Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 37 references

Spinel Ferrite-Based Materials for Electrochemical Applications: Synthesis, Applications, and Future Perspectives

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-07-14 · grok-4.5

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

Pith's one-line read Spinel ferrite electrodes for gas sensors and supercapacitors can be tuned by controlling morphology, defects, carbon hybrids, and doping.

desk verdict Useful subfield review that organizes synthesis–defect–performance links for ferrite gas sensors and supercapacitors; design rules stay qualitative because tabulated metrics are not standardized. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.10823 v1 pith:5RLASLL2 submitted 2026-07-12 cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Sakhi Tiwari , Ashish Dubey , Pragyanand Prajapati , Akhilesh Kumar Singh , Ashutosh Kumar , Jai Singh This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords SpinelferriteNanostructuresElectrochemicalsensorsGasSupercapacitorsDopingGraphenehybridsSynthesismethods
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This review argues that spinel ferrites (MFe2O4) are practical electrode materials for gas sensors and supercapacitors because their multiple oxidation states, chemical stability, and surface chemistry support both surface redox sensing and pseudocapacitive charge storage. It claims the decisive lever is not a single recipe but a synthesis–structure–property chain: how the material is made sets crystallinity, porosity, cation distribution, and oxygen vacancies, which then set charge-transfer kinetics and device metrics. The authors organize wet-chemical and emerging routes (co-precipitation, sol-gel, hydrothermal/solvothermal, templates, electrospinning, microwave) and show how nanostructuring, graphene hybrids, transition-metal and rare-earth doping, and heterojunction formation raise sensitivity, capacitance, and cycling stability. A sympathetic reader cares because the same design rules are presented as a map for building more efficient, sustainable sensing and energy-storage devices from abundant oxide chemistry.

What carries the argument

The synthesis–structure–property–performance relationship for MFe2O4 electrodes—linking route and parameters (pH, temperature, solvent, fuel, template) to cation distribution and oxygen vacancies, then to gas-response resistance changes and faradaic/EDLC capacitance.

What would settle it

A controlled side-by-side study of one ferrite composition made by several routes, tested under identical sensor and supercapacitor protocols, that fails to rank morphology, defect level, or carbon hybrid in the order the review’s design rules predict.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper’s central claim is that electrochemical performance of spinel ferrite electrodes for gas sensing and supercapacitors is systematically tunable: synthesis conditions control crystallinity, morphology, porosity, cation site occupancy, and oxygen vacancies, and those structural features govern charge-transfer kinetics; further gains come from nanostructuring, carbonaceous hybridization, transition-metal and rare-earth doping, and junction engineering.

Load-bearing premise

The review treats performance numbers reported under very different synthesis conditions, electrolytes, gas concentrations, and device architectures as comparable enough to support general design rules.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Electrode design for spinel ferrite sensors and supercapacitors should prioritize morphology, porosity, and oxygen-vacancy control set at the synthesis step.
  • Graphene/rGO hybrids and hierarchical 1D/porous architectures are presented as reliable routes to higher conductivity and active-site access.
  • Transition-metal and rare-earth doping are offered as levers to retune inversion, band gap, and redox centers for selectivity and capacitance.
  • Future device work is steered toward MXene/MOF/MoS2 hybrids, flexible and biomedical formats, greener scale-up, and AI-assisted composition search.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Without a standardized reporting protocol for response definitions, electrolyte, mass loading, and humidity, the review’s tables risk over-generalizing which synthesis knob wins.
  • The same defect and hybrid levers used for gas sensors and supercapacitors could be stress-tested as dual-use materials for environmental remediation plus sensing.
  • Heterojunction and doping sections imply that Fermi-level and Debye-length matching may matter as much as bulk composition for room-temperature selectivity.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This review surveys spinel ferrites (MFe2O4) as electrode materials for gas sensors and supercapacitors, organizing the literature around a synthesis–structure–property–performance framework. Sections 2–3 cover co-precipitation, sol-gel/auto-combustion, hydro(solvo)thermal, template, electrospinning, and microwave routes and link crystallinity, morphology/porosity, oxygen vacancies, and cation distribution to electrochemical activity. Sections 4–5 summarize sensing and pseudocapacitance mechanisms and enhancement strategies (nanostructuring, graphene/rGO hybridization, transition-metal and rare-earth doping, heterojunctions), with tabulated examples. Section 6 outlines future directions including MXenes/MOFs/MoS2 hybrids, biomedical and environmental uses, scalable fabrication, AI integration, and commercialization.

