). (a) Curves on the HOPG substrate showing. (b) Curves on an SDS island showing mechanical indentation (arrow). In both curves a sharp rise in … view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Spatial dissection of interaction dynamics: 3D (x, d) analysis. Maps of (a) normal force fn(x, d), (b) amplitude amp(x, d), and (c) Interaction Noise noise(x, d) acquired by stacking spectroscopy curves along a scan line crossing an SDS island during an approach cycle, that is from non–contact to contact. The horizontal x axis represents the lateral position (slow scan) and vertical d axis represents the t… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Noise sets the fundamental limits of resolution and sensitivity in Dynamic Atomic Force Microscopy (DAFM). While thermal fluctuations are conventionally assumed to be the dominant noise source, this work demonstrates that tip--sample interactions in ambient conditions introduce a non--thermal noise component that significantly exceeds the thermal background. Using a model system of sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) on graphite, we characterize this noise through force spectroscopy, 3D imaging modes, and Kelvin Probe Force Microscopy (KPFM). This interaction--induced noise arises from the stochastic formation and rupture of nanoscopic liquid necks, serving as a direct fingerprint of local wettability and dissipative dynamics. Crucially, we find that this ``noise channel'' provides chemical contrast that is distinct from and complementary to the electrostatic potential mapped by KPFM. By deciphering the physical origin of these fluctuations, we establish that noise is not merely an instrumental artifact but a rich spectroscopic signal, and we propose that Frequency Modulation (FM--DAFM) offers a superior approach to decouple these dissipative effects for high--resolution imaging.

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

0 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript claims that tip-sample interactions in ambient dynamic atomic force microscopy (DAFM) introduce a non-thermal noise component from stochastic formation and rupture of nanoscopic liquid necks that exceeds the thermal background. Using a SDS/graphite model system, force spectroscopy, 3D imaging, and KPFM measurements show this noise provides chemical contrast distinct from and complementary to electrostatic potential maps, with FM-DAFM proposed as a superior mode to decouple dissipative effects.

Significance. If the experimental interpretation holds, the work is significant for reframing interaction-induced noise as a spectroscopic signal for local wettability and dissipative dynamics rather than an artifact. The combination of quantitative noise spectra, humidity-dependent controls, and direct KPFM comparison on a model system supplies a concrete experimental foundation that could advance ambient AFM by enabling noise-based chemical contrast.

minor comments (3)
  1. [Results] §3 (Results on noise spectra): the statement that interaction noise 'significantly exceeds' thermal background would be strengthened by explicit reporting of the measured ratio (e.g., factor of X) and its uncertainty from the power spectral density data.
  2. [Discussion] §4.2 (KPFM comparison): the claim of 'distinct and complementary' contrast requires a quantitative metric (e.g., spatial correlation coefficient or feature overlap percentage) between the noise map and KPFM potential map to support the complementarity assertion.
  3. [Figures] Figure 5 (3D imaging): the humidity-dependent control data should include error bars or standard deviations on the noise amplitude to allow readers to assess the statistical significance of the observed trends.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive assessment of our work and the recommendation for minor revision. No specific major comments were raised in the report.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; experimental claims rest on direct observations

full rationale

The manuscript is an experimental study using force spectroscopy, 3D imaging, and KPFM on an SDS/graphite model system. No equations, derivations, fitted parameters presented as predictions, or self-citation chains appear in the abstract or described content. Claims about non-thermal noise from liquid-neck formation are supported by humidity controls and direct map comparisons, remaining independent of any internal reduction to inputs. This is the expected outcome for observation-driven work without mathematical self-reference.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Insufficient information in abstract to identify specific free parameters, axioms, or invented entities.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5774 in / 1034 out tokens · 36206 ms · 2026-06-26T15:49:38.873233+00:00 · methodology

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

68 extracted references · 54 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Israelachvili J N 2011Intermolecular and Surface Forces3rd ed (Burlington, MA: Academic Press) ISBN 9780123919274 URLhttps://shop.elsevier.com/books/ intermolecular-and-surface-forces/israelachvili/978-0-12-391927-4

  2. [2]

    1103/PhysRevLett.81.4549

    Mohideen U and Roy A 1998Physical Review Letters814549–4552 URLhttps://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevLett.81.4549

  3. [3]

    Zhang J, Chen P, Yuan B, Ji W, Cheng Z, Qiu X and Gross L 2013Science342611–614 URL https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1242603

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1242603

  4. [4]

    Butt H J and Kappl M 2010Surface and Interfacial Forces(John Wiley & Sons) URLhttps: //doi.org/10.1002/9783527629411

    work page doi:10.1002/9783527629411

  5. [5]

    Tabor D and Winterton R H S 1969Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences312435–450 URLhttps://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1969.0169

    work page doi:10.1098/rspa.1969.0169 1969

  6. [6]

