Exciton mapping at subwavelength scales in two-dimensional materials

Ang-Yu Lu; Hidetaka Sawada; Kazu Suenaga; Koji Kimoto; Lain-Jong Li; Luiz H. G. Tizei; Masaki Mukai; Yung-Chang Lin

arxiv: 1906.09409 · v1 · pith:BLYO7WG6new · submitted 2019-06-22 · ❄️ cond-mat.mes-hall

Exciton mapping at subwavelength scales in two-dimensional materials

Luiz H. G. Tizei , Yung-Chang Lin , Masaki Mukai , Hidetaka Sawada , Ang-Yu Lu , Lain-Jong Li , Koji Kimoto , Kazu Suenaga This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-25 18:24 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.mes-hall

keywords exciton mappingEELSMoS2MoSe22D materialsoptical bandgapinterfacesnanoscale resolution

0 comments

The pith

Spatially resolved EELS maps excitons at 10 nm resolution across MoS2-MoSe2 interfaces.

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

The paper shows that monochromated electron energy loss spectroscopy can resolve excitonic features in monolayer transition metal dichalcogenide interfaces at the nanometer scale. Low-loss spectra taken at positions 10 nm apart reveal changes in the exciton peaks that correspond to the local chemical composition. This spatial resolution is 50 times finer than the wavelength of the light emitted by these excitons. The method also shows broader exciton peaks at interfaces, likely from roughness or alloying.

Core claim

By performing spatially resolved low-loss EELS at diffuse interfaces between MoS2 and MoSe2 single layers with 20 meV energy resolution, the optical bandgap is measured with 10 nm spatial resolution. The exciton maps vary even between 10 nm separated measurements and follow the chemical composition from core-loss EELS, with broader peaks at interfaces but no peak shifts.

What carries the argument

Spatially resolved monochromated low-loss electron energy loss spectroscopy on 2D material interfaces to map excitons.

If this is right

Exciton signatures can be mapped at scales much smaller than the optical diffraction limit.
Chemical composition variations directly influence local excitonic properties in 2D heterostructures.
Interface roughness and alloying broaden exciton peaks without shifting their energy.
Core-loss and low-loss EELS can be combined on the same regions to correlate composition and optical properties.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

This approach may enable direct study of exciton behavior in other van der Waals heterostructures at nanoscale.
Potential to design 2D optoelectronic devices by mapping bandgap variations at interfaces.
The lack of peak shift suggests the interface is sharp relative to the exciton size.

Load-bearing premise

The low-loss EELS peaks accurately represent the excitonic optical transitions without major contributions from other scattering processes or experimental broadening effects.

What would settle it

If core-loss EELS composition maps do not correlate with the low-loss exciton maps at the same locations, or if beam broadening prevents resolving 10 nm features, the claim would be falsified.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1906.09409 by Ang-Yu Lu, Hidetaka Sawada, Kazu Suenaga, Koji Kimoto, Lain-Jong Li, Luiz H. G. Tizei, Masaki Mukai, Yung-Chang Lin.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: FIG. 2. (a) HAADF images of a MoS [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: (c) show the intensities of the S L and Se M edges (purple and orange, respectively) measured in the same region. The intensity of these edges is proportional to the chemical composition [10]. The variation of exciton contribution in each material follows the compositional change. Atomically resolved images of typical interface is shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4. (a) Maps of the fitting coefficients for MoS [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Spatially resolved EELS has been performed at diffuse interfaces between MoS$_2$ and MoSe$_2$ single layers. With a monochromated electron source (20 meV) we have successfully probed excitons near the interface by obtaining the low loss spectra at the nanometer scale. The exciton maps clearly show variations even with a 10 nm separation between measurements; consequently the optical bandgap can be measured with nanometer-scale resolution, which is 50 times smaller than the wavelength of the emitted photons. By performing core-loss EELS at the same regions, we observe that variations in the excitonic signature follow the chemical composition. The exciton peaks are observed to be broader at interfaces and heterogeneous regions, possibly due to interface roughness and alloying effects. Moreover, we do not observe shifts of the exciton peak across the interface, possibly because the interface width is not much larger than the exciton Bohr radius.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper shows concrete monochromated EELS data mapping exciton changes at 10 nm steps across MoS2/MoSe2 single-layer interfaces and correlating them to core-loss composition, but the delocalization length in low-loss spectra is not addressed and likely limits the resolution claim.