Significance. If the synthesis–structure–property framing holds as a practical design guide, the manuscript is a useful consolidating resource for materials chemists working on ferrite-based sensors and supercapacitors. Strengths include a clear mechanism exposition for n/p-type MOS sensing and EDLC/pseudocapacitance, explicit discussion of defect and cation-distribution chemistry, and broad coverage of enhancement routes with multi-table literature snapshots. The contribution is organizational rather than a new primary result or quantitative meta-analysis; its value is as a roadmap for rational electrode design in a crowded application space.

major comments (3)
  1. Tables 1 and 3–6 and Sections 4–5 juxtapose response values, specific capacitances, and retention figures obtained under non-uniform gas concentrations, operating temperatures, electrolytes, mass loadings, and electrode architectures, then treat them as support for general design rules. Without a short critical filter (e.g., reporting conditions, mass-normalized metrics, or a note that cross-study ranking is qualitative), the structure–property claims risk over-interpretation. Add a methods-comparability caveat and, where possible, normalize or flag non-comparable entries.
  2. Section 3.4 asserts a structure–property–performance relationship but remains largely narrative; the tables list systems and metrics without a consistent mapping of which synthesis-induced variable (crystallinity, oxygen vacancies, cation inversion, porosity hierarchy) is claimed to drive each performance gain. A compact conceptual map or annotated table column would make the central framework load-bearing rather than descriptive.
  3. The Introduction states that existing reviews lack a unified synthesis–defect–performance correlation for gas sensing and supercapacitors, yet the manuscript does not systematically position itself against the cited prior reviews (e.g., refs on ZnFe2O4 sensors, energy storage, microwave absorption). A short comparative paragraph is needed so the novelty claim is falsifiable rather than asserted.
minor comments (5)
  1. Abstract and body contain repeated typos and grammar issues (e.g., "This review focus es", "spinal ferrite", "Red" column headers in Table 1, duplicated sentences in §2.4 and §4.2).
  2. Table numbering is inconsistent: synthesis benefits/drawbacks is labeled Table 2 after Table 1, while the text earlier refers to "Table 1" for method comparison; figure captions for Figs. 11–14 and 18–20 would benefit from self-contained axis/condition labels.
  3. Some mechanism equations in §4.1 (chemisorbed oxygen species) and the generalized redox equation in §4.2 are standard but would be clearer with consistent charge-balance notation and temperature ranges stated once.
  4. Future-directions subsections (§6.2–6.6) are broad relative to the gas-sensor/supercapacitor focus; either tighten scope or explicitly mark them as outlook only.
  5. Reference list and in-text citations appear dense and occasionally incomplete in formatting; a pass for consistency and removal of near-duplicate entries would help.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: literature review with no derivation chain, fitted predictions, or load-bearing self-citation reductions.

full rationale

This is a standard materials-science review that surveys external experimental reports on spinel-ferrite synthesis routes, morphology/defect control, carbon hybridization, doping, and device metrics for gas sensors and supercapacitors. It advances no original equations, first-principles derivations, uniqueness theorems, or quantitative fits that are then re-labeled as predictions. Performance numbers in Tables 1–6 and the narrative of §§3–5 are simply collated from the cited literature under heterogeneous conditions; the paper’s framing claim (that morphology, hybridization, substitution and nanostructuring can tune electrochemical response) is ordinary materials-chemistry reasoning supported by those external examples, not a result forced by construction or by self-citation. Residual ordinary self-citation, if any, is not load-bearing. Hence score 0 with empty steps.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

As a review paper, load-bearing content is domain knowledge and literature claims rather than free parameters or invented physical entities. The main assumptions are standard solid-state and electrochemistry premises plus the implicit premise that heterogeneous published metrics can be compared for design guidance.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Spinel ferrites have the general formula MFe2O4 with cations distributed over tetrahedral and octahedral sites in a cubic close-packed oxygen lattice.
    Stated in the Introduction as structural background for all subsequent property discussions.
  • domain assumption Chemiresistive gas sensing of metal oxides proceeds via oxygen chemisorption, space-charge layer modulation, and resistance change upon target-gas reaction.
    Section 4.1 presents the standard MOS sensing equations and n-type/p-type response rules as the operating principle.
  • domain assumption Supercapacitor charge storage in these electrodes combines electrical double-layer capacitance with pseudocapacitance from reversible surface/near-surface redox of multivalent metal cations.
    Section 4.2 and related equations frame ferrite supercapacitor performance.
  • ad hoc to paper Synthesis route and parameters control crystallinity, morphology, porosity, oxygen vacancies, and cation distribution sufficiently to explain performance trends across the cited studies.
    Core organizing premise of Sections 2–3 and Tables 1–3; treated as generalizable without a formal meta-analysis.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Spinel Ferrite-Based Materials for Electrochemical Applications: Synthesis, Applications, and Future Perspectives." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/5RLASLL2

