Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 9 minor 76 references

Radiation cascades in fullerite thermalize for hundreds of picoseconds

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · glm-5.2

2026-07-09 00:52 UTC pith:V5IQ6WK7

load-bearing objection First MD study of radiation cascades in bulk fullerite; extended thermalization is real but quantitative timescale carries uncertainty from missing vdW in EDIP the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2607.06962 v1 pith:V5IQ6WK7 submitted 2026-07-08 physics.comp-ph cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Radiation Damage Cascades in Fullerite Using Molecular Dynamics

Ethan P. Turner (1) , Paolo Raiteri (2) , Nigel A. Marks (1) ((1) Department of Physics , Astronomy Curtin University Perth WA 6845 Australia , (2) School of Molecular , Life Sciences Curtin University Perth WA 6845 Australia) This is my paper
classification physics.comp-ph cond-mat.mtrl-sci PACS 61.80.Az61.48.+c34.20.Cf
keywords fulleriteradiation damagemolecular dynamicsC60cascadethermalizationcross-linkingsp3 bonds
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

This paper uses molecular dynamics to simulate radiation damage cascades in bulk fullerite (solid C60) for the first time. The central finding is that radiation cascades in fullerite behave fundamentally differently from those in crystalline solids like diamond, graphite, metals, or oxides. In most materials, the ballistic phase—where a primary knock-on atom (PKA) bounces through the lattice—lasts a fraction of a picosecond, and thermal equilibrium is restored within a few picoseconds. In fullerite, the weak van der Waals forces between C60 molecules mean that kinetic energy cannot dissipate quickly through the lattice. Instead, the cascade energy is trapped in localized clusters of cross-linked C60 molecules, which remain at temperatures above 1000 K for over a hundred picoseconds. The primary mechanism for energy dissipation during this extended thermalization phase is the slow formation of sp3 bonds that cross-link neighboring C60 cages. The paper establishes a linear relationship between the number of cross-linked molecules and the number of new sp3 atoms (approximately 3.4 sp3 atoms per cross-linked molecule), and computes a threshold displacement energy of 18 eV, consistent with experimental values.

Core claim

The core discovery is that radiation damage in a molecular solid like fullerite produces a thermalization phase lasting hundreds of picoseconds—orders of magnitude longer than in crystalline solids—driven by slow cross-linking of C60 molecules via sp3 bonds rather than by rapid phonon-mediated heat diffusion. The weak intermolecular forces prevent efficient thermal transfer, trapping the cascade energy in localized molecular clusters that cool through an annealing process of bond formation rather than through a thermal spike.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is the cross-linking of C60 molecules through sp3 bonds formed during both the ballistic collision phase and the extended thermalization phase. The Environment Dependent Interaction Potential (EDIP) for carbon, paired with the Ziegler-Biersack-Littmark (ZBL) potential for close-range atomic interactions, provides the force model. A neighbor-list-based bond-tracking algorithm (rather than coordinate displacement) is used to identify defects, since molecular rotation makes standard vacancy-based methods inapplicable.

Load-bearing premise

The EDIP potential accurately models the energy barriers for making and breaking bonds in C60 during high-energy collisions, even though it cannot reproduce the experimental two-bond-length structure of C60 (yielding a single bond length of 1.49 Å instead of the experimental 1.40 and 1.45 Å). The authors argue this limitation is acceptable because the potential's transferability and realistic energy barriers matter more for radiation damage than exact structural reproduction.

What would settle it

If the energy barriers for sp3 bond formation and breaking in C60 are significantly different in reality than in EDIP, the thermalization timescale and the degree of cross-linking could be substantially wrong, since the entire extended thermalization phase is governed by the rate of these bond changes.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Ion implantation experiments on fullerite at 0.1–1 keV energies can be guided by the cascade length (103 Å/keV), threshold displacement energy (18 eV), and cross-linking statistics reported here.
  • The sp3-atom count can serve as a computationally cheap proxy for the number of cross-linked molecules in larger-scale simulations where full cluster analysis is prohibitively expensive.
  • The finding that cross-linking increases thermal conductivity suggests that radiation dose rate (flux) may control the duration of the thermalization phase—higher flux could shorten thermalization by building cross-link networks faster.
  • Simulation cell sizes for fullerite cascades must be at least 27 times larger than for graphite or diamond at equivalent PKA energies, placing a hard computational constraint on scaling to higher energies.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the thermalization duration depends on cross-link density, then pre-cross-linked fullerite (e.g., pressure-polymerized phases) should exhibit dramatically shorter thermalization phases, providing a testable prediction for future simulations or experiments.
  • The amorphous nature of the sp3 cross-links formed by radiation, contrasted with the ordered cross-links from photo-polymerization or pressure-induced polymerization, suggests that radiation-damaged fullerite may have different mechanical and electronic properties than chemically polymerized fullerite, even at similar cross-link densities.
  • The channeling behavior—where atoms travel through gaps between C60 molecules or through hexagonal faces of the cages—implies that orientational ordering of the C60 molecules (e.g., at low temperatures) could systematically alter cascade lengths and damage distributions, since the channeling pathways would become anisotropic.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 9 minor

