Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 64 references

First-principles study of the charge ordered phase in $\kappa$-D$_3$(Cat-EDT-TTF/ST)$_2$: Stability of $\pi$-electron deuterium coupled ordering in hydrogen-bonded molecular conductors

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A screened hybrid functional stabilizes the charge-ordered crystal that GGA misses.

desk verdict A useful DFT benchmark for a coupled D/CO phase: HSE06 reproduces the experimental LT geometry while GGA does not, but the 'stability' claim is weaker than the protocol supports because the cell is fixed and relaxations start from the LT structure. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.02580 v3 pith:VKBBCTAW submitted 2019-08-07 cond-mat.str-el cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Takao Tsumuraya , Hitoshi Seo , Tsuyoshi Miyazaki This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.str-elcond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords chargeorderinghydrogen-bondedmolecularconductorsHSE06hybridfunctionaldeuteriumisotopeeffectdensitytheoryMottinsulatornoncentrosymmetricphase
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 tries to show that a screened hybrid density functional, HSE06, can reproduce the experimentally observed charge-ordered structure of two deuterated hydrogen-bonded molecular conductors, while the standard GGA functional cannot. Getting this structure right matters because the ordering couples deuterium positions in hydrogen bonds to the distribution of π electrons, and reliable structures are needed to build effective models of the coupled order. The paper further claims that HSE06 predicts a second, noncentrosymmetric charge-ordered phase, close in energy to the measured one, with a different deuterium arrangement. If true, this turns a known failure of plain DFT into a quantitative tool for this class of molecular conductors.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the coupled order parameter formed by the off-center deuterium position in the O–D···O hydrogen bond and the charge disproportionation between the two types of dimers. The computational switch that makes the argument work is the fraction of exact exchange in HSE06, which localizes the π wavefunctions enough to stabilize the charge imbalance and the associated molecular distortions. The paper's explanatory device is a dimer molecular-orbital diagram: the deuterium-bearing monomer sits lower in HOMO energy, and the deuterium-free dimer has a shorter inter-monomer distance, so its antibonding level is pushed above the deuterium-bearing dimer's, emptying one level and filling the other.

What would settle it

Take the optimized HSE06 potential-energy surface for the shared deuterium atom and recompute it with deuterium zero-point motion included, for example by path-integral or multicomponent DFT on the same crystal; if the double-well profile flattens into a single well, the classical HSE06 stabilization of the charge-ordered phase would not survive quantum treatment.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Starting from the measured low-temperature P-1 structure of κ-D3(Cat-EDT-TTF)2 and its selenium analog, structural relaxation with GGA-PBE returns to a symmetric, high-temperature-like geometry with essentially no charge disproportionation between the two molecular units. Relaxation with HSE06 instead settles near the measured geometry, reproducing central C=C bond lengths of 1.35 Å and 1.38 Å for the deuterium-bearing and deuterium-free units. HSE06 also opens a 0.04 eV indirect gap in the sulfur compound, while the selenium compound remains semi-metallic, in contrast to experiment. Using the HSE06 landscape, the paper constructs a noncentrosymmetric P1 structure by reversing the deuterium displacement pattern on half the hydrogen bonds; this phase optimizes to a stable structure only 8 meV per formula unit above the centrosymmetric ground state. The stabilization is attributed to two comparable effects: the lower HOMO energy of the monomer carrying the deuterium and the stronger dimerization of the deuterium-free units.

