Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 75 references

Theoretical exploration of Be Ag(II) F phases and their magnetic properties using learning algorithms

T0 review · 2 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-07-10 · grok-4.5

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

Pith's one-line read Predicted AgBeF4 polymorphs carry record antiferromagnetic exchange near 460 meV, from short nearly linear Ag–F–Ag bridges in dimers and straight chains.

desk verdict Solid CSP+DFT map of unexplored AgBeF4 with two extreme computed J values from clear structural motifs; method-dependent ranking is the main soft spot, not a fatal flaw. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.08372 v1 pith:TPBUKA5J submitted 2026-07-09 cond-mat.supr-con cond-mat.mtrl-scicond-mat.str-el

Katarzyna Kuder , Wojciech Grochala This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.supr-concond-mat.mtrl-scicond-mat.str-el
keywords silver(II)fluoridesAgBeF4superexchangecrystalstructurepredictionDFT+Uantiferromagnetismmetastablecuprateanalogues
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 paper maps the unexplored Be–Ag(II)–F chemical space by global structure search and first-principles calculations, focusing on AgBeF4. It finds five low-enthalpy polymorphs whose magnetic ground states are antiferromagnetic. Two of them stand out: one with [Ag2F7] dimers and one with infinite equiplanar [AgF2/2+2/1] chains. Those motifs produce computed superexchange constants of roughly −460 meV and −359 meV—larger than the values the authors tabulate for other silver(II) fluorides and for cuprate reference systems. The phases sit modestly above the AgF2–BeF2 convex hull, so they are metastable, yet reaction enthalpies with fluorine radicals reach about −370 kJ/mol, which the authors present as a realistic synthetic route. The work is offered as a computational roadmap toward new low-dimensional Ag(II) magnets that could serve as parent compounds for high-Tc superconductivity.

What carries the argument

The structural motifs that carry the magnetism: [Ag2F7] dimers (AgBeF4_4) and infinite equiplanar [AgF2/2+2/1]2− chains (AgBeF4_5) with very short Ag–F distances and near-180° Ag–F–Ag bridges, which the authors link via Goodenough–Kanamori rules to the extreme |J|.

What would settle it

Successful synthesis of AgBeF4_4 or AgBeF4_5 followed by experimental measurement of the magnetic exchange (for example by neutron scattering or high-field susceptibility) that falls well below the predicted 350–460 meV range.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Global structure prediction plus DFT+U identifies five dynamically stable AgBeF4 polymorphs; two of them host [Ag2F7] dimers or unprecedented straight equiplanar Ag–F chains that yield the largest computed antiferromagnetic J values among the compared Ag(II) fluorides and cuprates (≈ −460 meV and ≈ −359 meV).

Load-bearing premise

The absolute size and ranking of the exchange constants rest on DFT+U energies computed at a fixed Hubbard U of 5 eV; if that method systematically overestimates |J|, the claim of record coupling no longer holds.

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

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports a global structure search (XtalOpt) of the AgBeF4 stoichiometry in the previously unexplored Be–Ag(II)–F chemical space, identifying five low-enthalpy polymorphs (C2, P-1, P21/c). All are dynamically stable local minima with antiferromagnetic ground states. Two of them, AgBeF4_4 ([Ag2F7] dimers, nearly linear Ag–F–Ag) and AgBeF4_5 (infinite equiplanar [AgF2/2+2/1] chains), are predicted to host exceptionally large AFM superexchange constants (J ≈ −460 meV and −359 meV from DFT+U PBEsol, U = 5 eV). The phases lie ~30–60 meV/atom above the AgF2 + BeF2 convex hull but are argued to be accessible via highly exothermic routes involving fluorine radicals (down to ~−370 kJ/mol). Electronic structure, phonon dispersions, and U-sensitivity of J are provided in the ESI.

