Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 2 minor 1 cited by

Atomic Structure of Amorphous Optical Coatings of TiO$_2$-doped GeO$_2$ by Grazing-Incidence Total X-ray Scattering Measurements

T0 review · 1 major / 2 minor · reviewed 2026-06-29 · grok-4.3

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

Pith's one-line read Annealing reduces edge- and face-sharing polyhedra in TiO2-doped GeO2 films, showing the clearest link to lower mechanical loss.

desk verdict The paper supplies new grazing-incidence PDF data on TiO2-GeO2 films that tracks how annealing cuts edge- and face-sharing polyhedra while lowering mechanical loss, but the correlation leaves room for other unmeasured changes. read the letter →

arxiv 2605.27462 v1 pith:T54WMBHZ submitted 2026-05-25 cond-mat.mtrl-sci

K. Prasai , J. Jiang , K. Lee , L. Yang , M. Chicoine , S. Khadka , A. Markosyan , A. Mehta
show 8 more authors
C. S. Menoni S. Patel F. Schiettekatte B. Shyam G. Vajente H-P Cheng M. M. Fejer R. Bassiri
This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords amorphousopticalcoatingsTiO2-dopedGeO2mechanicallosspairdistributionfunctionannealingpolyhedralsharingX-rayscatteringgravitationalwavedetectors
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

The paper measures how atomic arrangement in amorphous TiO2-doped GeO2 coatings changes with titanium content and heat treatment. Higher titanium levels increase titanium coordination and create more compact edge- and face-sharing connections between polyhedra, while germanium stays mostly four-coordinated. Annealing reverses some of these compact connections and sharpens longer-range order. Among the features tracked, the drop in shared polyhedra after annealing matches the observed drop in mechanical loss most closely. The work uses grazing-incidence X-ray scattering on the actual films to connect these atomic details to coating performance for low-noise optics.

What carries the argument

Pair distribution functions from grazing-incidence total X-ray scattering, combined with atomic modeling to quantify coordination numbers and polyhedral sharing statistics.

What would settle it

A controlled sample in which edge- and face-sharing polyhedra are reduced by a method other than annealing yet mechanical loss stays unchanged, or in which loss drops without a corresponding drop in shared polyhedra.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Increasing Ti content raises average Ti coordination and promotes edge- and face-sharing polyhedral connections while Ge remains predominantly fourfold coordinated. Annealing reduces these compact shared-polyhedron motifs and sharpens the first sharp diffraction peak. Among the structural descriptors examined, the clearest correlation with the annealing-induced reduction in mechanical loss is the decrease in edge- and face-sharing polyhedra.

Load-bearing premise

The chosen measures of local coordination and polyhedral connectivity are the main factors that set mechanical dissipation rather than other untracked features such as defects or impurities.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Raising Ti concentration systematically increases Ti coordination and compact polyhedral connections.
  • Annealing relaxes the network by cutting edge- and face-sharing motifs and sharpening intermediate-range order.
  • Mechanical-loss reduction after annealing tracks the decline in these shared polyhedra more closely than other tracked descriptors.
  • The measured links between composition, annealing, structure, and dissipation supply concrete targets for tuning coating recipes.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same polyhedral-sharing metric could be checked in other amorphous oxides used for precision mirrors to test whether it predicts loss across chemistries.
  • In-situ X-ray monitoring during annealing might allow real-time adjustment of heat-treatment schedules to reach a target level of shared polyhedra.
  • If the correlation holds, models of dissipation could incorporate polyhedral connectivity as a design variable without needing full mechanical tests on every new composition.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

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

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper reports grazing-incidence X-ray pair distribution function measurements and atomic modeling of amorphous TiO2-doped GeO2 films (Ti cation fraction ~11–48 %) before and after annealing. It finds that increasing Ti content raises average Ti coordination and promotes edge- and face-sharing polyhedra while Ge remains ~4-fold; annealing reduces these compact motifs, sharpens the first sharp diffraction peak, and that the reduction in edge- and face-sharing polyhedra shows the clearest correlation with the observed drop in mechanical loss.