Summary. This manuscript presents molecular dynamics (MD) simulations of radiation damage cascades in bulk fullerite (solid C60), a system not previously studied in this configuration. Using the Environment Dependent Interaction Potential (EDIP) combined with the Ziegler-Biersack-Littmark (ZBL) potential for short-range interactions, the authors simulate carbon primary knock-on atoms (PKAs) at energies of 0.1–1.0 keV. The cascades are sampled over 25 directions per energy, and the dynamics are tracked for 300 ps. The authors characterize the ballistic and thermalization phases, finding that the thermalization phase lasts hundreds of picoseconds—orders of magnitude longer than in crystalline solids like diamond or graphite—driven by the cross-linking of C60 molecules via sp3 bonds. They also report a threshold displacement energy (Ed) of 18 eV via a Kinchin-Pease analysis, consistent with experimental and theoretical literature values, and identify a linear relationship between the number of cross-linked molecules and new sp3 atoms.

Significance. The study addresses a genuine gap in the literature: while fullerite thin films and C60 projectiles have been simulated, bulk fullerite under irradiation has not. The finding that thermalization in a molecular solid is drastically prolonged compared to extended network solids is physically reasonable and well-supported by the data presented. The methodology is standard and well-executed: 25 PKA directions per energy provide adequate statistics, the variable timestep algorithm ensures energy conservation, and the threshold displacement energy matching experimental values (10–29 eV) serves as a useful validation. The linear sp3/cross-linking proxy (Fig. 11) is a practical, falsifiable metric for future studies. The comparison to graphite and diamond using the same potential family provides a consistent framework. The central qualitative claim—that fullerite thermalizes much slower than crystalline solids—is robust.

major comments (2)
  1. §IV, final paragraph: The claim that 'contributions from the weak van der Waals forces are negligible in comparison' to cross-linking is derived from simulations that cannot model van der Waals (vdW) interactions, as EDIP is a bond-order potential without explicit dispersion terms. This creates a circularity risk for the central quantitative claim about the hundreds-of-picoseconds thermalization timescale. If vdW-mediated phonon coupling between molecules were present, it could provide an additional energy dissipation channel, potentially shortening the thermalization phase. The authors should explicitly acknowledge this limitation and reframe the conclusion as a finding specific to the EDIP potential, noting that the absence of vdW may artificially extend the thermalization timescale. The qualitative finding (fullerite thermalizes slower than crystalline solids) is likely robust sincevd
  2. §II, paragraph 2: The acknowledgment that EDIP yields a single C60 bond length of 1.49 Å (vs. experimental 1.40 and 1.45 Å) and a ~5% larger lattice parameter is transparent and appropriate. However, the claim that EDIP provides 'realistic energy barriers for making and breaking bonds' is stated without supporting evidence or citation. Since the entire cascade simulation depends on these barriers—particularly for the sp3 cross-link formation that drives the thermalization phase—this assertion is load-bearing. The authors should either provide a reference validating EDIP barrier heights against DFT or experiment, or soften the claim to reflect that barrier accuracy is assumed rather than demonstrated.
minor comments (9)
  1. §III.B, Fig. 3: The exponential fit to KE_max for 1 keV cascades yields a time constant of 0.064 ps, described as 'four-times that of diamond at 0.016 ps.' The fit is shown as a solid black line but the fitting range (e.g., 0 to 0.25 ps?) is not specified. Please state the fitting window.
  2. §III.C, Fig. 6: The y-intercepts of 11.7 Å and 12.1 Å are described as 'roughly similar to the diameter of the C60 molecules (7.378 Å).' The ratio is approximately 1.6, which is not immediately obvious as 'roughly similar.' Please clarify the physical reasoning connecting the intercept to the molecular diameter or free rotation distance.
  3. §III.D, Fig. 8(c): The exponential fits to the cluster temperature include 'a non-zero y-offset.' The values of these offsets and the physical motivation for them should be stated. Are the offsets representing the equilibrium temperature?
  4. §III.D, Fig. 9: The Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution is labeled as corresponding to 316 K. Please clarify how this temperature was derived from the 1 keV PKA energy and the total number of atoms in the simulation cell, as this determines whether the comparison is appropriate.
  5. §III.D, Fig. 11: The linear fit yields 3.4 sp3/molecule, interpreted as 'three or four cross-links.' Error bars are 95% confidence intervals, but the R² value or equivalent goodness-of-fit metric is not reported. Please include this.
  6. §II, paragraph 4: The equilibration time is 5 ps at 300 K. Given that the thermalization phase is shown to last hundreds of picoseconds, it would be useful to briefly justify whether 5 ps is sufficient for the initial orientational disorder to be well-established.
  7. §III.A, Fig. 2: The figure caption states 'All views are along a Cartesian direction' but does not specify which direction. Please clarify for reproducibility.
  8. §IV, paragraph 3: The discussion of channeling barriers cites Zhevago and Glebov [68] for potential wells of ~7–14 eV between molecules and Kaxiras and Pandey [69] for a ~19.5 eV barrier through a graphene hexagon. The comparison is interesting but the argument that this explains the longer cascade length in fullerite vs. graphite is qualitative. A brief quantitative comparison of the expected channeling distances or rates would strengthen this point.
  9. Typographical: §III heading reads 'III. RESUL TS' with a space in 'RESULTS.'