Significance. If the large |J| values and the structural motifs survive experimental scrutiny, the work supplies concrete synthetic targets for low-dimensional Ag(II) fluorides that push the known limits of magnetic coupling and that are relevant to the search for cuprate analogues. Strengths include unrestricted evolutionary sampling, phonon confirmation of local minima, explicit mapping of FM/AFM total energies onto a Heisenberg J, U-variation checks (ESI Figs. S3–S4), and a clear thermodynamic analysis of radical-based routes. The ranking of |J| is method-dependent, but the structural origin of the enhancement (short, near-linear bridges) is internally consistent with Goodenough–Kanamori expectations and with the authors’ own prior DFT+U/HSE data set.

major comments (2)
  1. Table 2 and the accompanying ranking claim (AgBeF4_4/5 as record |J| among Ag(II) fluorides and cuprates) rest on absolute DFT+U (PBEsol, Dudarev U = 5 eV, J = 1 eV) values. ESI Figs. S3–S4 already show that J varies substantially over U = 4–6 eV. The manuscript should either (i) recompute the key J values with a hybrid functional (e.g., HSE06, as used for several entries already listed in Table 2) or (ii) reframe the ranking as “largest within a consistent DFT+U protocol” and move the absolute “record” language to a more cautious statement. Without one of these steps the central quantitative claim remains method-dependent.
  2. The Heisenberg mapping (ESI S3, Tables S1–S5) uses only two spin configurations per structure (FM and one AFM). For AgBeF4_4 (dimers) and AgBeF4_5 (chains plus isolated squares) this is formally sufficient for a single nearest-neighbour J, but the text should state explicitly that longer-range or inter-chain couplings were checked and found negligible, or report additional collinear configurations that isolate those terms. Otherwise the quoted J values could absorb residual interactions.
minor comments (6)
  1. Abstract and main text: “J equal circa to minus 460meV” and similar phrasing should be standardised to “J ≈ −460 meV” (and likewise for −359 meV); units need a space (meV).
  2. Figure 2 caption and ESI S3: “lithium cations” is a copy-paste remnant; the structures contain Be, not Li.
  3. Table 1 vs. ESI CIFs: lattice parameters are given to three decimals in the table but more digits appear in the CIFs; a single consistent precision should be used.
  4. Phonon section (ESI S5): the imaginary mode of −9 cm−1 at Γ for AgBeF4_4 is correctly identified as a numerical artefact after re-optimisation, but this discussion should be briefly summarised in the main text so that readers do not need the ESI to accept dynamical stability.
  5. Band-gap discussion: the statement that DFT+U underestimates gaps is standard; a short note that the reported values are therefore lower bounds (already implied) would avoid over-interpretation of the 1.18–1.73 eV range.
  6. References: several self-citations to prior Ag(II) J values are appropriate for the ranking, but a few key experimental cuprate J values (e.g., Sr2CuO3) could be cross-checked against more recent inelastic-neutron data if available.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: J values are extracted from independent DFT+U total-energy differences of spin configurations; self-citations set the comparison baseline but do not force the new structures or energies.

full rationale

The paper's central results (five AgBeF4 polymorphs from XtalOpt global search, AFM ground states, and large |J| for AgBeF4_4/5) are obtained by unrestricted structure prediction followed by DFT+U total-energy differences between FM and AFM configurations (ESI Tables S1–S5, Hamiltonian H = −1/2 ∑ Jij Si Sj). The geometries (short Ag–F bonds, near-linear Ag–F–Ag bridges in [Ag2F7] dimers or straight [AgF2/2+2/1] chains) are outputs of the search, not inputs, and the large J values follow from those geometries via Goodenough–Kanamori expectations. Self-citations to prior Ag(II) J values (LiAgF3, AgFBF4, HP-AgF2, etc.) and the authors’ own U-sensitivity checks (ESI Figs. S3–S4) establish the “record” ranking and method dependence, but they do not define or force the new energies. Phonon stability, band gaps, and convex-hull metastability are likewise independent first-principles outputs. No definitional loop, fitted-parameter-as-prediction, or load-bearing uniqueness theorem from the authors is present. Score 1 reflects only the minor, non-load-bearing self-citation baseline for ranking.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 1 invented entities