@misc{pith2026260710823,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Spinel Ferrite-Based Materials for Electrochemical Applications: Synthesis, Applications, and Future Perspectives},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/5RLASLL2}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.10823}
}
read the original abstract

Spinel ferrites have shown wide range of applications in various fields, including supercapacitors, Li-ion batteries, water splitting, chemical sensors, catalytic activity, high-frequency magnetic devices, and biomedical, hyperthermia, drug delivery applications., etc. This review focuses on the latest progress and trends on design of spinel ferrites (MFe2O4; M = Divalent transition metal ion) based materials for electrochemical applications. Spinel ferrites exhibit good chemical stability, high surface area and excellent electrochemical behaviour with their multiple oxidation states, making them suitable for the detection of a wide range of gaseous analytes including volatile organic compounds, heavy metal ions, biomolecules, and environmental pollutants. It also makes spinel ferrites a great choice for efficient energy storage and utility in supercapacitors. The electrochemical performance of spinel ferrite-based electrode materials can be effectively tuned via morphology control, incorporation of carbon-based materials, compositional substitution, doping and forming composition systems, especially in nanostructured form. This review will serve as a comprehensive resource for researchers interested in the synthesis and various enhancement techniques for electrode material composition of electrochemical device applications specifically, gas sensors and supercapacitors, which are two of the highest emerging functional applications for the new sustainability directed world, utilizing these advanced materials.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

37 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    1 W. H. Bragg, Nature, 1915, 95, 561–561. 2 M.-S. Park, J. Kim, K. J. Kim, J.-W. Lee, J. H. Kim and Y. Yamauchi, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 2015, 17, 30963– 30977. 3 F. L. Sutherland, K. Zaw, S. Meffre, G. Giuliani, A. E. Fallick, I. T. Graham and G. B. Webb, Australian Journal of Earth Sciences, 2009, 56, 1003–1022. 4 D. Federman, in Modern Jeweler’s Consu...

    1915

  2. [2]

    Šutka and K

    10 A. Šutka and K. A. Gross, Sensors and Actuators B: Chemical, 2016, 222, 95–105. 11 K. Wu, J. Li and C. Zhang, Ceramics International, 2019, 45, 11143–11157. 12 V. Jose, V. Jose, C. E. Freeda Christy and A. S. Nesaraj, Inorganic and Nano-Metal Chemistry, 2022, 52, 1449–

    2016

  3. [3]

    Das and B

    13 T. Das and B. Verma, Materials Technology, 2022, 37, 2552–2566. 14 P. K. Baruah, N. Mukherjee, B. Bhagat and K. Mukherjee, Crystal Growth & Design, 2024, 24, 1504–1528. 15 A. J. R. Rennie, V. L. Martins, R. M. Smith and P. J. Hall, Sci Rep, 2016, 6, 22062. 16 A. Soufi, H. Hajjaoui, R. Elmoubarki, M. Abdennouri, S. Qourzal and N. Barka, Applied Surface ...

    2022

  4. [4]

    Zhang, C

    18 R. Zhang, C. Qin, H. Bala, Y. Wang and J. Cao, Nanomaterials, 2023, 13,

    2023

  5. [5]

    Kumar, R

    93 19 R. Kumar, R. Kumar, P. Kumar Sahoo, M. Singh and A. Soam, Materials Today: Proceedings, 2022, 67, 1001–

    2022

  6. [6]

    20 J. M. Gonçalves, L. V. De Faria, A. B. Nascimento, R. L. Germscheidt, S. Patra, L. P. Hernández -Saravia, J. A. Bonacin, R. A. A. Munoz and L. Angnes, Analytica Chimica Acta, 2022, 1233, 340362. 21 P. Arévalo-Cid, J. Isasi, M. Alcolea Palafox and F. Martín-Hernández, Materials Research Bulletin, 2020, 123, 110726. 22 M. O. Besenhard, A. P. LaGrow, A. H...