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for a careful and constructive review. Both major comments are well-taken and will be addressed in the revised manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: §IV, final paragraph: The claim that 'contributions from the weak van der Waals forces are negligible in comparison' to cross-linking is derived from simulations that cannot model van der Waals (vdW) interactions, as EDIP is a bond-order potential without explicit dispersion terms. This creates a circularity risk for the central quantitative claim about the hundreds-of-picoseconds thermalization timescale. If vdW-mediated phonon coupling between molecules were present, it could provide an additional energy dissipation channel, potentially shortening the thermalization phase. The authors should explicitly acknowledge this limitation and reframe the conclusion as a finding specific to the EDIP potential, noting that the absence of vdW may artificially extend the thermalization timescale.

    Authors: The referee is correct that this statement is circular as written. EDIP is a bond-order potential with no explicit dispersion terms, so our simulations cannot directly assess the magnitude of vdW-mediated energy transfer between C60 molecules. We agree that the claim should be reframed. In the revised manuscript, we will (1) explicitly state that EDIP does not include vdW interactions, (2) acknowledge that the absence of vdW phonon coupling between molecules could artificially prolong the thermalization timescale by removing an additional energy dissipation channel, and (3) reframe the sentence in §IV to say that within the EDIP model, cross-linking is the dominant dissipation mechanism, while noting that a potential including vdW could yield a shorter thermalization phase. We agree with the referee that the qualitative finding — fullerite thermalizes much more slowly than crystalline solids — is robust, since even with vdW coupling the intermolecular interaction would remain far weaker than the covalent networks in diamond or graphite. However, we will no longer present the vdW negligibility as a definitive conclusion. revision: yes

  2. Referee: §II, paragraph 2: The claim that EDIP provides 'realistic energy barriers for making and breaking bonds' is stated without supporting evidence or citation. Since the entire cascade simulation depends on these barriers—particularly for the sp3 cross-link formation that drives the thermalization phase—this assertion is load-bearing. The authors should either provide a reference validating EDIP barrier heights against DFT or experiment, or soften the claim to reflect that barrier accuracy is assumed rather than demonstrated.

    Authors: We agree that this claim is stated more strongly than the manuscript currently supports. The original EDIP paper (Marks, Phys. Rev. B 63, 035401, 2000) demonstrates transferability across diamond, graphite, and liquid carbon structures, and the potential has been widely applied to radiation damage and amorphous carbon systems (as cited in our reference list), but we are not aware of a published systematic comparison of EDIP barrier heights against DFT for the specific bond-breaking and cross-linking processes relevant to fullerite cascades. Rather than overstate the case, we will soften the language to indicate that EDIP is expected to provide reasonable energy barriers based on its demonstrated transferability across carbon allotropes, but that a direct validation against DFT for the specific reactions in this study has not been performed. We will also add the original EDIP reference [41] as a citation for the transferability claim. We note that the threshold displacement energy of 18 eV matching experimental values (10–29 eV) provides indirect evidence that the effective barriers are in a reasonable range, and we will make this connection explicit in the revised text. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Minor self-citations for methodology and comparison data; central claims are independently derived from simulation.

full rationale

The paper's central claims about fullerite radiation cascades — the extended thermalization phase (hundreds of ps), cross-linking as the dominant dissipation mechanism, Ed = 18 eV via Kinchin-Pease, and the linear sp3/cross-link relation — are all direct outputs of MD simulations performed in this work, not quantities derived from self-cited premises. The self-citations that appear are: (1) EDIP potential [41, Marks 2000], an established potential used by many groups, acknowledged here with its known limitations (single bond length 1.49 Å vs experiment); (2) variable timestep algorithm [55, Marks & Robinson 2015], a methodological tool; (3) graphite [39] and diamond [40] cascade data from the same group, used for contextual comparison only — the fullerite results do not depend on these. The Kinchin-Pease analysis uses a standard external model (Kinchin & Pease 1955) and the resulting Ed = 18 eV is validated against independent experimental and theoretical literature values (10–29 eV range). The skeptic's concern about the paper concluding 'contributions from the weak van der Waals forces are negligible' while using a potential that lacks vdW interactions is a legitimate correctness/modeling-limitation concern, but it is not a formal circularity: the paper does not derive the negligibility of vdW from a model that assumes it; rather, it observes that cross-linking dominates in its simulations. The inability to test the alternative is a limitation, not a self-definitional reduction. No step in the derivation chain reduces to its own inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 3 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper uses standard simulation methods and does not invent new entities. The free parameters are standard cutoffs used in analysis, not fitted to force a result. The main axiom is the validity of EDIP for C60 dynamics despite its structural limitations.