Central magnetic ranking rests on a standard but non-universal DFT+U setup and a classical Heisenberg mapping. Metastability and synthetic feasibility rest on 0 K enthalpies relative to chosen binaries and radical precursors. No new physical entities beyond predicted crystal structures.

free parameters (3)
  • Hubbard U on Ag d = 5.0 eV
    Set to 5.0 eV (Dudarev) following prior Ag(II) fluoride work; J values change when U is varied 4–6 eV (ESI).
  • Exchange J in DFT+U = 1.0 eV
    Fixed at 1.0 eV with U; standard choice but not derived here.
  • Plane-wave cutoff and k-spacing = 600 eV; 0.065 Å−1
    600 eV and ~0.065 Å−1 chosen after convergence tests (ESI); affect absolute energies at meV scale relevant to hull placement.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption DFT+U (PBEsol) with fixed U adequately ranks magnetic exchange and relative enthalpies of Ag(II) fluorides.
    Used throughout for structure ranking, band gaps, and J extraction; known to underestimate gaps and to be U-sensitive.
  • domain assumption Magnetic energy differences map to a classical Heisenberg Hamiltonian H = −1/2 Σ Jij Si Sj with the reported spin models.
    ESI §S3; only nearest-neighbor J extracted from FM vs one AFM configuration per phase.
  • domain assumption Phonon dispersions without significant imaginary modes imply dynamically stable local minima and viable synthetic targets.
    §Dynamic stability and ESI §S5; soft modes dismissed as numerical artifacts after reoptimization tests.
  • domain assumption 0 K reaction enthalpies with F* or F2 predict feasible synthetic routes for metastable phases.
    §Energetic stability; ignores kinetics, solvent (aHF), and finite-T free energy.
  • ad hoc to paper Evolutionary search (XtalOpt, 650 structures, 2–8 f.u.) sufficiently samples the AgBeF4 landscape for the five lowest-enthalpy forms.
    Methods; no guarantee of global completeness for larger cells or other stoichiometries.
invented entities (1)
  • AgBeF4_1 through AgBeF4_5 polymorphs (C2, P-1, P21/c)
    purpose: Predicted crystal structures that host the reported magnetic and electronic properties.
    Generated by unconstrained structure search; independent evidence would be experimental synthesis and diffraction matching the CIFs/phonons.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Theoretical exploration of Be Ag(II) F phases and their magnetic properties using learning algorithms." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/TPBUKA5J

@misc{pith2026260708372,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Theoretical exploration of Be Ag(II) F phases and their magnetic properties using learning algorithms},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/TPBUKA5J}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.08372}
}
read the original abstract

The search for novel silver(II) fluorides is driven by their potential as electronic and magnetic analogues to high temperature cuprate(II) superconductor precursors. Here, we explore the previously uncharted Be Ag(II) F chemical space using global structure prediction algorithms combined with first principles calculations. Focusing on the AgBeF4 stoichiometry, we identify the five lowest enthalpy polymorphs crystallizing in the C2, P minus 1, and P 21/c space groups. All polymorphs show an antiferromagnetic ground state, with AgBeF4_4 and AgBeF4_5 exhibiting unprecedented strong superexchange interactions of J equal circa to minus 460meV and J equal circa to minus 359meV respectively. Those high J values are due to the presence of either [Ag2F7] for AgBeF4_4, or related infinite [AgF2/2+2/1]2 minus chains for AgBeF4_5. Although the phases are found to be metastable with respect to binary difluorides, the thermodynamic analysis suggests that they could be targeted via synthetic routes employing fluorine radicals, with reaction enthalpies reaching minus 370 kJ/mol.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.08372 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Coordination environments within the five proposed AgBeF4 polymorphs. For each structure, the coordination sphere of silver(II) is shown first, followed by the coordination sphere of beryllium, and finally a combined view illustrating both environments. Dark grey spheres represent Ag(2+), light grey spheres correspond to fluorine atoms, and green spheres denote beryllium atoms. Short and long Ag-F bonds are shown us… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The ground state antiferromagnetic models investigated for the AgBeF4_4 and AgBeF4_5 polymorphs. Spin-up silver(II) cations are represented by grey spheres, while spin-down cations are shown as black spheres. To simplify the pictures, lithium cations and their coordination spheres were omitted. The visualization of the spin density within the infinite chain is also presented with the cutoff value of 0.005e/A3 [35] .… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. LEFT: Comparison of the absolute values of magnetic exchange coupling constants, |J|, for selected Ag(II)-based fluoride systems and representative cuprates, grouped according to the dimensionality of the magnetic lattice. Hatched bars denote theoretical data, filled bars denote experimental data, and open bars represent experimental data for cuprates. The dashed blue box highlights metastable compounds; RIGHT: Depe… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: TOP: Convexhull for the proposed AgBeF4 polymorphs which shows the relative stability of the considered structures with respect to AgF2 and BeF2. BOTTOM: Calculated formation ener￾gies of these structures from selected precursors in reactions involv￾ing fluorine gas (F…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

