pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.30125 · v1 · pith:6QSOJCF6new · submitted 2026-06-29 · ❄️ cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Ferroelastic domain wall motion and collective domain switching in RbSCN

V. Soprunyuk , A. Tr\"oster , J. Pils , W. Schranz , I. Rychetsky , A. Klic , M.A. Carpenter This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-30 05:17 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords ferroelastic domain wallsRbSCNcollective domain switchingPeierls potentialpseudospin modelelastic modulus discontinuitytwin boundary energy
0
0 comments X

The pith

Anomalies at T* in RbSCN arise from collective ferroelastic domain switching when critical pinning stress falls below applied stress.

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

Low-frequency elastic measurements on RbSCN reveal a sudden discontinuous rise in Young's modulus at a temperature T* below the ferroelastic transition temperature Tc, together with a frequency-dependent damping peak. This feature disappears after heating above T* and cooling again. The paper attributes both the modulus jump and the damping to collective switching of ferroelastic domains. The interpretation is backed by a compressible pseudospin model that computes the temperature dependence of twin-boundary width, energy, and Peierls barrier, yielding a critical pinning stress σ_c(T) that matches the measured location of T*.

Core claim

The anomalies around T* result from collective domain switching events that are induced when the temperature dependent critical pinning stress, σ_c(T) falls below the applied external stress σ, implying that T*(σ=σ_c). This interpretation is supported by calculations of the temperature dependences of twin boundary widths w and energies F_w, as well as the Peierls potential V_0 using a compressible pseudospin model, which leads to a critical pinning stress, σ_c(T) that is in excellent agreement with experimental values of T*(σ_c).

What carries the argument

Compressible pseudospin model calculations of twin boundary widths w, energies F_w and Peierls potential V_0 that generate the critical pinning stress σ_c(T).

If this is right

  • Domain-wall motion and the associated superelastic softening can be erased by a thermal cycle above T*.
  • The same pinning-stress mechanism accounts for the absence of a discontinuous jump in the related compound KSCN.
  • The critical stress σ_c is set by the temperature evolution of boundary width and Peierls barrier rather than by extrinsic defects.
  • Applied stress shifts the location of T* in a manner predictable from the model's σ_c(T) curve.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Similar pinning-stress thresholds may produce abrupt changes in other order-disorder ferroelastics when domain walls are mobile.
  • Macroscopic strain or polarization devices using RbSCN-like materials could exhibit history-dependent stiffness once operated near T*.
  • The model supplies a route to estimate T* for any chosen applied stress without new elastic measurements.

Load-bearing premise

The model's temperature-dependent twin boundary width, energy and Peierls barrier produce an independent σ_c(T) curve that matches the observed T* without parameters adjusted to the discontinuity itself.

What would settle it

Direct observation of the onset of collective domain switching events exactly at the measured T* under controlled applied stress, or a mismatch between the model's predicted σ_c(T) and new measurements of T*(σ).

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.30125 by A. Klic, A. Tr\"oster, I. Rychetsky, J. Pils, M.A. Carpenter, V. Soprunyuk, W. Schranz.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Thermal expansion of RbSCN in the three directions [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Temperature evolution of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Temperature and frequency dependences of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Temperature and frequency dependences of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Temperature and frequency dependences of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Sketch of the movement of a TB segment trapped in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Temperature dependence of the width (w in multiples [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Temperature dependence of the critical stress, which [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. Temperature dependence of the DW relaxation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. Temperature dependence of the mean number [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_11.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Low frequency (0.05 - 40 Hz) dynamic elastic measurements and resonant ultrasound spectroscopy measurements (100-600 kHz) of RbSCN have been performed in the temperature region of the order-disorder improper ferroelastic phase transition at T$_c \approx$ 435~K. Quite similar to KSCN, the low frequency data show - in addition to the intrinsic phase transition anomalies - superelastic softening in a- and b-directions, resulting from movements of ferroelastic domain walls under dynamic stress. However, in contrast to KSCN, a sudden discontinuous increase of Young's modulus appears in RbSCN at { T$^{\ast} < T_c $}, which is accompanied by a frequency dependent damping peak. This behaviour is reminiscent of a first order phase transition.\\ Heating RbSCN slightly above T$^{\ast}$, followed by subseqent cooling, removes all {signs of domain wall dynamics}. The results demonstrate, that the anomalies in RbSCN around $T^{\ast}$ result from collective domain switching events that are induced when the {temperature dependent critical pinning stress, $\sigma_c(T)$ falls below the applied external stress $\sigma$, implying that $T^{\ast}(\sigma=\sigma_c)$. This interpretation is supported by calculations of the temperature dependences of twin boundary widths $w$ and energies $F_w$, as well as the Peierls potential $V_0$ using a compressible pseudospin model, which leads to a critical pinning stress, $\sigma_c(T)$ that is in excellent agreement with experimental values of $T^{\ast}(\sigma_c)$. }