    2022

  7. [7]

    24 I. H. Gul, A. Maqsood, M. Naeem and M. N. Ashiq, Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 2010, 507, 201–206. 25 S. Pira, M. M. Momeni and F. Zhang, J. Mater. Chem. A, 2026, 14, 16767–16783. 26 P. A. Vinosha, L. A. Mely, J. E. Jeronsia, S. Krishnan and S. J. Das, Optik, 2017, 134, 99–108. 27 A. D, G. S.R, P. V.K and M. A, Heliyon, 2023, 9, e21120. 28 P. Thakur...

    2010

  8. [8]

    Suresh, S

    39 S. Suresh, S. A. Deshmukh, D. V. Bhuse, B. Mallesham and P. Nagapillai, Appl Water Sci, 2025, 15,

    2025

Show all 37 references
  1. [9]

    94 40 M. Q. Fahem, M. H. Jawad, R. O. Abdulsada and Z. T. Turki, Ionics, 2025, 31, 6475–6481. 41 A. Varma, A. S. Mukasyan, A. S. Rogachev and K. V. Manukyan, Chem. Rev., 2016, 116, 14493–14586. 42 B. K. Ostafiychuk, L. S. Kaykan, J. S. Kaykan, B. Ya. Deputat and O. V. Shevchuk...

    2025

  2. [10]

    43 M. L. Hashmi, F. S. Muta, G. Deninno, C. Parmar, R. Verma, F. Mazaleyrat, S. N. Kane, S. Modak, V. R. Reddy, P. M. Tiberto and M. Coïsson, Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials, 2026, 641, 173833. 44 V. D. Sudheesh, N. Thomas, N. Roona, P. K. Baghya and V. Sebastian, ...

    2026

  3. [11]

    Kurian and M

    49 J. Kurian and M. J. Mathew, Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials, 2018, 451, 121–130. 50 N. Kader, A. K. Bojarajan, S. Sangaraju and D. Vasanth Raj, J Clust Sci, 2026, 37,

    2018

  4. [12]

    51 J. Wang, B. Yu, W. Wang and X. Cai, Catalysis Communications, 2019, 126, 35–39. 52 M. Ajitha, K. Selvarani, S. C. B. Gopinath and T. Theivasanthi, BioNanoSci., 2025, 15,

    2019

  5. [13]

    Sureka, G

    53 P. Sureka, G. Mahalakshmi, K. Vanasundari, N. K. Almulhem and M. W. Alam, Chemical Physics Letters, 2024, 842, 141228. 54 S. Gazi, P. Saha, K. Sarkar, D. Majumdar, R. Mondal and S. Kumar, Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 2026, 1050, 185718. 55 M. L. Aparna, A. N. Grace, P. ...

    2024

  6. [14]

    60 Y. Xie, D. Kocaefe, C. Chen and Y. Kocaefe, Journal of Nanomaterials, 2016, 2016, 1–10. 61 L. Lv, P. Cheng, Y. Zhang, Y. Zhang, Z. Lei, Y. Wang, L. Xu, Z. Weng and C. Li, Sensors and Actuators B: Chemical, 2022, 358, 131490. 62 W. Chen, H. Zheng, D. Hu, Q. Wu, P. Zheng, L. ...

    2016

  7. [15]

    Menchaca-Nal, C

    63 S. Menchaca-Nal, C. L. Londoño-Calderón, P. Cerrutti, M. L. Foresti, L. Pampillo, V. Bilovol, R. Candal and R. Martínez-García, Carbohydrate Polymers, 2016, 137, 726–731. 64 H. Chen, H. Chen, J. Chen and M. Song, Sensors, 2024, 24,

    2016

  8. [16]

    65 J. Xue, J. Xie, W. Liu and Y. Xia, Acc. Chem. Res., 2017, 50, 1976–1987. 66 Z. Jiang, Y. Zhao and P. Yang, Materials Chemistry and Physics, 2018, 214, 1–7. 67 P. H. Phuoc, N. Van Hoang, N. M. Hung, P. T. Hung, P. D. Hoat and N. Van Hieu, Sensors and Actuators B: Chemical, 2...