free parameters (2)
  • Bond cutoff = 1.85 Å
    Used to define bonds and compute coordination fractions. Standard value but chosen by the authors.
  • Cluster size cutoff = 100 atoms
    Chosen to omit small fragments and undamaged molecules from cross-linking analysis.
axioms (3)
  • domain assumption EDIP accurately models energy barriers for bond making/breaking in C60 despite incorrect bond lengths.
    Section II: The authors state EDIP cannot capture bond conjugation in C60 but assume it is well-suited for radiation damage due to realistic energy barriers.
  • standard math Kinchin-Pease hard sphere collision model is valid for fullerite.
    Section III.C: Used to compute threshold displacement energy.
  • domain assumption 25 PKA directions provide sufficient statistical sampling.
    Section II: Directions are evenly spaced on a sphere. Error bars are standard error in the mean.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-glm · 20903 in / 1666 out tokens · 462137 ms · 2026-07-09T00:52:43.072916+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Molecular dynamics is used to study radiation cascades in solid C60 under ambient conditions. Simulations are performed for Primary Knock-On Atom (PKA) energies from 0.1 to 1 keV, and cascades are sampled over many PKA directions to collect statistics. Energies and forces are described using the Environment Dependent Interaction Potential for carbon paired with the Ziegler-Biersack-Littmark potential for short-range interactions, and cascade behaviour is characterized by tracking kinetic energy, hybridization and bond connectivity as a function of time. Compared to most materials, fullerite exhibits an unusual radiation response due to weak thermal transfer between C60 molecules leading to a thermalization phase lasting hundreds of picoseconds. The cascades damage the C60 molecules and link them together, and a linear relation is found between the number of cross-linked molecules and the number of new sp3 atoms. The threshold displacement energy computed is 18 eV, in agreement with experiments

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.06962 by (2) School of Molecular, Astronomy Curtin University Perth WA 6845 Australia, Ethan P. Turner (1), Life Sciences Curtin University Perth WA 6845 Australia), Nigel A. Marks (1) ((1) Department of Physics, Paolo Raiteri (2).

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. (a-g) Time series of the ballistic phase in a typical 1 keV cascade in fullerite. Blue spheres indicate displacements and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Time evolution of the maximum kinetic energy in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Representative cascades (smallest, average, greatest [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Duration of the ballistic phase as a function of PKA [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Bonds formed, bonds broken and number of displace [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Number of displacements as a function of PKA en [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. PKA range (a) and cascade length (b) as a func [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. (a-b) Visualization of growth in the largest cluster of a 1 keV cascade over 290 ps. (a) viewing along the x-axis and (b) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Distribution of the kinetic energy of atoms as a func [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. Number of sp [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. Number of bonds formed, number of bonds broken [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_10.png] view at source ↗

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

76 extracted references · 76 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    H. W. Kroto, J. R. Heath, S. C. O’Brien, R. F. Curl, and R. E. Smalley. C 60: Buckminsterfullerene.nature, 318 (6042):162–163, 1985. doi:10.1038/318162a0

    work page doi:10.1038/318162a0 1985

  2. [2]

    S. Iijima. Helical microtubules of graphitic carbon.na- ture, 354(6348):56–58, 1991. doi:10.1038/354056a0

    work page doi:10.1038/354056a0 1991

  3. [3]

    K. S. Novoselov, A. K. Geim, S. V. Morozov, D. E. Jiang, Y. Zhang, S. V. Dubonos, I. V. Grigorieva, and A. A. Firsov. Electric field effect in atomically thin carbon films.Science, 306(5696):666–669, 2004. doi: 10.1126/science.1102896

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1126/science.1102896 2004

  4. [4]

    Kr¨ atschmer, L

    W. Kr¨ atschmer, L. D. Lamb, K. H. D. R. Fostiropoulos, and D. R. Huffman. Solid C 60: a new form of carbon. Nature, 347(6291):354–358, 1990. doi:10.1038/347354a0

    work page doi:10.1038/347354a0 1990

  5. [5]

    Sundqvist

    B. Sundqvist. Fullerenes under high pressures. Advances in physics, 48(1):1–134, 1999. doi: 10.1080/000187399243464

    work page doi:10.1080/000187399243464 1999

  6. [6]

    Sundqvist

    B. Sundqvist. Carbon under pressure.Physics Reports, 909:1–73, 2021. doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2020.12.007

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2020.12.007 2021

  7. [7]

    Shang, Z

    Y. Shang, Z. Liu, J. Dong, M. Yao, Z. Yang, Q. Li, C. Zhai, F. Shen, X. Hou, L. Wang, et al. Ultrahard bulk amorphous carbon from collapsed fullerene.Nature, 599 (7886):599–604, 2021. doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03882-9

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03882-9 2021

  8. [8]

    Meirzadeh, A

    E. Meirzadeh, A. M. Evans, M. Rezaee, M. Milich, C. J. Dionne, T. P. Darlington, S. T. Bao, A. K. Bartholomew, T. Handa, D. J. Rizzo, et al. A few-layer covalent net- work of fullerenes.Nature, 613(7942):71–76, 2023. doi: 10.1038/s41586-022-05401-w

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-022-05401-w 2023

  9. [9]

    L. Hou, X. Cui, B. Guan, S. Wang, R. Li, Y. Liu, D. Zhu, and J. Zheng. Synthesis of a monolayer fullerene network. Nature, 606(7914):507–510, 2022. doi:10.1038/s41586- 022-04771-5

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586- 2022

  10. [10]

    F. Pan, K. Ni, T. Xu, H. Chen, Y. Wang, K. Gong, C. Liu, X. Li, M. L. Lin, S. Li, et al. Long-range ordered porous carbons produced from C 60.Nature, 614(7946): 95–101, 2023. doi:10.1038/s41586-022-05532-0