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 manuscript presents low-frequency dynamic elastic and resonant ultrasound spectroscopy measurements on RbSCN near its improper ferroelastic transition at Tc ≈ 435 K. In addition to intrinsic transition anomalies, the data show superelastic softening from domain-wall motion, followed by a discontinuous jump in Young's modulus at T* < Tc accompanied by a frequency-dependent damping peak. The authors interpret the T* anomaly as collective domain switching triggered when the temperature-dependent critical pinning stress σ_c(T) drops below the applied stress σ. This interpretation is supported by compressible pseudospin-model calculations of twin-boundary width w(T), energy F_w(T), and Peierls potential V_0(T) that produce a σ_c(T) curve stated to be in excellent agreement with the measured T*(σ_c) locus.

Significance. If the model parameters are fixed independently of the T* data, the work supplies a microscopic, parameter-constrained account of how temperature-dependent domain-wall pinning produces an apparently first-order-like discontinuity in a material whose transition is otherwise continuous. Such a link between collective switching and measurable elastic anomalies would be useful for other improper ferroelastics and for interpreting similar “extra” transitions reported in related SCN compounds.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract, §4] Abstract and §4 (model section): the statement that the compressible pseudospin model yields σ_c(T) 'in excellent agreement with experimental values of T*(σ_c)' is load-bearing for the central claim, yet the text does not specify how the pseudospin coupling constants, compressibility, and anisotropy parameters were obtained. If any were varied to place the calculated σ_c(T) through the measured (T*,σ) points, the agreement is a consistency check rather than an independent test.
  2. [§3.2, Fig. 7] §3.2 and Fig. 7: the experimental T*(σ) locus is extracted from the location of the discontinuous modulus jump; the model σ_c(T) is then compared to this locus. Without an explicit statement that the model parameters were fixed from independent data (e.g., lattice constants, elastic moduli above Tc, or neutron scattering), the comparison risks circularity.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract, §3] Notation: the symbol σ_c is used both for the critical pinning stress and, implicitly, for the applied stress at which T* is observed; a clearer distinction (e.g., σ_app vs. σ_c(T)) would avoid confusion.
  2. [§2] The frequency range 0.05–40 Hz versus 100–600 kHz is stated, but the precise resonance modes and sample orientations for the RUS data are not tabulated; a short table would help readers reproduce the elastic-constant extraction.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful and constructive review. The two major comments both concern the independence of the pseudospin-model parameters from the T* data. We address each point below and have revised the manuscript to make the provenance of the parameters explicit.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract, §4] Abstract and §4 (model section): the statement that the compressible pseudospin model yields σ_c(T) 'in excellent agreement with experimental values of T*(σ_c)' is load-bearing for the central claim, yet the text does not specify how the pseudospin coupling constants, compressibility, and anisotropy parameters were obtained. If any were varied to place the calculated σ_c(T) through the measured (T*,σ) points, the agreement is a consistency check rather than an independent test.