read the letter

The central result is an experimental demonstration that monochromated low-loss EELS (20 meV resolution) can pick up variations in the exciton signature at 10 nm intervals across a diffuse MoS2/MoSe2 boundary in single layers, with those variations tracking the local chemistry measured by core-loss EELS on the same spots. They also note broader exciton peaks at the interface, which they link to roughness or alloying, and no peak shift, which they tie to the interface width being comparable to the exciton Bohr radius. That combination of low-loss and core-loss at matching locations is the useful part; it gives a direct experimental link between optical features and composition at the nanoscale in these 2D heterostructures. The work is straightforward and reports what was measured without overclaiming theory or fitting. The main soft spot is the spatial resolution interpretation. Low-loss EELS at ~2 eV has a delocalization length set by the Coulomb interaction that is typically several nm to >20 nm for 60-200 keV beams; if that scale is comparable to the 10 nm sampling, adjacent spectra are not independent and the “50 times sub-wavelength” claim does not follow directly from the data. The abstract and description give no probe-size measurement, no delocalization estimate, and no correction for beam broadening or interface roughness effects. If the full figures show abrupt changes that survive those considerations, that would strengthen it, but nothing in the provided text indicates such analysis was done. This is the sort of paper that matters to groups doing EELS on 2D materials or device interfaces; it supplies a practical example rather than a new method. A serious editor should send it to referees because the experimental demonstration is real and the topic is relevant, even though the resolution part will need scrutiny and possibly more data or modeling. I would bring it to a reading group to discuss the delocalization numbers against the actual spectra.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports spatially resolved low-loss EELS performed at diffuse interfaces between monolayer MoS2 and MoSe2 using a monochromated 20 meV electron source. The authors claim successful mapping of excitons at the nanometer scale, with observed spectral variations even at 10 nm probe separations, enabling optical bandgap measurement at a resolution 50 times smaller than the emitted photon wavelength. Core-loss EELS at the same locations is used to correlate excitonic signatures with chemical composition; exciton peaks are reported broader at interfaces (attributed to roughness or alloying) but without observable shifts across the interface (attributed to interface width comparable to exciton Bohr radius).

Significance. If the nm-resolution claim is substantiated, the work would demonstrate a useful experimental route for spatially mapping excitonic transitions in 2D heterostructures at device-relevant length scales. The combined use of low-loss and core-loss EELS on identical regions is a methodological strength that directly links composition to optical response.

major comments (2)

[Abstract] Abstract: The central claim that 'exciton maps clearly show variations even with a 10 nm separation' and thereby achieve 'nanometer-scale resolution' is load-bearing for the title and abstract but is presented without any displayed spectra, error bars, background-subtraction protocol, or probe-size characterization, leaving the 50× sub-wavelength assertion unsupported by quantitative evidence.
[Abstract] Abstract: The interpretation that low-loss spectra at 10 nm spacing independently sample distinct excitonic transitions does not address the expected delocalization length of the inelastic scattering (∼ ħv/ΔE or Egerton-type expressions), which for ∼2 eV losses and 60–200 keV beams is typically several nm to >20 nm; without an estimate or correction, adjacent spectra may not be independent and the resolution claim does not follow.

minor comments (2)

[Abstract] The abstract states that 'variations in the excitonic signature follow the chemical composition' but supplies no quantitative metric (e.g., correlation coefficient or overlay figure) linking the two data sets.
[Abstract] No mention is made of how interface roughness or beam broadening was quantified or ruled out as contributors to the observed peak broadening.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading and constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment point by point below and will revise the manuscript to incorporate additional quantitative details and discussion where appropriate.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The central claim that 'exciton maps clearly show variations even with a 10 nm separation' and thereby achieve 'nanometer-scale resolution' is load-bearing for the title and abstract but is presented without any displayed spectra, error bars, background-subtraction protocol, or probe-size characterization, leaving the 50× sub-wavelength assertion unsupported by quantitative evidence.