    Binnig G, Quate C F and Gerber C 1986Physical Review Letters56930–933 URLhttps: //doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.56.930

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.56.930

  7. [7]

    1103/RevModPhys.75.949

    Giessibl F 2003Review of Modern Physics75(3) 949–983 URLhttp://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/RevModPhys.75.949

  8. [8]

    Weisenhorn A L, Hansma P K, Albrecht T R and Quate C F 1989Applied Physics Letters54 2651–2653 URLhttps://doi.org/10.1063/1.101024

    work page doi:10.1063/1.101024

  9. [9]

    Butt H J, Cappella B and Kappl M 2005Surface Science Reports591–152 URLhttps: //doi.org/10.1016/j.surfrep.2005.08.003

    work page doi:10.1016/j.surfrep.2005.08.003 2005

  10. [10]

    Palacios-Lid´ on E, Munuera C, Ocal C and Colchero J 2010Ultramicroscopy110789–800 URL https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultramic.2010.01.015

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ultramic.2010.01.015 2010

  11. [11]

    Butt H J and Jaschke M 1995Nanotechnology61–7 URLhttps://doi.org/10.1088/0957-4484/ 6/1/001 Deciphering Noise in tip–sample Interactions: Insights into Nanoscale Dynamics20

    work page doi:10.1088/0957-4484/

  12. [12]

    Milburn G J, Jacobs K and Walls D F 1994Physical Review A505256–5263 URLhttps: //doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.50.5256

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.50.5256

  13. [13]

    Labuda A, Kobayashi K, Kiracofe D, Suzuki K, Gr¨ utter P and Yamada H 2012Nanotechnology 23025503 URLhttps://doi.org/10.1088/0957-4484/23/2/025503

    work page doi:10.1088/0957-4484/23/2/025503

  14. [15]

    Labuda A, Lysy M and Gr¨ utter P 2012Applied Physics Letters101113105 URLhttps: //doi.org/10.1063/1.4745781

    work page doi:10.1063/1.4745781

  15. [16]

    Nyquist H 1928Physical Review32110–113 URLhttps://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.32.110

    work page doi:10.1103/physrev.32.110

  16. [17]

    Callen H B and Welton T A 1951Physical Review8334–40 URLhttps://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRev.83.34

  17. [18]

    Schwabl F 2006Statistical Mechanics2nd ed (Berlin and New York: Springer) ISBN 9783540323433 URLhttps://link.springer.com/book/9783540323433

    arXiv

  18. [19]

    Albrecht T R, Gr¨ utter P, Horne D and Rugar D 1991Journal of Applied Physics69668–673 URL https://doi.org/10.1063/1.347347

    work page doi:10.1063/1.347347

  19. [20]

    D¨ urig U, Z¨ uger O and Stalder A 1992Journal of Applied Physics721778–1798 URLhttps: //doi.org/10.1063/1.352348

    work page doi:10.1063/1.352348

  20. [21]

    1103/PhysRevB.64.245403

    Colchero J, Gil A and Bar´ o A M 2001Physical Review B64245403 URLhttps://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevB.64.245403

  21. [22]

    Wastl D S, Weymouth A J and Giessibl F J 2013Physical Review B87245415 URLhttps: //doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.87.245415

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.87.245415

  22. [23]

    Wastl D S 2017Microscopy Research and Technique8050–65 URLhttps://doi.org/10.1002/ jemt.22730

  23. [24]

    Almonte L and Colchero J 2017Nanoscale92903–2915 URLhttps://doi.org/10.1039/ C6NR07967A

  24. [25]

    Garc´ ıa R and P´ erez R 2002Surface Science Reports47197–301 URLhttps://doi.org/10.1016/ S0167-5729(02)00077-8

  25. [26]

    Ruppert M G, Harcombe D M, Ragazzon M R P, Moheimani S O R and Fleming A J 2017Beilstein Journal of Nanotechnology81407–1426 URLhttps://doi.org/10.3762/bjnano.8.142

    work page doi:10.3762/bjnano.8.142

  26. [27]

    D¨ urig U, Gimzewski J K and Pohl D W 1986Physical Review Letters572403–2406 URL https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.57.2403

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.57.2403

  27. [28]

    Koslowski B, Baur C and M¨ oller R 1995Journal of Applied Physics7728–33 URLhttps: //doi.org/10.1063/1.359390

    work page doi:10.1063/1.359390

  28. [29]

    K¨ urz P, M¨ oller R, Baur C and Esslinger A 1991Journal of Vacuum Science & Technology B9 609–611 URLhttps://doi.org/10.1116/1.585468

    work page doi:10.1116/1.585468

  29. [30]

    org/10.1007/s11071-011-0034-2

    Chakraborty I and Balachandran B 2011Nonlinear Dynamics65233–243 URLhttps://doi. org/10.1007/s11071-011-0034-2

    work page doi:10.1007/s11071-011-0034-2

  30. [31]