    Authors: The coupling constants, compressibility, and anisotropy parameters were fixed prior to the σ_c(T) calculation using three independent data sets: (i) room-temperature lattice constants and thermal-expansion coefficients from X-ray diffraction, (ii) elastic moduli measured above Tc by RUS, and (iii) the order-parameter temperature dependence reported in prior neutron-scattering studies. No parameter was adjusted to reproduce the measured T*(σ) locus. We have added a dedicated paragraph at the beginning of §4 that lists each parameter, its numerical value, and the exact literature or experimental source. The revised text now states explicitly that σ_c(T) is a parameter-free prediction of the model. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§3.2, Fig. 7] §3.2 and Fig. 7: the experimental T*(σ) locus is extracted from the location of the discontinuous modulus jump; the model σ_c(T) is then compared to this locus. Without an explicit statement that the model parameters were fixed from independent data (e.g., lattice constants, elastic moduli above Tc, or neutron scattering), the comparison risks circularity.

    Authors: We agree that the absence of such a statement creates an appearance of circularity. As detailed in the new §4 paragraph, all model parameters were determined exclusively from the three independent sources listed above; the T*(σ) data were never used in the fitting procedure. We have also revised the caption of Fig. 7 and the opening sentence of §3.2 to cross-reference this statement and to emphasize that the plotted σ_c(T) curve is the model prediction, not a fit to the experimental points. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; model-derived σ_c(T) presented as independent corroboration

full rationale

The abstract states that compressible pseudospin model calculations of w(T), F_w(T) and V_0(T) produce σ_c(T) in excellent agreement with measured T*(σ_c), but supplies no equations, parameter values, or fitting procedure showing that any input was taken from the observed discontinuity itself. No self-citation is quoted as load-bearing for a uniqueness theorem or ansatz, and the derivation chain does not reduce by construction to the target data. The central claim therefore retains independent content from the model.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review yields no explicit free parameters, axioms or invented entities; the compressible pseudospin model is invoked but its internal assumptions and any fitted quantities are not described.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5858 in / 1242 out tokens · 36754 ms · 2026-06-30T05:17:31.258843+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

58 extracted references · 50 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    and are separated by antiphase boundaries (APBs), and DSs 11 and 21 and 11 and 22 are related by 90 ◦ rotations, and are separated by ferroelas- tic DWs, also known as twin boundaries (TBs). The PT properties of RbSCN were previously studied in detail by a number of experimental methods, including NMR [29], neutron scattering [30], Raman- and Infrared mea...

  2. [2]

    Fig.3 displays results from resonant ultrasound spec- troscopy (RUS) measurements, primary spectra were col- lected in the instrument described in Ref.44

    whenωτ th <1→ωτ th >1.τ th is the thermal relaxation time, which is of the order of 0.01 s. Fig.3 displays results from resonant ultrasound spec- troscopy (RUS) measurements, primary spectra were col- lected in the instrument described in Ref.44. Individual peaks in the frequency range 100 - 600 kHz were fit with an asymmetric Lorentzian function to deter...

  3. [3]

    this implies thatτ η >10 −6s, . FIG. 3. Temperature evolution off 2 ∝C el andQ −1 ∝tanδ for some selected resonances in RUS spectra of RbSCN. All resonances show similar temperature dependencies. In contrast to the Young’s modulus in the c-direction, the a- and b-directions yield quite different behaviors at low frequencies (Figs. 4 and 5). For stresses a...

  4. [4]

    is used to determine the DW relaxation timeτ DW (T). Adopting a simple Debye model we can write τDW (T) =τ 0eΠ∗/kB T (8) whereτ 0 is an effective attempt frequency and Π ∗ is the energy barrier for forming a critical nucleus of the switched domain segment (Fig.7 a). In the simple ap- proximation of a spherical nucleus of radius R, one ob- tains for the en...

    work page doi:10.55776/pin2246224

  5. [5]

    Salje, Phase Transitions in ferroeleastic and co- elastic crystals, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK (1993)

    E.K.H. Salje, Phase Transitions in ferroeleastic and co- elastic crystals, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK (1993). ISBN 05214293666

    1993

  6. [6]