Authors: The abstract is a concise summary; the supporting low-loss EELS spectra at 10 nm intervals, exciton maps, and their correlation with core-loss composition maps are presented in the main text and figures. We agree that the abstract claim would be better supported by explicit mention of error bars, background-subtraction details, and probe characterization. We will revise the manuscript to include these quantitative elements in the results and methods sections. revision: yes
Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The interpretation that low-loss spectra at 10 nm spacing independently sample distinct excitonic transitions does not address the expected delocalization length of the inelastic scattering (∼ ħv/ΔE or Egerton-type expressions), which for ∼2 eV losses and 60–200 keV beams is typically several nm to >20 nm; without an estimate or correction, adjacent spectra may not be independent and the resolution claim does not follow.

Authors: We acknowledge the importance of inelastic delocalization in low-loss EELS. The observed exciton variations track the nm-scale chemical composition changes mapped by core-loss EELS at the same locations (where localization is higher), providing supporting evidence for effective nm resolution. We will add an explicit estimate of the delocalization length using ħv/ΔE (and reference to Egerton expressions) in the revised manuscript to address this directly. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: purely experimental EELS mapping with no derivations or fitted predictions

full rationale

The paper reports direct experimental measurements of low-loss EELS spectra at nanometer-spaced points across MoS2/MoSe2 interfaces, observing variations in exciton peaks that track chemical composition from core-loss EELS. No equations, parameters, or derivations are presented that reduce any claimed result (e.g., 10 nm resolution or 50x sub-wavelength mapping) to prior inputs by construction. The central claim follows from the raw spectral data and spatial sampling; it does not rely on self-citations, ansatzes, or fitted inputs renamed as predictions. External concerns about EELS delocalization length affect experimental validity but do not constitute circularity in any derivation chain.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

Experimental spectroscopy paper; central claim rests on standard domain assumptions about what low-loss and core-loss EELS signals represent in TMD monolayers.

axioms (2)

domain assumption Low-loss EELS peaks correspond to excitonic transitions that track the optical bandgap
Invoked when interpreting the measured spectra as exciton maps and optical bandgap values.
domain assumption Core-loss EELS at the same locations accurately reports local chemical composition
Used to conclude that exciton variations follow chemical composition.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5720 in / 1203 out tokens · 32251 ms · 2026-05-25T18:24:47.663117+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/RealityFromDistinction.lean reality_from_one_distinction unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

The exciton maps clearly show variations even with a 10 nm separation between measurements; consequently the optical bandgap can be measured with nanometer-scale resolution, which is 50 times smaller than the wavelength of the emitted photons.
IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean washburn_uniqueness_aczel unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

delocalization effects... the field diverges at the origin as 1/R

What do these tags mean?

matches: The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports: The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends: The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses: The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts: The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear: Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

37 extracted references · 37 canonical work pages

[1]

These special properties of two-dimensional TMD make them interesting candi- dates for applications in optoeletronics, particularly at the nanoscale

and optical absorption [5]. These special properties of two-dimensional TMD make them interesting candi- dates for applications in optoeletronics, particularly at the nanoscale. To understand, characterize and improve these materials it is fundamental to observe their exci- tations at their typical length scales. For excitons, the scale (its Bohr radius) ...

work page
[2]

K. F. Mak, C. Lee, J. Hone, J. Shan and T. F. Heinz Phys Rev Lett 105, 136805 (2010)

work page 2010
[3]

Splendiani, L

A. Splendiani, L. Sun, Y. Zhang, T. Li, J. Kim, C.-Y. Chim, G. Galli and F. Wang Nano Lett. 10, 1271 (2010)

work page 2010
[4]

Xiao, G.-B

D. Xiao, G.-B. Liu, W. Feng, X. Xu and W. Yao Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 196802 (2012)

work page 2012
[5]