    2017

  9. [17]

    72 C. Sun, M. Ge, S. Tan, Y. Liu, H. Wang, W. Jiang, S. Zhang and Y. Sun, Molecules, 2025, 30,

    2025

  10. [18]

    73 G. Liu, B. Dai, Y. Ren and W. Zhang, Results in Physics, 2021, 26, 104441. 74 M. Selvakumar, S. Maruthamuthu, B. Saravanakumar and A. Tony Dhiwahar, J Mater Sci: Mater Electron, 2024, 35,

    2021

  11. [19]

    75 T. T. N. Nha, S. H. Prakash, S. Mohana Roopan, J. J. Samuel, D. N. Toan, D. T. Khan, D. D. Bich, T. D. Thanh, L. T. T. Ngan, D. H. Manh and P. T. Phong, RSC Adv., 2025, 15, 29571–29592. 76 H. L. Andersen, C. Granados -Miralles, K. M. Ø. Jensen, M. Saura -Múzquiz and M. Chri...

    2025

  12. [20]

    79 H. W. Jeong, W. Haihua, G. F. Samu, P. Rouster, I. Szilágyi, H. Park and C. Janáky, Electrochimica Acta, 2021, 373, 137900. 80 L. Wu, Y. Li, Z. Fu and B.-L. Su, National Science Review, 2020, 7, 1667–1701. 81 T. Tatarchuk, Nanomaterials, 2024, 14,

    2021

  13. [21]

    82 J. Bak, Y. Heo, T. G. Yun and S.-Y. Chung, ACS Nano, 2020, 14, 14323–14354. 83 L. Wang, C. Peng, H. Lin and B. Zhao, Energy Fuels, 2022, 36, 11660–11690. 84 J. Li, in Materials Science, ed. P. Vizureanu, IntechOpen, 2025, vol

    2020

  14. [22]

    85 L. Sun, M. Liu and Z. Wang, Discover Nano, 2026, 21,

    2026

  15. [23]

    Mukherjee and S

    86 K. Mukherjee and S. B. Majumder, Scripta Materialia, 2012, 67, 617–620. 87 C. Xiangfeng, J. Dongli, G. Yu and Z. Chenmou, Sensors and Actuators B: Chemical, 2006, 120, 177–181. 88 I. F. F. Christopher and A. Karuppiah, Chemical Physics Impact, 2024, 8, 100460. 89 V. H. Ong,...

    2012

  16. [24]

    93 A. J. V. John, G. Vijay, S. -M. Chen, Z. -P. Liu and F. P. D. Disouza, Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering, 2026, 14, 120712. 94 V. S. Kumbhar, A. D. Jagadale, N. M. Shinde and C. D. Lokhande, Applied Surface Science, 2012, 259, 39–43. 95 E. Mazario, M. P. Morales...

    2026

  17. [25]

    98 A. Shan, X. Wu, J. Lu, C. Chen and R. Wang, CrystEngComm, 2015, 17, 1603–1608. 99 S. Pavithra, R. Yuvakumar, A. Sakunthala, G. Ravi and M. V. Reddy, in Ferrite Nanostructured Magnetic Materials, Elsevier, 2023, pp. 723–732. 100 M. A. Njoroge, N. M. Kirimi and K. P. Kuria, C...

    2015

  18. [26]

    Rashid Khan and A

    102 H. Rashid Khan and A. Latif Ahmad, Journal of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, 2025, 141, 46–66. 103 N. Khoirina, R. Nabila, T. Nurtono, W. Widiyastuti, S. Madhania, H. Nilasary, H. S. Oktaviano, S. U. Muzayanha and H. Setyawan, Electrochemistry Communications, 2026, ...

    2025

  19. [27]

    Šutka and K

    107 A. Šutka and K. A. Gross, Sensors and Actuators B: Chemical, 2016, 222, 95–105. 108 S. Kaur, S. Jaidka, A. Gupta, A. Kumar and V. Singhal, in Spinel Ferrite Materials, Elsevier, 2025, pp. 227–251. 109 Y. Ou, X. Liao, S. Chen, X. Liu, R. Li, Y. Chen, Y. Wang, Z. Wu, A. Huan...

    2016

  20. [28]

    Kumar, A

    124 V. Kumar, A. Rana, M. S. Yadav and R. P. Pant, Journal of Magnetism and Magnetic Materials, 2008, 320, 1729–1734. 125 N. Ponpandian and A. Narayanasamy, Journal of Applied Physics, 2002, 92, 2770–2778. 126 M. Souiyah, T. O. Owolabi, S. Saliu, T. F. Qahtan, N. Aldhafferi an...