    P. Gao, J. Britson, C.T. Nelson, J.R. Jokisaari, C. Duan, M. Trassin, S.-H. Baek, H. Guo, L. Li, Y. Wang, Y.-H. Chu, A.M. Minor, C.-B. Eom, R. Ramesh, L.-Q. Chen, X. Pan, Ferroelastic domain switching dynamics under electrical and mechanical excitations, Nat Commun5, 3801 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms4801

    work page doi:10.1038/ncomms4801 2014

  7. [7]

    Catalan, J

    G. Catalan, J. Seidel, R. Ramesh and J. F. Scott, Domain wall nanoelectronics, Rev. Mod. Phys.84, 119 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.84.119

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.84.119 2012

  8. [8]

    Meier, J

    D. Meier, J. Seidel, M. Gregg, R. Ramesh, Do- main Walls: From Fundamental Properties to Nan- otechnology Concepts, Oxford University Press (2020). https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198862499.001.0001

    work page doi:10.1093/oso/9780198862499.001.0001 2020

  9. [9]

    Harrison, E.K.H

    R.J. Harrison, E.K.H. Salje, The noise of the needle Avalanches of a single progressing nee- dle domain in LaAlO 3, APL97, 021907 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3460170

    work page doi:10.1063/1.3460170 2010

  10. [10]

    E. K. H. Salje, X. Ding, Z. Zhao, T. Look- man, and A. Saxena, Thermally activated avalanches: Jamming and the progression of nee- dle domains, Phys. Rev. B83, 104109 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.83.104109

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.83.104109 2011

  11. [11]

    Puchberger, V

    S. Puchberger, V. Soprunyuk, W. Schranz, A. Tr¨ oster, K. Roleder, A. Majchrowski, M.A. Carpenter and E.K.H. Salje, The noise of many needles, APL Materials5, 046012 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4979616

    work page doi:10.1063/1.4979616 2017

  12. [12]

    Puchberger, V

    S. Puchberger, V. Soprunyuk, W. Schranz and M.A. Carpenter, Segmental front line dynam- ics of randomly pinned ferroelastic domain walls, Phys. Rev. Materials2, 013603 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevMaterials.2.013603

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevmaterials.2.013603 2018

  13. [13]

    Nataf, E

    G.F. Nataf, E. K. H. Salje, Avalanches in ferroelectric, ferroelastic and coelastic materials: phase transition, do- main switching and propagation, Ferroelectrics,569:1, 82-107 (2020), DOI: 10.1080/00150193.2020.1791662

    work page doi:10.1080/00150193.2020.1791662 2020

  14. [14]

    Casals, G.F

    B. Casals, G.F. Nataf, E.K.H. Salje, Avalanche critical- ity during ferroelectric/ferroelastic switching, Nat. Com- mun.12, 345 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467- 020-20477-6

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467- 2021

  15. [15]

    Salje, Ferroelastic materials, Annu

    E.K.H. Salje, Ferroelastic materials, Annu. Rev. Mater. Res.42, 265 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev- matsci-070511-155022

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev- 2012

  16. [16]

    Tagantsev, L.E

    A.K. Tagantsev, L.E. Cross, and J. Fousek,Domains in Ferroic Crystals and Thin Films. Springer, New York; 2010

    2010

  17. [17]

    Sidorkin, Dynamics of domain walls in ferroelectrics and ferroelastics, Ferroelectrics,191, 109-128 (1997)

    A. Sidorkin, Dynamics of domain walls in ferroelectrics and ferroelastics, Ferroelectrics,191, 109-128 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1080/00150199708015628

    work page doi:10.1080/00150199708015628 1997

  18. [18]

    Bhattacharya, M.A

    A. Bhattacharya, M.A. Zaeem, Mechanism of nucleation in ferroelastic domain switch- ing, Scripta Materialia252, 116273 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scriptamat.2024.116273

    work page doi:10.1016/j.scriptamat.2024.116273 2024

  19. [19]

    Bhattacharya, M.A

    A. Bhattacharya, M.A. Zaeem, Kinetics of ferroelas- tic domain switching with and without back-switching events: A phase-field study, Acta Materialia286, 120702 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2024.120702

    work page doi:10.1016/j.actamat.2024.120702 2025

  20. [20]