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-022-05532-0 2023

  11. [11]

    Sundqvist

    B. Sundqvist. Polymeric fullerene phases formed un- der pressure.Fullerene-Based Materials: Structures and Properties, pages 85–126, 2004. doi:10.1007/b94380

    work page doi:10.1007/b94380 2004

  12. [12]

    Tanaka and S

    M. Tanaka and S. Yamanaka. Vapor-phase growth and structural characterization of single crystals of magne- sium doped two-dimensional fullerene polymer mg 2C60. Crystal Growth & Design, 18(7):3877–3882, 2018. doi: 10.1021/acs.cgd.8b00186

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.cgd.8b00186 2018

  13. [13]

    A. M. Rao, P. Zhou, K. A. Wang, G. T. Hager, J. M. Holden, Y. Wang, W. T. Lee, X. X. Bi, P. C. Eklund, D. S. Cornett, et al. Photoinduced polymerization of solid C 60 films.Science, 259(5097):955–957, 1993. doi: 10.1126/science.259.5097.955

    work page doi:10.1126/science.259.5097.955 1993

  14. [14]

    Onoe and K

    J. Onoe and K. Takeuchi. In situ high-resolution infrared spectroscopy of a photopolymerized C 60 film.Phys. Rev. B, 54:6167–6171, 1996. doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.54.6167

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.54.6167 1996

  15. [15]

    Alvarez-Zauco, H

    E. Alvarez-Zauco, H. Sobral, E. V. Basiuk, J. M. Saniger-Blesa, and M. Villagr´ an-Muniz. Polymerization of C 60 fullerene thin films by uv pulsed laser irradia- tion.Applied surface science, 248(1-4):243–247, 2005. doi:10.1016/j.apsusc.2005.03.032

    work page doi:10.1016/j.apsusc.2005.03.032 2005

  16. [16]

    Hassanien, J

    A. Hassanien, J. Gasperiˇ c, J. Demsar, I. Muˇ seviˇ c, and D. Mihailovic. Atomic force microscope study of photo-polymerized and photo-dimerized epitaxial C 60 films.Applied physics letters, 70(4):417–419, 1997. doi: 10.1063/1.118321

    work page doi:10.1063/1.118321 1997

  17. [17]

    P. Zhou, Z. H. Dong, A. M. Rao, and P. C. Eklund. Reaction mechanism for the photopolymerization of solid fullerene C60.Chemical physics letters, 211(4-5):337–340,

    work page

  18. [18]

    doi:10.1016/0009-2614(93)87069-F

    work page doi:10.1016/0009-2614(93)87069-f

  19. [19]

    Y. B. Zhao, D. M. Poirier, R. J. Pechman, and J. H. Weaver. Electron stimulated polymerization of solid C60.Applied physics letters, 64(5):577–579, 1994. doi: 10.1063/1.111113

    work page doi:10.1063/1.111113 1994

  20. [20]

    Mathew, B

    S. Mathew, B. Satpati, B. Joseph, B. N. Dev, R. Nir- mala, S. K. Malik, and R. Kesavamoorthy. Magnetism in C60 films induced by proton irradiation.Physical Re- view B—Condensed Matter and Materials Physics, 75(7): 075426, 2007. doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.75.075426

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.75.075426 2007

  21. [21]

    R. G. Musket, R. A. Hawley-Fedder, and W. L. Bell. Proton irradiation of thin films of C 60 molecules.Radi- ation effects and defects in solids, 118(3):225–235, 1991. doi:10.1080/10420159108221361

    work page doi:10.1080/10420159108221361 1991

  22. [22]

    Palmetshofer and J

    L. Palmetshofer and J. Kastner. Ion bombardment of C60: Raman study of amorphization and polymerization. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms, 96(1-2):343–346, 1995. doi:10.1016/0168-583X(94)00515- X

    work page doi:10.1016/0168-583x(94)00515- 1995

  23. [23]

    F. C. Zawislak, D. L. Baptista, M. Behar, D. Fink, P. L. Grande, and J. A. H. Da Jornada. Damage of ion irradiated C 60 films.Nuclear Instruments and Meth- ods in Physics Research Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms, 149(3):336–342, 1999. doi: 10.1016/S0168-583X(98)00890-8

    work page doi:10.1016/s0168-583x(98)00890-8 1999

  24. [24]

    K. L. Narayanan, M. Yamaguchi, N. Dharmarasu, N. Ko- jima, and D. Kanjilal. Low energy ion implantation and high energy heavy ion irradiation in C 60 films.Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms, 178(1-4): 301–304, 2001. doi:10.1016/S0168-583X(00)00488-2

    work page doi:10.1016/s0168-583x(00)00488-2 2001

  25. [25]

    Smith and K

    R. Smith and K. Beardmore. Molecular dynamics stud- ies of particle impacts with carbon-based materials.Thin Solid Films, 272(2):255–270, 1996. doi:10.1016/0040- 6090(95)06052-9

    work page doi:10.1016/0040- 1996

  26. [26]