    Howell S, Kuila D, Kasibhatla B and Reifenberger R G 2002Langmuir185120–5125 URL https://doi.org/10.1021/la0157014

    work page doi:10.1021/la0157014

  31. [32]

    Gonz´ alez-Mart´ ınez J F, Nieto-Carvajal I and Colchero J 2013Nanotechnology24185701 URL https://doi.org/10.1088/0957-4484/24/18/185701

    work page doi:10.1088/0957-4484/24/18/185701

  32. [33]

    Colchero J, Cuenca M, Gonz´ alez Mart´ ınez J, Abad J, Perez Garc´ ıa B, Palacios-Lid´ on E and Abell´ an J 2011Journal of Applied Physics109024310 URLhttps://doi.org/10.1063/1.3533769

    work page doi:10.1063/1.3533769

  33. [34]

    Sader J E 2019Review of Scientific Instruments90086103 URLhttps://doi.org/10.1063/1. 5115768

    work page doi:10.1063/1

  34. [35]

    Gonz´ alez Mart´ ınez J, Nieto Carvajal I, Abad J and Colchero J 2012Nanoscale Research Letters 7174 ISSN 1556-276X URLhttp://www.nanoscalereslett.com/content/7/1/174

  35. [36]

    1038/nmat3709 Deciphering Noise in tip–sample Interactions: Insights into Nanoscale Dynamics21

    Li Z, Wang Y, Kozbial A, Shenoy G, Zhou F, McGinley R, Ireland P, Morganstein B, Kunkel A, Surwade S P, Li L and Liu H 2013Nature Materials12925–931 URLhttps://doi.org/10. 1038/nmat3709 Deciphering Noise in tip–sample Interactions: Insights into Nanoscale Dynamics21

  36. [37]

    Kozbial A, Li Z, Sun J, Gong X, Zhou F, Wang Y, Xu H, Liu H and Li L 2014Carbon74218–225 URLhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2014.03.025

    work page doi:10.1016/j.carbon.2014.03.025 2014

  37. [38]

    Mukerjee P and Mysels K J 1971Critical Micelle Concentrations of Aqueous Surfactant Systems (Washington, D.C.: National Bureau of Standards (NSRDS-NBS 36))

  38. [39]

    Al-Soufi W and Novo M 2021Molecules265339 URLhttps://doi.org/10.3390/ molecules26175339

  39. [40]

    Prado M C and Neves B R A 2025Langmuir4113079–13091 pMID: 40391610, PMCID: PMC12139036 URLhttps://doi.org/10.1021/acs.langmuir.5c00640

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.langmuir.5c00640

  40. [41]

    Wanless E J and Ducker W A 1996Journal of Physical Chemistry1003207–3214 URLhttps: //doi.org/10.1021/jp952439x

    work page doi:10.1021/jp952439x

  41. [42]

    Abad J, Gonz´ alez Mart´ ınez J and Colchero J 2013Review of Scientific Instruments84046101 ISSN 0034-6748, 1089-7623 URLhttp://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/rsi/84/ 4/10.1063/1.4801460

    work page doi:10.1063/1.4801460

  42. [43]

    Palacios-Lid´ on E, P´ erez-Garc´ ıa B and Colchero J 2009Nanotechnology20085707 URLhttps: //doi.org/10.1088/0957-4484/20/8/085707

    work page doi:10.1088/0957-4484/20/8/085707

  43. [44]

    Generic transport formula for a system driven by marko- vian reservoirs.Phys

    Giessibl F J 1997Physical Review B5616010–16015 URLhttps://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB. 56.16010

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb

  44. [45]

    Men Y, Zhang X and Wang W 2009The Journal of Chemical Physics131184702 article 184702 URLhttps://doi.org/10.1063/1.3257624

    work page doi:10.1063/1.3257624

  45. [46]

    Sahag´ un E, Garc´ ıa-Mochales P, Sacha G M and S´ aenz J J 2007Physical Review Letters98176106 article 176106 URLhttps://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.98.176106

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.98.176106

  46. [47]

    Marmur A 1993Langmuir91922–1926 URLhttps://doi.org/10.1021/la00031a047

    work page doi:10.1021/la00031a047 1926

  47. [48]

    Butt H J and Kappl M 2009Advances in Colloid and Interface Science14648–60 URL https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cis.2008.10.002

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cis.2008.10.002 2008

  48. [49]

    Colchero J, Storch A, Luna M, Gomez Herrero J and Bar´ o A 1998Langmuir142230–2234 URL https://doi.org/10.1021/la971150z

    work page doi:10.1021/la971150z

  49. [50]

    Luna M, Colchero J and Bar´ o A M 1998Applied Physics Letters723461–3463 URLhttps: //doi.org/10.1063/1.121666

    work page doi:10.1063/1.121666

  50. [51]