75 extracted references · 75 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Heck,Magnetic materials and their applications, El- sevier2013

    C. Heck,Magnetic materials and their applications, El- sevier2013

    work page

  2. [2]

    H. Li, S. Ruan, Y.-J. Zeng,Advanced Materials2019, 31, 1900065

    work page

  3. [3]

    R. L. Comstock,Journal of Materials Science: Mate- rials in Electronics2002,13, 509

    work page

  4. [4]

    X. Liu, M. C. Hersam,Nature Reviews Materials2019, 4, 669. 6

    work page

  5. [5]

    Kittel,Introduction to Solid State Physics, John Wi- ley & Sons, 8 edition2004

    C. Kittel,Introduction to Solid State Physics, John Wi- ley & Sons, 8 edition2004

    work page

  6. [6]

    J.A.Flores-Livas,Journal of Physics: Condensed Mat- ter2020,32, 294002

    work page

  7. [7]

    Rahmanian Koshkaki, Z

    S. Rahmanian Koshkaki, Z. Allahyari, A. R. Oganov, V. L. Solozhenko, I. B. Polovov, A. S. Belozerov, A. A. Katanin, V. I. Anisimov, E. V. Tikhonov, G.-R. Qian, K. V. Maksimtsev, A. S. Mukhamadeev, A. V. Chukin, A. V. Korolev, N. V. Mushnikov, H. Li,The Journal of Chemical Physics2022,157, 124704

    work page

  8. [8]

    Huang, Y

    G. Huang, Y. Guo, Y. Chen, Z. Nie,Materials2023, 16

    work page

Show all 75 references
  1. [9]

    Huang, S

    X. Huang, S. Zhang, L. Liu, L. Yu, G. Chen, W. Xu, D. Zhu,Angewandte Chemie2018,130, 152

  2. [10]

    Larsson,Chemistry – A European Journal2004,10, 5276

    S. Larsson,Chemistry – A European Journal2004,10, 5276

  3. [11]

    J. B. Goodenough, J.-S. Zhou, J. Chan,Phys. Rev. B 1993,47, 5275

    1993

  4. [12]

    Nakano, M

    T. Nakano, M. Oda, C. Manabe, N. Momono, Y. Miura, M. Ido,Phys. Rev. B1994,49, 16000

  5. [13]

    Grochala, R

    W. Grochala, R. G. Egdell, P. P. Edwards, Z. Mazej, B. Žemva,ChemPhysChem2003,4, 997

  6. [14]

    Fischer, G

    P. Fischer, G. Roult, D. Schwarzenbach,Journal of Physics and Chemistry of Solids1971,32, 1641

  7. [15]

    Kurzydłowski, W

    D. Kurzydłowski, W. Grochala,Angewandte Chemie 2017,129, 10248

    2017

  8. [16]