    R. Webb, M. Kerford, A. Way, and I. Wilson. Compar- ison of gold and carbon cluster impacts on graphite us- ing Molecular Dynamics simulation.Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B: Beam In- teractions with Materials and Atoms, 153(1-4):284–291,

    work page

  27. [27]

    doi:10.1016/S0168-583X(99)00202-5

    work page doi:10.1016/s0168-583x(99)00202-5

  28. [28]

    R. Webb, M. Kerford, E. Ali, M. Dunn, L. Knowles, K. Lee, J. Mistry, and F. Whitefoot. Molecular dynamics simulation of the cluster-impact-induced molecular des- orption process.Surface and Interface Analysis, 31(4): 297–301, 2001. doi:10.1002/sia.992

    work page doi:10.1002/sia.992 2001

  29. [29]

    Postawa, B

    Z. Postawa, B. Czerwinski, M. Szewczyk, E. J. Smi- ley, N. Winograd, and B. J. Garrison. Enhancement 11 of sputtering yields due to C 60 versus Ga bombardment of Ag{111}as explored by molecular dynamics simu- lations.Analytical Chemistry, 75(17):4402–4407, 2003. doi:10.1021/ac034387a

    work page doi:10.1021/ac034387a 2003

  30. [30]

    J. G. Chang, C. C. Hwang, S. P. Ju, and S. H. Huang. A molecular dynamics simulation investigation into the structure of fullerene C 60 grown on a diamond substrate.Carbon, 42(12-13):2609–2616, 2004. doi: 10.1016/j.carbon.2004.05.043

    work page doi:10.1016/j.carbon.2004.05.043 2004

  31. [31]

    K. D. Krantzman, R. P. Webb, and B. J. Garrison. Sim- ulations of C 60 bombardment of Si, SiC, diamond and graphite.Applied Surface Science, 255(4):837–840, 2008. doi:10.1016/j.apsusc.2008.05.236

    work page doi:10.1016/j.apsusc.2008.05.236 2008

  32. [32]

    Paruch, L

    R. Paruch, L. Rzeznik, B. Czerwinski, B. J. Garrison, N. Winograd, and Z. Postawa. Molecular dynamics simulations of sputtering of Langmuir-Blodgett multi- layers by kiloelectronvolt C 60 projectiles.The Journal of Physical Chemistry C, 113(14):5641–5648, 2009. doi: 10.1021/jp809769q

    work page doi:10.1021/jp809769q 2009

  33. [33]

    M. F. Russo Jr., Z. Postawa, and B. J. Garrison. A computational investigation of C60 depth profiling of Ag: molecular dynamics of multiple impact events.The Jour- nal of Physical Chemistry C, 113(8):3270–3276, 2009. doi:10.1021/jp808706y

    work page doi:10.1021/jp808706y 2009

  34. [34]

    O. A. Restrepo and A. Delcorte. Molecular dynamics study of metal-organic samples bombarded by kiloelec- tronvolt projectiles.Surface and interface analysis, 43 (1-2):70–73, 2011. doi:10.1002/sia.3411

    work page doi:10.1002/sia.3411 2011

  35. [35]

    Czerwinski, Z

    B. Czerwinski, Z. Postawa, B. J. Garrison, and A. Del- corte. Molecular dynamics study of polystyrene bond- breaking and crosslinking under C 60 and Ar n clus- ter bombardment.Nuclear Instruments and Meth- ods in Physics Research Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms, 303:23–27, 2013. doi: 10.1016/j.nimb.2012.11.030

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nimb.2012.11.030 2013

  36. [36]

    The effect of the H:C ratio on the sputtering of molecular solids by fullerenes.Surface and interface analysis, 43(1-2):116–119, 2011

    Roger P Webb, Barbara J Garrison, and John C Vick- erman. The effect of the H:C ratio on the sputtering of molecular solids by fullerenes.Surface and interface analysis, 43(1-2):116–119, 2011. doi:10.1002/sia.3421

    work page doi:10.1002/sia.3421 2011

  37. [37]

    Czerwinski and A

    B. Czerwinski and A. Delcorte. Molecular dynamics study of fullerite cross-linking under keV C 60 and Ar n cluster bombardment.The Journal of Physical Chem- istry C, 117(7):3595–3604, 2013. doi:10.1021/jp310635g

    work page doi:10.1021/jp310635g 2013

  38. [38]

    Hobday, R

    S. Hobday, R. Smith, U. Gibson, and A. Richter. Ion bombardment of C 60 films.Radiation Effects and Defects in Solids, 142(1–4):301–318, 1997. doi: 10.1080/10420159708211615

    work page doi:10.1080/10420159708211615 1997

  39. [39]

    Shinya, H

    T. Shinya, H. Kirihata, Y. Yamaguchi, H. Yasumatsu, T. Kondow, H. M. Urbassek, and J. Gspann. Molecular simulations of cluster ejection by CO 2 cluster impact on carbon-based surfaces.Nuclear Instruments and Meth- ods in Physics Research Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms, 267(18):3080–3083, 2009. doi: 10.1016/j.nimb.2009.06.021

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nimb.2009.06.021 2009

  40. [40]

    G. H. Kinchin and R. S. Pease. The mechanism of the irradiation disordering of alloys.Journal of Nu- clear Energy, 1(3):200–202, 1955. doi:10.1016/0891- 3919(54)90016-9

    work page doi:10.1016/0891- 1955

  41. [41]