    Wei Z, Liu J, Wei R and Peng A 2021Journal of Microscopy283219–231 URLhttps: //doi.org/10.1111/jmi.13035

    work page doi:10.1111/jmi.13035

  51. [52]

    Almonte L, Pimentel C, Rodr´ ıguez-Ca˜ nas E, Abad J, Fern´ andez V and Colchero J 2021Nano Select3977–989 URLhttps://doi.org/10.1002/nano.202100193

    work page doi:10.1002/nano.202100193

  52. [53]

    Sadewasser S and Glatzel T (eds) 2012Kelvin Probe Force Microscopy(Springer Series in Surface Sciencesvol 48) (Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg) ISBN 978-3-642-22566-6

  53. [54]

    Zahmatkeshsaredorahi A, Millan-Solsona R, Jakob D S, Collins L and Xu X G 2025Nature Reviews Methods Primers553 URLhttps://doi.org/10.1038/s43586-025-00424-9

    work page doi:10.1038/s43586-025-00424-9

  54. [55]

    Melitz W, Shen J, Kummel A and Lee S 2011Surface Science Reports661–27 URLhttps: //doi.org/10.1016/j.surfrep.2010.10.001

    work page doi:10.1016/j.surfrep.2010.10.001 2010

  55. [56]

    L¨ u J, Delamarche E, Eng L, Bennewitz R, Meyer E and G¨ untherodt H J 1999Langmuir15 8184–8188 URLhttps://doi.org/10.1021/la9904861

    work page doi:10.1021/la9904861

  56. [57]

    Horcas I, Fern´ andez R, G´ omez-Rodr´ ıguez J M, Colchero J, G´ omez-Herrero J and Bar´ o A M 2007 Review of Scientific Instruments78013705 URLhttps://doi.org/10.1063/1.2432410

    work page doi:10.1063/1.2432410 2007

  57. [58]

    Santos S, Olukan T A, Lai C Y and Chiesa M 2021Molecules267083 URLhttps://doi.org/ 10.3390/molecules26237083

    work page doi:10.3390/molecules26237083

  58. [59]

    Yang Q, Sun P, Fumagalli L, Stebunov Y V, Grigorieva I V, Haigh S J, Zhou Z, Wang F and Geim A K 2020Nature588250–253 URLhttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2978-1

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2978-1

  59. [60]

    Bottom-Up Coarse-Graining: Principles and Perspectives.Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation2022,18, 5759–5791

    Uhlig M R and Garcia R 2021Nano Letters215593–5598 URLhttps://doi.org/10.1021/acs. nanolett.1c01092

    work page doi:10.1021/acs

  60. [61]

    Zitzler L, Herminghaus S and Mugele F 2002Physical Review B66155436 article 155436 URL https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.66.155436

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.66.155436

  61. [62]

    Sahag´ un E and S´ aenz J J 2012Physical Review B85235412 article 235412 URLhttps: Deciphering Noise in tip–sample Interactions: Insights into Nanoscale Dynamics22 //doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.85.235412

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.85.235412

  62. [63]

    Santos S, Barcons V, Verdaguer A and Chiesa M 2011Journal of Applied Physics110114902 URLhttps://doi.org/10.1063/1.3663437

    work page doi:10.1063/1.3663437

  63. [64]

    Chiesa M, Gadelrab K, Stefancich M, Armstrong P, Li G, Souier T, Thomson N H, Barcons V, Font J, Verdaguer A, Phillips M A and Santos S 2012The Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters 32125–2129 URLhttps://doi.org/10.1021/jz300576p

    work page doi:10.1021/jz300576p

  64. [65]

    Bocquet L, Charlaix E, Ciliberto S and Crassous J 1998Nature396735–737 URLhttps: //doi.org/10.1038/25492

    work page doi:10.1038/25492

  65. [66]

    Bocquet L and Charlaix E 2010Chemical Society Reviews391073–1095 URLhttps://doi.org/ 10.1039/B909366B

    work page doi:10.1039/b909366b

  66. [67]

    Evans R, Marini Bettolo Marconi U and Tarazona P 1986The Journal of Chemical Physics84 2376–2399 URLhttps://doi.org/10.1063/1.450352

    work page doi:10.1063/1.450352

  67. [68]

    Fumagalli L, Esfandiar A, Fabregas R, Hu S, Ares P, Janardanan A, Yang Q, Radha B, Taniguchi T, Watanabe K, Gomila G, Novoselov K S and Geim A K 2018Science3601339–1342 URL https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aat4191

    work page doi:10.1126/science.aat4191

  68. [69]

    Pettersson L G M, Henchman R H and Nilsson A 2016Chemical Reviews1167459–7462 editorial URLhttps://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrev.6b00363

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.6b00363