    2008

  21. [29]

    150 A. Bag, M. Kumar, D. -B. Moon, A. Hanif, M. J. Sultan, D. H. Yoon and N. -E. Lee, Sensors and Actuators B: Chemical, 2021, 346, 130463. 151 J. Zhu, D. Yang, Z. Yin, Q. Yan and H. Zhang, Small, 2014, 10, 3480–3498. 152 U. L. I. Udayantha, A. M. B. S. Alahakoon, A. D. T. Med...

    2021

  22. [30]

    Yoon, Muksin and K

    162 D.-H. Yoon, Muksin and K. Raju, J Supercond Nov Magn, 2016, 29, 439–445. 163 A. A. Zaware, A. C. Mehere, S. V. Chavan, K. P. Hasnalkar, M. S. Rathod, R. S. Patil, P. B. Shelke and S. M. Rathod, Microchemical Journal, 2026, 223, 117362. 164 K. G. Krishna, S. R. Parne and P....

    2016 doi

  23. [31]

    Jagadeesha Angadi, L

    167 V. Jagadeesha Angadi, L. Zhengyou, K. K. Yadav, H. A. Alqhtani, F. A. Nasr, M. A. Alreshidi, V. Pattar, E. Novikov and F. M. Aldosari, Journal of Energy Storage, 2026, 153, 120837. 168 S. A. Al Kiey, M. M. Ahmad and A. A. Azab, Journal of Energy Storage, 2026, 148, 119968....

    2026

  24. [32]

    Bhujun, M

    172 B. Bhujun, M. T. T. Tan and A. S. Shanmugam, Results in Physics, 2017, 7, 345–353. 173 M. Mayakkannan, S. Thangarasu, V. Siva, A. Murugan, A. Shameem and S. Asath Bahadur, Materials Science and Engineering: B, 2024, 306, 117448. 174 D. B. Malavekar, V. V. Magdum, S. D. Kho...

    2017

  25. [33]

    Mirzaei, J

    190 A. Mirzaei, J. -H. Lee, S. M. Majhi, M. Weber, M. Bechelany, H. W. Kim and S. S. Kim, Journal of Applied Physics, 2019, 126, 241102. 191 C. Sakaguchi, Y. Nara, T. Hashishin, H. Abe, M. Matsuda, S. Tsurekawa and H. Kubota, Sci Rep, 2020, 10, 17055. 102 192 P. H. Phuoc, N. N...

    2019

  26. [34]

    Sabir, H

    196 I. Sabir, H. Mingxia, H. Anwar, M. I. Masud, M. Aman and M. Kashif, Journal of Materiomics, 2026, 12, 101147. 197 A. Rundla, Priyanka, M. Singh, B. Kumar, V. Mishra and K. Singh, Energy Fuels, 2026, 40, 11093–11107. 198 W.-T. Koo, J.-S. Jang and I.-D. Kim, Chem, 2019, 5, 1...

    2026

  27. [35]

    202 J. Li, C. Liu, R. Liu, M. Hu, X. Chu and S. Liang, Materials Science and Engineering: B, 2026, 323, 118839. 203 S. A. Al-Shuayfani, S. T. Gunday, E. Cevik, M. A. Almessiere and A. Baykal, Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 2025, 1047, 184960. 204 L. Ganesh Babu, P. Prasanth,...

    2026

  28. [36]

    209 E. V. Tomina, B. V. Sladkopevtsev, N. A. Tien and V. Q. Mai, Inorg Mater, 2023, 59, 1363–1385. 210 M. Ghosh, A. Akbar and B. Lakshmi M, 2024, preprint, DOI: 10.26434/chemrxiv -2024-hq04v. 211 B. Bhaduri, A. K. Dikshit, T. Kim and K. M. Tripathi, ACS Appl. Nano Mater., 2022...

    2023 doi

  29. [37]

    214 S. H S, A. Vijayan, P. P and A. Rao, Mater. Res. Express, 2025, 12, 092001. 215 R. Rodrigues, S. I. C. J. Palma, V. G. Correia, I. Padrão, J. Pais, M. Banza, C. Alves, J. Deuermeier, C. Martins, H. M. A. Costa, E. Ramou, C. Silva Pereira and A. C. A. Roque, Materials Today...

    2025

Pith tools

Reviewed July 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.