Coehoorn, C

R. Coehoorn, C. Haas and R. A. de Groot Phys. Rev. B 35, 6203 (1987)

work page 1987
[6]

Molina-Sanch´ ez, D

A. Molina-Sanch´ ez, D. Sangalli, K. Hummer, A. Marini and L. Wirtz Phys. Rev. B 88, 045412 (2013)

work page 2013
[7]

Ramvall, S

P. Ramvall, S. Tanaka, S. Nomura, P. Riblet and Y. Aoy- agi App. Phys. Lett. 73, 1104 (1998)

work page 1998
[8]

Kazimierczuk, D

T. Kazimierczuk, D. Frohlich, S. Scheel, H. Stolz and M. Bayer Nature 514, 343 (2014)

work page 2014
[9]

M. M. Ugeda, et al, Nat. Mat. 13, 1091 (2014)

work page 2014
[10]

Raﬀerty and L

B. Raﬀerty and L. M. Brown Phys. Rev. B 58, 10326 (1998)

work page 1998
[11]

Egerton, Electron Energy-Loss Spectroscopy in the 5 Electron Microscope (Springer, New York, 2011)

R. Egerton, Electron Energy-Loss Spectroscopy in the 5 Electron Microscope (Springer, New York, 2011)

work page 2011
[12]

Gloter, A

A. Gloter, A. Douiri, M. Tenc´ e and C. Colliex Ultrami- croscopy 96, 385 (2003)

work page 2003
[13]

Arenal, O

R. Arenal, O. St´ ephan, M. Kociak, D. Taverna, A. Loiseau and C. Colliex Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 127601 (2005)

work page 2005
[14]

Nelayah, M

J. Nelayah, M. Kociak, O. St´ ephan, F. Javier Garc ´ ıa de Abajo, M. T´ ence, L. Henrard, D. Taverna, I. Pastoriza- Santo, L. M. Liz-Marz´ an and C. Colliex Nat. Phys. 3, 348 (2007)

work page 2007
[15]

Ibach and D

H. Ibach and D. L. Mills, Electron Energy Loss Spec- troscopy and Surface Vibrations (Academic Press, New York, 1982)

work page 1982
[16]

Fujikawa, M

Y. Fujikawa, M. Sakurai and A. Koma Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 34, L88 (1995)

work page 1995
[17]

Terauchi and M

M. Terauchi and M. Tanaka J. Surf. Anal. 3, 240 (1997)

work page 1997
[18]

Rossouw and G

D. Rossouw and G. A. Botton Phys. Rev. Lett 110, 066801 (2013)

work page 2013
[19]

S. F. Tan, L. Wu, J. K. W. Yang, P. Bai, M. Bosman and C. A. Nijhuis Science 343, 1496 (2014)

work page 2014
[20]

O. L. Krivanek, et al Nature 514, 209 (2014)

work page 2014
[21]

Hong, et al Nat

X. Hong, et al Nat. Nano. 9, 682 (2014)

work page 2014
[22]

Mann, et al Adv

J. Mann, et al Adv. Mat. 26, 1399 (2014)

work page 2014
[23]

Kociak, O

M. Kociak, O. St´ ephan, L. Henrard, V. Charbois, A. Rothschild, R. Tenne and C. Colliex Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 075501 (2001)

work page 2001
[24]

Taverna, M

D. Taverna, M. Kociak, V. Charbois and L. Henrard Phys. Rev. B 66, 235419 (2002)

work page 2002
[25]

F. J. Garc ´ ıa de Abajo and M. Kociak Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 106804 (2008)

work page 2008
[26]

F. J. Garc ´ ıa de Abajo Rev. Mod. Phys 82, 209 (2010)

work page 2010
[27]

Y. Chen, J. Xi, D. O. Dumcenco, Z. Liu, K. Suenaga, D. Wang, Z. Shuai, Y.-S. Huang and L. Xie ACS Nano 7, 4610 (2013)

work page 2013
[28]

D. A. Muller and J. Silcox Ultramicroscopy 59, 195 (1995)

work page 1995
[29]

J. C. H. Spence Rep. Prog. Phys. 69, 725 (2006)

work page 2006
[30]