    H. J. Christie, M. Robinson, D. L. Roach, D. K. Ross, I. Suarez-Martinez, and N. A. Marks. Simulating radia- tion damage cascades in graphite.Carbon, 81:105–114,

    work page

  42. [42]

    doi:10.1016/j.carbon.2014.09.031

    work page doi:10.1016/j.carbon.2014.09.031 2014

  43. [43]

    J. T. Buchan, M. Robinson, H. J. Christie, D. L. Roach, D. K. Ross, and N. A. Marks. Molecular dynamics simulation of radiation damage cascades in diamond. Journal of Applied Physics, 117(24):245901, 2015. doi: 10.1063/1.4922457

    work page doi:10.1063/1.4922457 2015

  44. [44]

    N. A. Marks. Generalizing the environment-dependent interaction potential for carbon.Phys. Rev. B, 63:035401,

    work page

  45. [45]

    doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.63.035401

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.63.035401

  46. [46]

    J. W. Martin, J. L. Fogg, G. R. Francas, K. J. Put- man, E. P. Turner, I. Suarez-Martinez, and N. A. Marks. Graphite rapidly forms via annihilation of screw dislocations.Carbon, 215:118386, 2023. doi: 10.1016/j.carbon.2023.118386

    work page doi:10.1016/j.carbon.2023.118386 2023

  47. [47]

    BILBY: A user-friendly Bayesian inference library for gravitational-wave astronomy.As- trophys

    A. Aghajamali, A. A. Shiryaev, and N. A. Marks. Molec- ular dynamics approach for predicting release tempera- tures of noble gases in presolar nanodiamonds.The As- trophysical Journal, 916(2):85, 2021. doi:10.3847/1538- 4357/ac06cf

    work page doi:10.3847/1538- 2021

  48. [48]

    Suarez-Martinez, P

    I. Suarez-Martinez, P. J. Higginbottom, and N. A. Marks. Molecular dynamics simulations of the trans- formation of carbon peapods into double-walled car- bon nanotubes.Carbon, 48(12):3592–3598, 2010. doi: 10.1016/j.carbon.2010.06.004

    work page doi:10.1016/j.carbon.2010.06.004 2010

  49. [49]

    Suarez-Martinez and N

    I. Suarez-Martinez and N. A. Marks. Amorphous carbon nanorods as a precursor for carbon nan- otubes.Carbon, 50(15):5441–5449, 2012. doi: 10.1016/j.carbon.2012.07.030

    work page doi:10.1016/j.carbon.2012.07.030 2012

  50. [50]

    D. W. M. Lau, D. G. McCulloch, N. A. Marks, N. R. Madsen, and A. V. Rode. High-temperature formation of concentric fullerene-like structures within foam-like carbon: experiment and molecular dynam- ics simulation.Physical Review B—Condensed Mat- ter and Materials Physics, 75(23):233408, 2007. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.75.233408

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.75.233408 2007

  51. [51]

    N. A. Marks, M. Lattemann, and D. R. McKenzie. Nonequilibrium route to nanodiamond with astrophysi- cal implications.Physical Review Letters, 108(7):075503,

    work page

  52. [52]

    doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.075503

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.108.075503

  53. [53]

    M. R. Field, B. A. Cook, C. De Tomas, N. A. Marks, et al. Graphitization of glassy carbon after compression at room temperature.Physical Review Letters, 120(21): 215701, 2018. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.215701

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.120.215701 2018

  54. [54]

    De Tomas, A

    C. De Tomas, A. Basu, N. A. Marks, and J. E. Bradby. In situ analysis of the structural transformation of glassy carbon under compression at room temperature.Physical Review B, 99(2), 2019. doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.99.024114

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.99.024114 2019

  55. [55]

    de Tomas, I

    C. de Tomas, I. Suarez-Martinez, F. Vallejos-Burgos, M. J. Lopez, K. Kaneko, and N. A. Marks. Struc- tural prediction of graphitization and porosity in carbide-derived carbons.Carbon, 119:1–9, 2017. doi: 10.1016/j.carbon.2017.04.004

    work page doi:10.1016/j.carbon.2017.04.004 2017

  56. [56]

    de Tomas, I

    C. de Tomas, I. Suarez-Martinez, and N. A. Marks. Carbide-derived carbons for dense and tunable 3d graphene networks.Applied Physics Letters, 112(25),

    work page

  57. [57]

    doi:10.1063/1.5030136

    work page doi:10.1063/1.5030136

  58. [58]

    N. A. Marks, J. M. Bell, G. K. Pearce, D. R. McKen- zie, and M. M. M. Bilek. Atomistic simulation of energy and temperature effects in the deposition and implan- tation of amorphous carbon thin films.Diamond and related materials, 12(10–11), 2003. doi:10.1016/S0925- 9635(03)00215-2

    work page doi:10.1016/s0925- 2003

  59. [59]

    N. A. Marks. Thin film deposition of tetrahedral amorphous carbon: a molecular dynamics study.Dia- mond and related materials, 14(8):1223–1231, 2005. doi: 10.1016/j.diamond.2004.10.047. 12

    work page doi:10.1016/j.diamond.2004.10.047 2005

  60. [60]