Significance. If the reported correlation is robust, the work supplies concrete microscopic guidance for reducing coating thermal noise in gravitational-wave detectors by linking composition, annealing, and specific polyhedral motifs to dissipation. The grazing-incidence PDF approach on thin films is a technical strength that enables direct structural characterization of the relevant layers.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract / structural-analysis section] Abstract and structural-analysis section: the central claim that the decrease in edge- and face-sharing polyhedra is the clearest correlate with annealing-induced mechanical-loss reduction is load-bearing, yet the manuscript does not demonstrate that this descriptor dominates over unmeasured variables (point defects, OH content, or longer-range relaxations) known to control TLS density in a-TiO2:GeO2; without multivariate regression or additional controls, the correlation cannot isolate the polyhedral motif as the dominant factor.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Methods] Notation for coordination numbers and sharing statistics should be defined explicitly in the methods or first results paragraph to avoid ambiguity when comparing pre- and post-anneal data.
  2. [Experimental methods] The range of the measured PDF and the Q-resolution of the grazing-incidence setup should be stated so readers can assess the reliability of the intermediate-range order (FSDP) sharpening.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive comments and positive assessment of the work's significance. We respond to the single major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract / structural-analysis section] Abstract and structural-analysis section: the central claim that the decrease in edge- and face-sharing polyhedra is the clearest correlate with annealing-induced mechanical-loss reduction is load-bearing, yet the manuscript does not demonstrate that this descriptor dominates over unmeasured variables (point defects, OH content, or longer-range relaxations) known to control TLS density in a-TiO2:GeO2; without multivariate regression or additional controls, the correlation cannot isolate the polyhedral motif as the dominant factor.

    Authors: We agree that the observed correlation does not establish dominance or causality over unmeasured variables. The manuscript states only that the reduction in edge- and face-sharing polyhedra is the clearest correlation 'among the structural descriptors examined.' No multivariate regression or controls for point defects, OH content, or longer-range relaxations were performed because those quantities were not measured in the present grazing-incidence PDF study. The data do show that annealing systematically reduces these compact motifs while sharpening the FSDP, and that this structural change tracks the mechanical-loss reduction across the full composition range. We therefore consider the claim appropriately qualified as a correlation among measured descriptors rather than an assertion of dominance. No revision is required. revision: no

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity in derivation chain

full rationale

The paper reports experimental grazing-incidence total X-ray scattering measurements yielding pair distribution functions, followed by standard atomic-structure modeling to extract coordination numbers, polyhedral sharing statistics, and FSDP features. The central claim is an empirical correlation between the annealing-induced decrease in edge- and face-sharing polyhedra and reduced mechanical loss; this is an observational result from measured data, not a quantity fitted to a subset and renamed as prediction, nor a self-definitional relation, nor dependent on load-bearing self-citations whose content reduces to the present inputs. No equations or ansatzes are invoked that make any reported descriptor equivalent to its inputs by construction. The derivation chain is self-contained against external benchmarks of PDF analysis.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 1 assumptions · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only; modeling of atomic structure from PDF data implicitly relies on standard assumptions about coordination and connectivity but no explicit free parameters or invented entities are stated.

assumptions (1)
  • domain assumption Pair distribution functions derived from grazing-incidence scattering faithfully represent bulk short- and intermediate-range order without significant surface or beam-geometry artifacts.
    Invoked by the choice of measurement technique and structural analysis described in the abstract.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Atomic Structure of Amorphous Optical Coatings of TiO$_2$-doped GeO$_2$ by Grazing-Incidence Total X-ray Scattering Measurements." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/T54WMBHZ

@misc{pith2026260527462,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Atomic Structure of Amorphous Optical Coatings of TiO$_2$-doped GeO$_2$ by Grazing-Incidence Total X-ray Scattering Measurements},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/T54WMBHZ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2605.27462}
}
abstract

Reducing coating thermal noise in future gravitational-wave detectors requires identifying the atomic motifs that control mechanical loss in amorphous optical coatings. We combine grazing-incidence X-ray pair distribution function measurements with atomic-structure modeling to study amorphous TiO$_2$-doped GeO$_2$ films over Ti cation concentrations from $\sim$11 % to $\sim$48 %, before and after annealing. The structural analysis reveals systematic composition- and annealing-dependent changes in short- and intermediate-range order. Increasing Ti content raises the average Ti coordination and promotes edge- and face-sharing polyhedral connections, while Ge remains predominantly fourfold coordinated. Annealing reduces these compact shared-polyhedron motifs and sharpens the first sharp diffraction peak, indicating a more relaxed intermediate-range network. Among the structural descriptors examined, the clearest correlation with the annealing-induced reduction in mechanical loss is the decrease in edge- and face-sharing polyhedra. These results connect composition, annealing, atomic structure, and mechanical dissipation in TiO$_2$-doped GeO$_2$, providing microscopic guidance for optimizing low-noise mirror coatings.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.27462 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Structure factor [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Pair distribution functions obtained from grazing-incidence X-ray total scattering. (a) Measured GIPDFs [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Coordination statistics computed from the experimentally [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (7 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Percentage of edge-shared (ES) and face-shared (FS) poly [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Bond-angle distributions computed from the experimentally [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Normalized distribution of the Steinhardt bond-orientational [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Measured structure factors [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_7.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Correlation between the measured loss angle and the height [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_9.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Effect of annealing on mechanical loss and polyhedral con [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_8.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. Comparison of partial PDFs computed from the experi [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_10.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Mechanical loss in amorphous solids: spatial correlations, interacting transitions, and annealed thermodynamic pathways