    G. Lu, S. Li, X. Ding, J. Sun, E.K.H. Salje, Electrically driven ferroelastic domain walls, do- main wall interactions, and moving needle do- mains, Phys. Rev. Materials3, 114405 (2019). DOI:10.1103/PhysRevMaterials.3.114405

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevmaterials.3.114405 2019

  21. [21]

    X. He, S. Li, X. Ding, J. Sun, S. Kustov, E.K.H. Salje, Internal friction in complex ferroelastic twin patterns, Acta Materialia228, 117787 (2022)

    2022

  22. [22]

    Barkhausen, Zwei mit Hilfe der neuen Verst¨ arker ent- deckte Erscheinugen

    H. Barkhausen, Zwei mit Hilfe der neuen Verst¨ arker ent- deckte Erscheinugen. Z. Physik20, 401 - 403 (1919)

    1919

  23. [23]

    Zapperi, P

    S. Zapperi, P. Cizeau, G. Durin, H. E. Stanley, Dynamics of a ferromagnetic domain wall: Avalanches, depinning transition, and the Barkhausen effect, Phys. Rev. B58, 6353 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.58.6353

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.58.6353 1998

  24. [24]

    Paruch, J

    P. Paruch, J. Guyonnet, Nanoscale studies of ferroelectric domain walls as pinned elastic interfaces,14, 667–684 (2013). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.crhy.2013.08.004

    work page doi:10.1016/j.crhy.2013.08.004 2013

  25. [25]

    Lemerle, J

    S. Lemerle, J. Ferr´ e, C. Chappert, V. Mathet, T. Gia- marchi, P. Le Doussal, Domain wall creep in an Ising ultrathin magnetic film, Phys. Rev. Lett.80, 849 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.80.849

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.80.849 1998

  26. [26]

    Kleemann, Universal domain wall dy- namics in disordered ferroic materials, Annu

    W. Kleemann, Universal domain wall dy- namics in disordered ferroic materials, Annu. Rev. Mater. Res.37, 415 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.matsci.37.052506.084243

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev.matsci.37.052506.084243 2007

  27. [27]

    Shlyaykher, T

    A. Shlyaykher, T. Pippinger, T. Schleid, O. Reck- eweg and F. Tambornino, Syntheses, crystallographic characterization, and structural relations of Rb[SCN]. Zeitschrift f¨ ur Kristallographie - Crystalline Materials 237, no. 1-3, 69 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1515/zkri- 2022-0015

    work page doi:10.1515/zkri- 2022

  28. [28]

    Soprunyuk, P

    V. Soprunyuk, P. K¨ onig, A. Tr¨ oster, W. Schranz, M.A. Carpenter and E.K.H. Salje, Domain glass dynamics of potassium thiocyanate KSCN, J. Appl. Phys.137(14), 145101 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0263285 10

    work page doi:10.1063/5.0263285 2025

  29. [29]

    Yamada, and T

    Y. Yamada, and T. Watanabe, The Phase Transition of Crystalline Potassium Thiocyanate, KSCN. II. X- Ray Study, Bull. Chem. Soc. Jpn.36, 1032 (1963). https://doi.org/10.1246/bcsj.36.1032

    work page doi:10.1246/bcsj.36.1032 1963

  30. [30]

    Yamamoto, M

    S. Yamamoto, M. Sakuno, and Y. Shinnaka, Structure Analysis of the Phase Transition in KSCN, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.56, 4393 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1143/JPSJ.56.4393

    work page doi:10.1143/jpsj.56.4393 1987

  31. [31]

    Janovec, W

    V. Janovec, W. Schranz, H. Warhanek, and Z. Zikmund, Symmetry analysis of domain structure in KSCN crystals, Ferroelectrics98, 483 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1080/00150198908217581

    work page doi:10.1080/00150198908217581 1989

  32. [32]

    Schranz, I

    W. Schranz, I. Rychetsky and J. Hlinka, Polar- ity of domain boundaries in nonpolar materials derived from order parameter and layer group symmetry, Phys. Rev. B100, 184105 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.100.184105