    J. F. Ziegler, J. P. Biersack, and U. Littmark.The Stop- ping and Range of Ions in Solids, volume 1. Pergamon, New York, 1985

    work page 1985

  61. [61]

    N. A. Marks and M. Robinson. Variable timestep algorithm for molecular dynamics simulation of non- equilibrium processes.Nuclear Instruments and Meth- ods in Physics Research Section B: Beam Interac- tions with Materials and Atoms, 352:3–8, 2015. doi: 10.1016/j.nimb.2014.11.094

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nimb.2014.11.094 2015

  62. [62]

    C. S. Yannoni, P. P. Bernier, D. S. Bethune, G. Meijer, and J. R. Salem. NMR determination of the bond lengths in C 60.Journal of the American Chemical Society, 113 (8):3190–3192, 1991. doi:10.1021/ja00008a068

    work page doi:10.1021/ja00008a068 1991

  63. [63]

    Hedberg, L

    K. Hedberg, L. Hedberg, D. S. Bethune, C. A. Brown, H. C. Dorn, R. D. Johnson, and M. De Vries. Bond lengths in free molecules of buckminsterfullerene, C60, from gas-phase electron diffraction.Science, 254(5030): 410–412, 1991. doi:10.1126/science.254.5030.410

    work page doi:10.1126/science.254.5030.410 1991

  64. [64]

    R. M. Fleming, T. Siegrist, P. M. Marsh, B. Hessen, A. R. Kortan, D. W. Murphy, R. C. Haddon, R. Tycko, G. Dabbagh, A. M. Mujsce, et al. Diffraction symmetry in crystalline, close-packed C60.MRS Online Proceedings Library, 206:691–695, 1990. doi:10.1557/PROC-206-691

    work page doi:10.1557/proc-206-691 1990

  65. [65]

    J. J. Thomson. XXIV. on the structure of the atom: an investigation of the stability and periods of oscilla- tion of a number of corpuscles arranged at equal inter- vals around the circumference of a circle; with appli- cation of the results to the theory of atomic structure. The London, Edinburgh, and Dublin Philosophical Mag- azine and Journal of Scienc...

    work page doi:10.1080/14786440409463107 1904

  66. [66]

    Stukowski

    A. Stukowski. Visualization and analysis of atom- istic simulation data with ovito–the open visualization tool.Modelling and Simulation in Materials Science and Engineering, 18(1):015012, 2009. doi:10.1088/0965- 0393/18/1/015012

    work page doi:10.1088/0965- 2009

  67. [67]

    N. A. Marks. Evidence for subpicosecond thermal spikes in the formation of tetrahedral amorphous car- bon.Physical Review B, 56(5):2441, 1997. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.56.2441

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.56.2441 1997

  68. [68]

    F¨ uller and F

    T. F¨ uller and F. Banhart. In situ observation of the for- mation and stability of single fullerene molecules under electron irradiation.Chemical physics letters, 254(5-6): 372–378, 1996. doi:10.1016/0009-2614(96)00338-7

    work page doi:10.1016/0009-2614(96)00338-7 1996

  69. [69]

    E. S. Parilis. Atomic collisons with accelerated fullerenes. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms, 88(1-2):21–24, 1994. doi:10.1016/0168-583X(94)96074-7

    work page doi:10.1016/0168-583x(94)96074-7 1994

  70. [70]

    M. H. Stockett, M. Wolf, M. Gatchell, H. T. Schmidt, H. Zettergren, and H. Cederquist. The threshold dis- placement energy of buckminsterfullerene C60 and forma- tion of the endohedral defect fullerene He@C 59.Carbon, 139:906–912, 2018. doi:10.1016/j.carbon.2018.07.073

    work page doi:10.1016/j.carbon.2018.07.073 2018

  71. [71]

    Tomita, P

    S. Tomita, P. Hvelplund, S. B. Nielsen, and T. Mu- ramoto. C 59-ion formation in high-energy collisions be- tween cold C − 60 and noble gases.Physical Review A, 65 (4):043201, 2002. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.65.043201

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.65.043201 2002

  72. [72]

    F. Z. Cui, H. D. Li, and X. Y. Huang. Atomistic simula- tion of radiation damage to C 60.Physical Review B, 49 (14):9962, 1994. doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.49.9962

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.49.9962 1994

  73. [73]

    N. A. Marks, B. S. Thomas, K. L. Smith, and G. R. Lumpkin. Thermal spike recrystallisation: Molecular dy- namics simulation of radiation damage in polymorphs of titania.Nucl. Instr. and Meth. B, 266(12-13):2665–2670,

    work page

  74. [74]

    doi:10.1016/j.nimb.2008.03.098

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nimb.2008.03.098 2008

  75. [75]

    N. K. Zhevago and V. I. Glebov. Theory of propagation of charged particles and soft X-rays in fullerites.Physics Letters A, 282(1-2):97–105, 2001. doi:10.1016/S0375- 9601(01)00162-1

    work page doi:10.1016/s0375- 2001

  76. [76]

    Kaxiras and K

    E. Kaxiras and K. C. Pandey. Energetics of defects and diffusion mechanisms in graphite.Physical review letters, 61(23):2693, 1988. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.61.2693

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.61.2693 1988