    cond-mat.mtrl-sci 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Atomic transitions causing mechanical loss in amorphous solids are spatially clustered and interact, requiring a connected-network description over independent two-level systems; flattening the energy landscape lowers...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

53 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Ge–Ge” refers to connections be- tween two Ge-centered polyhedra. “Ge–Ti

    until convergence inχ 2 and energy is obtained. We de- fine χ2 = X j Sexpt j (q)−S calc j (q) 2 σ2 j ,(1) where the sum is overjindexing discrete bins in theq-range of interest,S expt(q)andS calc(q)are the experimental and modeled structure factors, respectively, andσ j is a weight- ing factor commonly used to representq-dependent noise. In this work, we ...

  2. [2]

    All Ge- or Ti-centered polyhedra are connected to adjacent polyhedra through one or more shared O atoms at their vertices

    Polyhedral connections Looking beyond the first coordination sphere, we analyze polyhedral connections. All Ge- or Ti-centered polyhedra are connected to adjacent polyhedra through one or more shared O atoms at their vertices. Pairs of polyhedra sharing one, two, or three (or more) vertices are commonly referred to as corner- sharing (CS), edge-sharing (E...

  3. [3]

    Here,q 6 is a rotation- 7 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 q6 0 200 400Distribution anatase rutile q6 Ge 11% Ti 27% Ti 40% Ti 48% Ti FIG

    Bond-orientational order around Ti We analyze the Steinhardt bond-orientational order param- eters [32], focusing onq 6 for Ti atoms in the models, to assess the extent to which local Ti environments resemble those of common crystalline TiO2 polymorphs. Here,q 6 is a rotation- 7 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 q6 0 200 400Distribution anatase rutile q6 Ge 11% Ti 27% ...

  4. [4]

    A higher value ofq 6 for a given Ti atom indicates that its bond pattern projects more strongly onto sixfold angular sym- metry. The precise numerical value ofq 6 depends on how the neighbor shell is defined, such as the cutoff distance and/or the number of neighbors included; therefore, absolute values should be interpreted only within the same analysis ...

  5. [5]

    First Sharp Diffraction Peaks Additional information on IRO can be obtained by analyz- ing the structure factorS(q)(Fig. 7). The first sharp diffrac- tion peak (FSDP) is commonly used as a measure of IRO in amorphous networks. From Fig. 7, the FSDP broadens and shifts to higherqwith increasing Ti content, indicat- ing a reduction in the correlation length...

    work page doi:10.37807/gbmf6793.02 2024

  6. [6]

    The BKS and Morse parameters are given in Table III

    Long-range Coulomb interactions were evaluated using Ewald summation with a tolerance of10 −6. The BKS and Morse parameters are given in Table III. Cation–cation pairs were included through the Coulomb part of the interaction, with zero short-range Buckingham parameters. TABLE III. BKS and Morse two-body force-field parameters used for the oxide network. ...

  7. [7]

    D. V . Martynov, E. Hall, B. Abbott, R. Abbott, T. Abbott, C. Adams, R. Adhikari, R. Anderson, S. Anderson, K. Arai, et al., Physical Review D93, 112004 (2016)

    2016

  8. [8]

    Buikema, C

    A. Buikema, C. Cahillane, G. Mansell, C. Blair, R. Abbott, C. Adams, R. Adhikari, A. Ananyeva, S. Appert, K. Arai,et al., Physical Review D102, 062003 (2020)

    2020

Show all 53 references
  1. [9]

    Granata, A

    M. Granata, A. Amato, L. Balzarini, M. Canepa, J. Degallaix, D. Forest, V . Dolique, L. Mereni, C. Michel, L. Pinard,et al., Classical and Quantum Gravity37, 095004 (2020)

    2020

  2. [10]

    Amato, S

    A. Amato, S. Terreni, V . Dolique, D. Forest, G. Gemme, M. Granata, L. Mereni, C. Michel, L. Pinard, B. Sassolas,et al., Journal of Physics: Materials2, 035004 (2019)