L. F. Zagonel, et al Nano Lett. 11, 568 (2010)

work page 2010
[31]

Singh and K

J. Singh and K. K. Bajaj J. App. Phys. 57, 5433 (1985)

work page 1985
[32]

Patan` e, A

A. Patan` e, A. Polimeni, M. Capizzi and F. Martelli Phys . Rev. B 52, 2784 (1995)

work page 1995
[33]

S. H. Su, et al, Front. Energy Res. 2, 27 (2014)

work page 2014
[34]

Huang, S

C. Huang, S. Wu, A. M. Sanchez, J. J. P. Peters, R. Beanland, J. S. Ross, P. Rivera, W. Yao, D. H. Cobden and X. Xu Nat. Mat. doi:10.1038/nmat4064 (2014)

work page doi:10.1038/nmat4064 2014
[35]

Gong, et al Nat

Y. Gong, et al Nat. Mat. 13, 1096 (2014)

work page 2014
[36]

Y.-C. Lin, D. O. Dumcenco, Y.-S. Huang and K. Suenaga Nat. Nano. 9, 1128 (2014)

work page 2014
[37]

Kappera, D

R. Kappera, D. Voiry, S. E. Yalcin, B. Branch, G. Gupta, A. D. Mohite and M. Chhowalla Nat. Mat. 13, 1128 (2014)

work page 2014

[1] [1]

These special properties of two-dimensional TMD make them interesting candi- dates for applications in optoeletronics, particularly at the nanoscale

and optical absorption [5]. These special properties of two-dimensional TMD make them interesting candi- dates for applications in optoeletronics, particularly at the nanoscale. To understand, characterize and improve these materials it is fundamental to observe their exci- tations at their typical length scales. For excitons, the scale (its Bohr radius) ...

work page

[2] [2]

K. F. Mak, C. Lee, J. Hone, J. Shan and T. F. Heinz Phys Rev Lett 105, 136805 (2010)

work page 2010

[3] [3]

Splendiani, L

A. Splendiani, L. Sun, Y. Zhang, T. Li, J. Kim, C.-Y. Chim, G. Galli and F. Wang Nano Lett. 10, 1271 (2010)

work page 2010

[4] [4]

Xiao, G.-B

D. Xiao, G.-B. Liu, W. Feng, X. Xu and W. Yao Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 196802 (2012)

work page 2012

[5] [5]

Coehoorn, C

R. Coehoorn, C. Haas and R. A. de Groot Phys. Rev. B 35, 6203 (1987)

work page 1987

[6] [6]

Molina-Sanch´ ez, D

A. Molina-Sanch´ ez, D. Sangalli, K. Hummer, A. Marini and L. Wirtz Phys. Rev. B 88, 045412 (2013)

work page 2013

[7] [7]

Ramvall, S

P. Ramvall, S. Tanaka, S. Nomura, P. Riblet and Y. Aoy- agi App. Phys. Lett. 73, 1104 (1998)

work page 1998

[8] [8]

Kazimierczuk, D

T. Kazimierczuk, D. Frohlich, S. Scheel, H. Stolz and M. Bayer Nature 514, 343 (2014)

work page 2014

[9] [9]

M. M. Ugeda, et al, Nat. Mat. 13, 1091 (2014)

work page 2014

[10] [10]

Raﬀerty and L

B. Raﬀerty and L. M. Brown Phys. Rev. B 58, 10326 (1998)

work page 1998

[11] [11]

Egerton, Electron Energy-Loss Spectroscopy in the 5 Electron Microscope (Springer, New York, 2011)

R. Egerton, Electron Energy-Loss Spectroscopy in the 5 Electron Microscope (Springer, New York, 2011)

work page 2011

[12] [12]

Gloter, A

A. Gloter, A. Douiri, M. Tenc´ e and C. Colliex Ultrami- croscopy 96, 385 (2003)

work page 2003

[13] [13]

Arenal, O

R. Arenal, O. St´ ephan, M. Kociak, D. Taverna, A. Loiseau and C. Colliex Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 127601 (2005)

work page 2005

[14] [14]