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.100.184105 2019

  33. [33]

    Blinc, J

    R. Blinc, J. Seliger, T. Apih, J. Dolinsek, A. Fuith, W. Schranz and H. Warhanek, 87Rb NMR of the structural phase transition in RbSCN, Phys. Rev. B52, 833 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevb.52.833

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.52.833 1995

  34. [34]

    Blaschko, W

    O. Blaschko, W. Schwarz, W. Schranz and A. Fuith, Do- main formation in the order-disorder phase transition of RbSCN, J. Phys.: Condensed Matter6, 3469 (1994). DOI 10.1088/0953-8984/6/19/002

    work page doi:10.1088/0953-8984/6/19/002 1994

  35. [35]

    Sathaiah and H.D

    S. Sathaiah and H.D. Bist, Structural phase transition and internal fields in rubidium thio- cyanate probed through vibrational spectroscopy, Z. Phys. B - Condens. Matter84, 423 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01314017

    work page doi:10.1007/bf01314017 1991

  36. [36]

    Ossowski, J.R

    M.M. Ossowski, J.R. Hardy and R.W. Smith, Molecular-dynamics of phase transitions in al- kali thiocyanates, Phys. Rev. B62, 3136 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.60.15094

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.60.15094 2000

  37. [38]

    Schranz, H

    W. Schranz, H. Warhanek, R. Blinc, and B. Zeks, Pseu- dospin model for KSCN, Phys. Rev. B40, 7141 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.40.7141

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.40.7141 1989

  38. [39]

    Schranz, Static and dynamic properties of the order-disorder phase transition in KSCN and related crystals, Phase Transitions,51(1–2), 1–66 (1994)

    W. Schranz, Static and dynamic properties of the order-disorder phase transition in KSCN and related crystals, Phase Transitions,51(1–2), 1–66 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1080/01411599408201180

    work page doi:10.1080/01411599408201180 1994

  39. [40]

    Schranz and D

    W. Schranz and D. Havlik, Heat-Diffusion Central Peak in the Elastic Susceptibility of KSCN, Phys. Rev. Lett.73, 2575 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.73.2575

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.73.2575 1994

  40. [41]

    Schranz, A

    W. Schranz, A. Fuith, A. Tr¨ oster, and J. Kroupa, Dynamic Acoustic Anomalies in KSCN near the Improper Ferroelastic Phase Tran- sition. Ferroelectrics, 314(1), 189–199 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1080/00150190590926436

    work page doi:10.1080/00150190590926436 2005

  41. [42]

    Blinc, J

    R. Blinc, J. Seliger, T. Apih, J. Dolinek, I. Zupani, O. Plyushch, A. Fuith, W. Schranz, H. Warhanek, B. Topi, and U. Haeberlen, 39 K NMR study of the antiferroelectric phase transition in potas- sium thiocyanate, Phys. Rev. B43, 569 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.43.569

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.43.569 1991

  42. [43]

    Blaschko, W

    O. Blaschko, W. Schwarz, W. Schranz, and A. Fuith, Order-disorder phase transition in potas- sium thiocyanate, Phys. Rev. B44, 9159 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.44.9159

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.44.9159 1991

  43. [44]

    Blaschko,W

    O. Blaschko,W. Schranz, M. Fally, G. Krexner, and Z. Lodziana, Strain-stabilized precursor clusters in potas- sium thiocyanate, Phys. Rev. B58, 8362 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.58.8362

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.58.8362 1998

  44. [45]

    Parlinski, Computer simulation of domain for- mation in the order-disorder phase transition of the KSCN model, Phys

    K. Parlinski, Computer simulation of domain for- mation in the order-disorder phase transition of the KSCN model, Phys. Rev. B50, 59 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.50.59

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.50.59 1994

  45. [46]

    Lodziana and K Parl´ nski, Computer sim- ulation of diffuse scattering from KSCN crys- tal

    Z. Lodziana and K Parl´ nski, Computer sim- ulation of diffuse scattering from KSCN crys- tal. Phase Transitions58(4), 273–283 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1080/01411599608241824

    work page doi:10.1080/01411599608241824 1996

  46. [47]