    2019

  3. [11]

    Punturo, M

    M. Punturo, M. Abernathy, F. Acernese, B. Allen, N. Anders- son, K. Arun, F. Barone, B. Barr, M. Barsuglia, M. Beker,et al., Classical and Quantum Gravity27, 194002 (2010)

    2010

  4. [12]

    Prasai, J

    K. Prasai, J. Jiang, A. Mishkin, B. Shyam, S. Angelova, R. Bir- ney, D. Drabold, M. Fazio, E. Gustafson, G. Harry,et al., Phys- ical review letters123, 045501 (2019)

    2019

  5. [13]

    Vajente, L

    G. Vajente, L. Yang, A. Davenport, M. Fazio, A. Ananyeva, L. Zhang, G. Billingsley, K. Prasai, A. Markosyan, R. Bassiri, et al., Physical Review Letters127, 071101 (2021)

    2021

  6. [14]

    Vajente, R

    G. Vajente, R. Birney, A. Ananyeva, S. Angelova, R. Asselin, B. Baloukas, R. Bassiri, G. Billingsley, M. Fejer, D. Gibson, et al., Classical and Quantum Gravity35, 075001 (2018)

    2018

  7. [15]

    L. Yang, G. Vajente, M. Fazio, A. Ananyeva, G. Billingsley, A. Markosyan, R. Bassiri, K. Prasai, M. M. Fejer, M. Chicoine, et al., Science advances7, eabh1117 (2021)

    2021

  8. [16]

    Abernathy, A

    M. Abernathy, A. Amato, A. Ananyeva, S. Angelova, B. Baloukas, R. Bassiri, G. Billingsley, R. Birney, G. Cagnoli, M. Canepa,et al., Classical and Quantum Gravity38, 195021 (2021)

    2021

  9. [17]

    Khadka, A

    S. Khadka, A. Markosyan, K. Prasai, A. Dana, L. Yang, S. Tait, I. Martin, C. Menoni, M. Fejer, and R. Bassiri, Classical and Quantum Gravity40, 205002 (2023)

    2023

  10. [18]

    Chu,Backscattering spectrometry(Elsevier, 2012)

    W.-K. Chu,Backscattering spectrometry(Elsevier, 2012)

    2012

  11. [19]

    Fujiwara,Spectroscopic ellipsometry: principles and appli- cations(John Wiley & Sons, 2007)

    H. Fujiwara,Spectroscopic ellipsometry: principles and appli- cations(John Wiley & Sons, 2007)

    2007

  12. [20]

    Cesarini, M

    E. Cesarini, M. Lorenzini, E. Campagna, F. Martelli, F. Pier- giovanni, F. Vetrano, G. Losurdo, and G. Cagnoli, Review of Scientific Instruments80(2009)

    2009

  13. [21]

    Vajente, A

    G. Vajente, A. Ananyeva, G. Billingsley, E. Gustafson, A. Hep- tonstall, E. Sanchez, and C. Torrie, Review of Scientific Instru- ments88(2017)

    2017

  14. [22]

    Lalande, A

    E. Lalande, A. Davenport, L. Marchand, A. Markosyan, D. Martinez, A. Paolone, M. Rezac, M. Bazzan, M. Chicoine, J. L. Colaux,et al., Classical and Quantum Gravity41, 115013 (2024)

    2024

  15. [23]

    Shyam, K

    B. Shyam, K. H. Stone, R. Bassiri, M. M. Fejer, M. F. Toney, and A. Mehta, Scientific reports6, 1 (2016)

    2016

  16. [24]

    X. Qiu, J. W. Thompson, and S. J. Billinge, Journal of Applied Crystallography37, 678 (2004)

    2004

  17. [25]

    J. H. Los and T. D. K ¨uhne, Physical Review B87, 214202 (2013)

    2013

  18. [26]

    Keen and R

    D. Keen and R. McGreevy, Nature344, 423 (1990)

    1990

  19. [27]

    Drabold, The European Physical Journal B68, 1 (2009)

    D. Drabold, The European Physical Journal B68, 1 (2009)

    2009

  20. [28]

    Pandey, P

    A. Pandey, P. Biswas, and D. Drabold, Physical Review B92, 155205 (2015)

    2015

  21. [29]

    Pandey, P

    A. Pandey, P. Biswas, and D. A. Drabold, Scientific Reports6, 1 (2016)

    2016

  22. [30]