    Koteras, J

    K. Koteras, J. Gawraczyński, G. Tavčar, Z. Mazej, W. Grochala,CrystEngComm2022,24, 1068

  9. [17]

    Grochala, Z

    W. Grochala, Z. Mazej,Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engi- neering Sciences2015,373, 20140179

  10. [18]

    S. E. McLain, M. R. Dolgos, D. A. Tennant, J. F. C. Turner, T.Barnes, T.Proffen, B.C.Sales, R.I.Bewley, Nature Materials2006,5, 561

  11. [19]

    Kuder, W

    K. Kuder, W. Grochala,arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.050482025, J. Fluor. Chem., in press 2026

    2026 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Baldwin, J

    C. Baldwin, J. Mackenzie,Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids1979,31, 441

  13. [21]

    Ross, Crystal chemistry of beryllium, Technical re- port, US Govt

    M. Ross, Crystal chemistry of beryllium, Technical re- port, US Govt. Print. Off.,1964

    1964

  14. [22]

    Fitch,Journal of Solid State Chemistry1988

    A. Fitch,Journal of Solid State Chemistry1988

  15. [23]

    T. Birk, K. S. Pedersen, C. A. Thuesen, T. Weyher- müller, M. Schau-Magnussen, S. Piligkos, H. Weihe, S. Mossin, M. Evangelisti, J. Bendix,Inorganic Chem- istry2012,51, 5435

  16. [24]

    J. P. Walsh, S. B. Meadows, A. Ghirri, F. Moro, M. Jennings, W. F. Smith, D. M. Graham, T. Kihara, H. Nojiri, I. J. Vitorica-Yrezabal, G. A. Timco, D. Col- lison, E. J. L. McInnes, R. E. P. Winpenny,Inorganic Chemistry2015,54, 12019

  17. [25]

    Grochala, A

    W. Grochala, A. Porch, P. P. Edwards,Solid State Communications2004,130, 137

  18. [26]

    Hajinazar, E

    S. Hajinazar, E. Zurek,Computer Physics Communi- cations2024,304, 109306

  19. [27]

    Falls, P

    Z. Falls, P. Avery, X. Wang, K. P. Hilleke, E. Zurek, The Journal of Physical Chemistry C2021,125, 1601

  20. [28]

    D. C. Lonie, E. Zurek,Computer Physics Communica- tions2011,182, 372

  21. [29]

    Grochala,physica status solidi (b)2006,243, R81

    W. Grochala,physica status solidi (b)2006,243, R81

    2006

  22. [30]

    Kurzydłowski, T

    D. Kurzydłowski, T. Jaroń, A. Ozarowski, S. Hill, Z. Jagličić, Y. Filinchuk, Z. Mazej, W. Grochala,Inor- ganic Chemistry2016,55, 11479

  23. [31]

    The Materials Project, Materials Data on SrBeF4 by Materials Project2020, mp-9726

  24. [32]

    The Materials Project, Materials Data on BaBeF4 by Materials Project2020, mp-12431

  25. [33]

    The Materials Project, Materials Data on SmBeF4 by Materials Project2020, mp-505432

  26. [34]

    Kurzydłowski, Z

    D. Kurzydłowski, Z. Mazej, W. Grochala,Dalton Transactions2013,42, 2167

  27. [35]

    Geng, Y.-C

    W.-T. Geng, Y.-C. Liu, N. Xu, G. Tang, Y. Kawazoe, V. Wang,Nature Protocols2025,20, 3143

  28. [36]

    J. Tong, F. Kraus, J. Köhler, A. Simon, J. Liu, M.- H. Whangbo, Dimers of Ag2+ Ions–Synthesis and Characterization of the Quaternary Silver Fluoride Ag2ZnZr2F14 with [Ag2F7] 3–Units2011

  29. [37]