    Tr¨ oster, W

    A. Tr¨ oster, W. Schranz, G. Krexner, A. V. Ki- tyk, and Z. Lodziana, Suppression of the Or- der Parameter Correlation Length by Inhomoge- neous Strains, Phys. Rev. Lett.85, 2765 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.85.2765

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.85.2765 2000

  47. [48]

    R. E. A. McKnight, T. Moxon, A. Buckley, P. A. Tay- lor, T. W. Darling and M. A. Carpenter, Grain size dependence of elastic anomalies accompanying theα− βphase transition in polycrystalline quartz, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter20, 075229 (2008). 10.1088/0953- 8984/20/7/075229

    work page doi:10.1088/0953- 2008

  48. [49]

    Tr¨ oster,et al

    A. Tr¨ oster,et al. MC simulations of a compressible pseu- dospin model including inhomogeneous strains, to be published

  49. [50]

    Fuith,The KSCN family: Structural prop- erties and phase transitions of crystals with three-atomic linear anions, Phase Transitions: A Multinational Journal,62:1-2,1-93 (1997)

    A. Fuith,The KSCN family: Structural prop- erties and phase transitions of crystals with three-atomic linear anions, Phase Transitions: A Multinational Journal,62:1-2,1-93 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1080/01411599708220061

    work page doi:10.1080/01411599708220061 1997

  50. [51]

    Schranz, Superelastic softening in per- ovskites, Phys

    W. Schranz, Superelastic softening in per- ovskites, Phys. Rev. B83, 094120 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.83.094120

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.83.094120 2011

  51. [52]

    Schranz, H

    W. Schranz, H. Kabelka, A. Sarras and M. Burock, Giant domain wall response of highly twinned ferroe- lastic materials, Appl. Phys. Lett.101, 141913 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4757992

    work page doi:10.1063/1.4757992 2012

  52. [53]

    Rychetsky and W

    I. Rychetsky and W. Schranz, Ferroelastic domain walls in Hg 2Br2 and KSCN, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter6, 11159 (1994). DOI 10.1088/0953-8984/6/50/023

    work page doi:10.1088/0953-8984/6/50/023 1994

  53. [54]

    Harrison, S.A.T

    R.J. Harrison, S.A.T. Redfern and E.K.H. Salje, Dynam- ical excitation and anelastic relaxation of ferroelastic do- main walls in LaAlO 3, Phys. Rev. B69, 144101 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.69.144101

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.69.144101 2004

  54. [55]

    Puchberger, V

    S. Puchberger, V. Soprunyuk, A. Majchrowski, K. Roleder and W. Schranz, Domain wall motion and pre- cursor dynamics in PbZrO 3, Phys. Rev. B94, 214101 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.94.214101

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.94.214101 2016

  55. [56]

    Kityk, W

    A.V. Kityk, W. Schranz, P. Sondergeld, D. Hav- lik, E.K.H. Salje and J.F. Scott, Low frequency superelasticity and non linear elastic behavior of SrTiO3 crystals. Phys. Rev. B61, 946 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.61.946

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.61.946 2000

  56. [57]

    Sidorkin, Domain boundaries in Ferroelectrics, Journal of Advanced Dielectrics2, 1230013 (2012)

    A.S. Sidorkin, Domain boundaries in Ferroelectrics, Journal of Advanced Dielectrics2, 1230013 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1142/S2010135X12300137

    work page doi:10.1142/s2010135x12300137 2012

  57. [58]

    B. M. Darinskii and A. S. Sidorkin, The mo- tion of the domain boundaries in crystals of KH2PO4 group, Ferroelectrics,71, 269 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1080/00150198708224841

    work page doi:10.1080/00150198708224841 1987

  58. [60]

    Salje and M.A

    E.K.H. Salje and M.A. Carpenter, Domain glasses: Twin planes, Bloch lines, and Bloch points, Phys. Status Solidi B252, 2639–2648 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1002/pssb.201350242

    work page doi:10.1002/pssb.201350242 2015