    Gu ´enol´e, W

    J. Gu ´enol´e, W. G. N ¨ohring, A. Vaid, F. Houll ´e, Z. Xie, A. Prakash, and E. Bitzek, Computational Materials Science 175, 109584 (2020)

    2020

  23. [31]

    Jiang, R

    J. Jiang, R. Zhang, K. Prasai, R. Bassiri, J. N. Fry, M. M. Fejer, and H.-P. Cheng, Physical Review Materials9, 105604 (2025)

    2025

  24. [32]

    Bernardes, Physical review112, 1534 (1958)

    N. Bernardes, Physical review112, 1534 (1958)

    1958

  25. [33]

    J. F. Ziegler and J. P. Biersack, inTreatise on Heavy-Ion Sci- ence: V olume 6: Astrophysics, Chemistry, and Condensed Mat- ter(Springer, 1985) pp. 93–129

    1985

  26. [34]

    D. A. Keen, Applied Crystallography34, 172 (2001)

    2001

  27. [35]

    Neuefeind and K.-D

    J. Neuefeind and K.-D. Liss, Berichte der Bunsengesellschaft f¨ur physikalische Chemie100, 1341 (1996)

    1996

  28. [36]

    Triana, C

    C. Triana, C. M. Araujo, R. Ahuja, G. A. Niklasson, and T. Ed- vinsson, Physical Review B94, 165129 (2016)

    2016

  29. [37]

    Zhang, R

    R. Zhang, R. Osovsky, J. Jiang, J. N. Fry, M. M. Fejer, C. S. Menoni, and H.-P. Cheng, Physical Review Materials10, 013601 (2026)

    2026

  30. [38]

    P. J. Steinhardt, D. R. Nelson, and M. Ronchetti, Physical Re- view B28, 784 (1983)

    1983

  31. [39]

    Elliott, Physical review letters67, 711 (1991)

    S. Elliott, Physical review letters67, 711 (1991)

    1991

  32. [40]

    Sampath, C

    S. Sampath, C. Benmore, K. Lantzky, J. Neuefeind, K. Leinen- weber, D. Price, and J. Yarger, Physical Review Letters90, 115502 (2003)

    2003

  33. [41]

    Guthrie, C

    M. Guthrie, C. Tulk, C. Benmore, J. Xu, J. Yarger, D. Klug, J. Tse, H. Mao, and R. Hemley, Physical Review Letters93, 115502 (2004)

    2004

  34. [42]

    Benmore, E

    C. Benmore, E. Soignard, S. Amin, M. Guthrie, S. Shastri, P. Lee, and J. Yarger, Physical Review B81, 054105 (2010)

    2010

  35. [43]

    Guerette, M

    M. Guerette, M. R. Ackerson, J. Thomas, F. Yuan, E. Bruce Watson, D. Walker, and L. Huang, Scientific reports 5, 15343 (2015)

    2015

  36. [44]

    Y . Shi, J. Neuefeind, D. Ma, K. Page, L. A. Lamberson, N. J. Smith, A. Tandia, and A. P. Song, Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids516, 71 (2019)

    2019

  37. [45]

    Kobayashi, M

    K. Kobayashi, M. Okumura, H. Nakamura, M. Itakura, M. Machida, S. Urata, and K. Suzuya, Scientific Reports13, 18721 (2023)

    2023

  38. [46]

    Trinastic, R

    J. Trinastic, R. Hamdan, Y . Wu, L. Zhang, and H.-P. Cheng, The Journal of Chemical Physics139, 154506 (2013)

    2013

  39. [47]

    Kresse and J

    G. Kresse and J. Hafner, Physical Review B47, 558 (1993)

    1993

  40. [48]

    Kresse and J

    G. Kresse and J. Furthm ¨uller, Physical Review B54, 11169 (1996)

    1996

  41. [49]

    P. E. Bl ¨ochl, Physical Review B50, 17953 (1994)

    1994

  42. [50]

    J. P. Perdew, K. Burke, and M. Ernzerhof, Physical Review Letters77, 3865 (1996)

    1996

  43. [51]

    Prasai, R

    K. Prasai, R. Bassiri, H.-P. Cheng, and M. M. Fejer, APL Ma- terials11(2023)

    2023

  44. [52]

    Nakano, R

    A. Nakano, R. K. Kalia, and P. Vashishta, Journal of non- crystalline solids171, 157 (1994)

    1994

  45. [53]

    Mora-Fonz and A

    D. Mora-Fonz and A. L. Shluger, Physical Review B99, 014202 (2019)

    2019

Pith tools

Reviewed June 29, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.