    Grzelak, J

    A. Grzelak, J. Gawraczyński, T. Jaroń, D. Kurzy- dłowski, Z. Mazej, P. Leszczyński, V. Prakapenka, M. Derzsi, V. Struzhkin, W. Grochala,Dalton Trans- actions2017,46, 14742

  30. [38]

    Grochala,Chemistry – A European Journal2022, 28, e202200712

    Ł.Wolański, M.Metzelaars, J.vanLeusen, P.Kögerler, W. Grochala,Chemistry – A European Journal2022, 28, e202200712

  31. [39]

    Połczyński, R

    P. Połczyński, R. Jurczakowski, Z. Mazej, Ł. Dobrzy- cki, A. Grzelak, W. Grochala,European Journal of In- organic Chemistry2020,2020, 3151

    2020

  32. [40]

    Ghalsasi, P

    P. Ghalsasi, P. Ghalsasi,ChemInform2011,42

  33. [41]

    Miller, A

    C. Miller, A. S. Botana,Phys. Rev. B2020,101, 195116

  34. [42]

    Jezierski, W

    D. Jezierski, W. Grochala,Phys. Rev. Mater.2024,8, 034407

    2024

  35. [43]

    Wegner, K

    W. Wegner, K. Tokár, J. Lorenzana, M. Derzsi, W. Grochala,Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys.2020,22, 21809

    2020

  36. [44]

    Knoll, C

    P. Knoll, C. Thomsen, M. Cardona, P. Murugaraj, Physical Review B1990,42, 4842

  37. [45]

    Gawraczyński, D

    J. Gawraczyński, D. Kurzydłowski, R. A. Ewings, S. Bandaru, W. Gadomski, Z. Mazej, G. Ru- ani, I. Bergenti, T. Jaroń, A. Ozarowski, S. Hill, P. J. Leszczyński, K. Tokár, M. Derzsi, P. Barone, K. Wohlfeld, J. Lorenzana, W. Grochala,Proceedings of the National Academy of Science...

  38. [46]

    Grochala,Phys

    A.Grzelak, H.Su, X.Yang, D.Kurzydłowski, J.Loren- zana, W. Grochala,Phys. Rev. Mater.2020,4, 084405

    2020

  39. [47]

    Kurzydłowski, Z

    D. Kurzydłowski, Z. Mazej, Z. Jagličić, Y. Filinchuk, W. Grochala,Chem. Commun.2013,49, 6262

    2013

  40. [48]

    A. C. Walters, T. G. Perring, J.-S. Caux, A. T. Savici, G. D. Gu, C.-C. Lee, W. Ku, I. A. Zaliznyak,Nature Physics2009,5, 867

  41. [49]

    Koteras,Structural, spectroscopic and theoretical studies of selected Ag(II) fluoride systems in the solid state, Ph.D

    K. Koteras,Structural, spectroscopic and theoretical studies of selected Ag(II) fluoride systems in the solid state, Ph.D. thesis, University of Warsaw2023, insti- tutional Repository of the University of Warsaw

  42. [50]

    Kurzydłowski, M

    D. Kurzydłowski, M. Derzsi, P. Barone, A. Grzelak, V. Struzhkin, J. Lorenzana, W. Grochala, Dramatic enhancement of spin-spin coupling and quenching of magnetic dimensionality in compressed silver difluoride 2018

    2018

  43. [51]

    Bandaru, M

    S. Bandaru, M. Derzsi, A. Grzelak, J. Lorenzana, W. Grochala,Phys. Rev. Mater.2021,5, 064801

    2021

  44. [52]

    Kasinathan, K

    D. Kasinathan, K. Koepernik, U. Nitzsche, H. Rosner, Physical review letters2007,99, 247210

  45. [53]

    X. Chen, S. Zhang, Z. Wang, M. Zhang, G. Wang, Phys. Rev. B2026,113, 054426

  46. [54]

    Grzelak, J

    A. Grzelak, J. Gawraczyński, T. Jaroń, D. Kurzy- dłowski, A. Budzianowski, Z. Mazej, P. J. Leszczyński, V. B. Prakapenka, M. Derzsi, V. V. Struzhkin, 7 W. Grochala,Inorganic Chemistry2017,56, 14651