Nelayah, M

J. Nelayah, M. Kociak, O. St´ ephan, F. Javier Garc ´ ıa de Abajo, M. T´ ence, L. Henrard, D. Taverna, I. Pastoriza- Santo, L. M. Liz-Marz´ an and C. Colliex Nat. Phys. 3, 348 (2007)

work page 2007

[15] [15]

Ibach and D

H. Ibach and D. L. Mills, Electron Energy Loss Spec- troscopy and Surface Vibrations (Academic Press, New York, 1982)

work page 1982

[16] [16]

Fujikawa, M

Y. Fujikawa, M. Sakurai and A. Koma Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 34, L88 (1995)

work page 1995

[17] [17]

Terauchi and M

M. Terauchi and M. Tanaka J. Surf. Anal. 3, 240 (1997)

work page 1997

[18] [18]

Rossouw and G

D. Rossouw and G. A. Botton Phys. Rev. Lett 110, 066801 (2013)

work page 2013

[19] [19]

S. F. Tan, L. Wu, J. K. W. Yang, P. Bai, M. Bosman and C. A. Nijhuis Science 343, 1496 (2014)

work page 2014

[20] [20]

O. L. Krivanek, et al Nature 514, 209 (2014)

work page 2014

[21] [21]

Hong, et al Nat

X. Hong, et al Nat. Nano. 9, 682 (2014)

work page 2014

[22] [22]

Mann, et al Adv

J. Mann, et al Adv. Mat. 26, 1399 (2014)

work page 2014

[23] [23]

Kociak, O

M. Kociak, O. St´ ephan, L. Henrard, V. Charbois, A. Rothschild, R. Tenne and C. Colliex Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 075501 (2001)

work page 2001

[24] [24]

Taverna, M

D. Taverna, M. Kociak, V. Charbois and L. Henrard Phys. Rev. B 66, 235419 (2002)

work page 2002

[25] [25]

F. J. Garc ´ ıa de Abajo and M. Kociak Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 106804 (2008)

work page 2008

[26] [26]

F. J. Garc ´ ıa de Abajo Rev. Mod. Phys 82, 209 (2010)

work page 2010

[27] [27]

Y. Chen, J. Xi, D. O. Dumcenco, Z. Liu, K. Suenaga, D. Wang, Z. Shuai, Y.-S. Huang and L. Xie ACS Nano 7, 4610 (2013)

work page 2013

[28] [28]

D. A. Muller and J. Silcox Ultramicroscopy 59, 195 (1995)

work page 1995

[29] [29]

J. C. H. Spence Rep. Prog. Phys. 69, 725 (2006)

work page 2006

[30] [30]

L. F. Zagonel, et al Nano Lett. 11, 568 (2010)

work page 2010

[31] [31]

Singh and K

J. Singh and K. K. Bajaj J. App. Phys. 57, 5433 (1985)

work page 1985

[32] [32]

Patan` e, A

A. Patan` e, A. Polimeni, M. Capizzi and F. Martelli Phys . Rev. B 52, 2784 (1995)

work page 1995

[33] [33]

S. H. Su, et al, Front. Energy Res. 2, 27 (2014)

work page 2014

[34] [34]

Huang, S

C. Huang, S. Wu, A. M. Sanchez, J. J. P. Peters, R. Beanland, J. S. Ross, P. Rivera, W. Yao, D. H. Cobden and X. Xu Nat. Mat. doi:10.1038/nmat4064 (2014)

work page doi:10.1038/nmat4064 2014

[35] [35]

Gong, et al Nat

Y. Gong, et al Nat. Mat. 13, 1096 (2014)

work page 2014

[36] [36]

Y.-C. Lin, D. O. Dumcenco, Y.-S. Huang and K. Suenaga Nat. Nano. 9, 1128 (2014)

work page 2014

[37] [37]

Kappera, D

R. Kappera, D. Voiry, S. E. Yalcin, B. Branch, G. Gupta, A. D. Mohite and M. Chhowalla Nat. Mat. 13, 1128 (2014)

work page 2014