  47. [55]

    J. B. Goodenough,Physical Review1955,100, 564

  48. [56]

    Kanamori,Journal of Physics and Chemistry of Solids1959,10, 87

    J. Kanamori,Journal of Physics and Chemistry of Solids1959,10, 87

  49. [57]

    Kurzydłowski, W

    D. Kurzydłowski, W. Grochala,Phys. Rev. B2017, 96, 155140

  50. [58]

    Koteras, J

    K. Koteras, J. Gawraczyński, M. Derzsi, Z. Mazej, W. Grochala,Chemistry2021,3, 94

  51. [59]

    Kurzydłowski, M

    D. Kurzydłowski, M. Derzsi, Z. Mazej, W. Grochala, Dalton Trans.2016,45, 16255

    2016

  52. [60]

    P. J. Malinowski, M. Derzsi, Z. Mazej, Z. Jagličić, B. Gaweł, W. Łasocha, W. Grochala,Angewandte Chemie International Edition2010,49, 1683

  53. [61]

    Pines,The Journal of Physical Chemistry B2013, 117, 13145

    D. Pines,The Journal of Physical Chemistry B2013, 117, 13145

  54. [62]

    Žemva, K

    B. Žemva, K. Lutar, A. Jesih, W. J. Casteel Jr, A. P. Wilkinson, D. E. Cox, R. B. Von Dreele, H. Borrmann, N. Bartlett,Journal of the American Chemical Society 1991,113, 4192

    1991

  55. [63]

    Žemva, N

    B. Žemva, N. Bartlett,Journal of Fluorine Chemistry 2006,127, 1463, the Centenary of Henri Moissan’s No- bel Prize

    2006

  56. [64]

    J.-H.Kim, S.Yonezawa, M.Takashima,Journal of Flu- orine Chemistry2003,120, 111, asian Fluorine Con- ference for Young Chemists

  57. [65]

    S. A. Kinkead, J. R. FitzPatrick, J. J. Foropoulos, R. J. Kissane, J. D. Purson, Studies on the photochemical and thermal dissociation synthesis of krypton difluo- ride, Technical report, Los Alamos National Lab., NM (United States)1993

    1993

  58. [66]

    Kresse, J

    G. Kresse, J. Hafner,Physical review B1993,47, 558

  59. [67]

    Kresse, J

    G. Kresse, J. Furthmüller,Computational Materials Science1996,6, 15

  60. [68]

    Kresse, J

    G. Kresse, J. Furthmüller,Physical review B1996,54, 11169

  61. [69]

    Kresse, D

    G. Kresse, D. Joubert,Physical review B1999,59, 1758

  62. [70]

    P. E. Blöchl,Physical review B1994,50, 17953

  63. [71]

    J. P. Perdew, A. Ruzsinszky, G. I. Csonka, O. A. Vydrov, G. E. Scuseria, L. A. Constantin, X. Zhou, K. Burke,Physical review letters2008,100, 136406

  64. [72]

    S. L. Dudarev, G. A. Botton, S. Y. Savrasov, C. J. Humphreys, A. P. Sutton,Phys. Rev. B1998,57, 1505

  65. [73]

    H. T. Stokes, D. M. Hatch, B. J. Campbell, FIND- SYM, ISOTROPY Software Suite,https://iso.byu. edu, brigham Young University

  66. [74]

    H. T. Stokes, D. M. Hatch,Journal of Applied Crystal- lography2005,38, 237

  67. [75]

    P 1 21/c 1

    A. Ganose, A. Jackson, D. O. Scanlon,Journal of Open Source Software2018,3, 717. 8 Entry for the Table of Contents New Magnetic Materials Structure Prediction A computational search reveals five metastable AgBeF 4 poly- morphs. TheP ¯1AgBeF 4_5 phase features unprecedented [Ag...

Pith tools

Reviewed July 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.