Load-bearing premise

The calculations treat the shared deuterium as a classical point charge, so any nuclear quantum motion that might explain why only deuterated samples order is left out.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • HSE06 structural optimization can be used quantitatively for charge-ordered phases in this family of molecular conductors, including bond lengths that Raman measurements probe.
  • The predicted noncentrosymmetric P1 phase, only 8 meV per formula unit above the observed phase, is a concrete candidate to search for under pressure or with altered deuteration patterns.
  • The molecular-orbital energy differences provide first-principles parameters for effective models of coupled deuterium–π-electron order, filling a gap left by models that neglect the inter-monomer distance asymmetry.
  • The 0.04 eV gap in the sulfur compound matches its insulating behavior, while the semi-metallic result for the selenium compound marks a specific quantitative limit of HSE06 for this family.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper: because the experimental transition occurs only in deuterated samples, the classical-HSE06 success on deuterated compounds suggests the functional may be capturing an enthalpy landscape that nuclear quantum motion then selects between; a quantum-nuclear calculation on the same surface would test this directly.
  • Beyond the paper: the 8 meV per formula unit separation between the two phases is close to the accuracy limits of the method, so a measured electric polarization or dielectric anomaly in the selenium compound could discriminate between the centrosymmetric and noncentrosymmetric arrangements.
  • Beyond the paper: if zero-point motion shifts the shared deuterium toward the center of the hydrogen bond, then the HSE06 double-well picture may over-stabilize charge order; path-integral or multicomponent DFT calculations could reveal whether the classical result is an artifact or the dominant physics.
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 paper investigates the low-temperature charge-ordered (CO) phase of the hydrogen-bonded molecular conductors κ-D3(Cat-EDT-TTF)2 and κ-D3(Cat-EDT-ST)2 using GGA-PBE and HSE06 calculations. The authors fix the lattice constants to the experimental values and relax the internal coordinates. They find that GGA-PBE relaxations starting from the experimental P-1 structure lose the CO distortion, while HSE06 retains it and reproduces the central C=C bond length asymmetry and hydrogen-bond geometry. They also construct a noncentrosymmetric P1 phase by reversing the D displacements and find it lies 8 meV/f.u. above the centrosymmetric phase. The paper concludes that HSE06 is highly accurate for the CO structure and that GGA fails to stabilize it.

Significance. If the central comparison is accepted, the paper provides a useful methodological benchmark: it shows that the standard HSE06 hybrid functional, used without parameter fitting, can preserve a charge-ordered distortion that GGA-PBE destroys, and it yields a concrete prediction of a close-lying ferroelectric-like CO phase that could be investigated experimentally. The authors also explicitly report a numerical check with HSE06-D3 and clearly state the limitations of the fixed-lattice protocol and of the classical treatment of D nuclei. However, because the relaxations begin from the experimental low-temperature geometry and never relax the cell, the paper overstates the thermodynamic stability of the CO phase; the significance of the results is correspondingly that of a conditional structural benchmark rather than a definitive stability calculation.

major comments (3)
  1. [Secs. III and IV B] The central stability conclusion rests on structural relaxations that start from the experimental low-temperature P-1 structure and hold lattice constants fixed to the experimental LT cell, as stated in Sec. III ('we use the experimental lattice parameters throughout this paper') and Sec. IV B (the initial state is 'the experimental structures of the D localized phase'). This protocol tests whether the experimental internal distortion survives internal-coordinate relaxation, but it does not test whether the CO phase is a stable minimum on the HSE06 potential-energy surface, because the high-temperature C2/c phase is never used as a starting point and the cell is not relaxed. Since the D ordering is coupled to the O···O hydrogen-bond distance, pinning the LT cell can itself stabilize the distorted internal coordinates, and the apparent GGA/HSE06 difference may be partly a boundary-condition effect. The abstract and Sec. IV B use the language 'structural stability of the CO phase,' which is stronger than the evidence. I ask the authors to either rephrase the stability claim as 'the CO internal distortion is preserved under HSE06 relaxation at the experimental lattice' or add full cell-plus-internal relaxations from both the C2/c and P-1 starting points.
  2. [Sec. IV B (energy difference between P-1 and P1)] The predicted noncentrosymmetric P1 phase is reported to lie only 8 meV per formula unit above the centrosymmetric phase, with no convergence tests or error estimates for this energy difference, and with no analysis of the dependence on k-point sampling, plane-wave cutoff, or exact-exchange integration grid. Given that HSE06 total-energy errors for competing molecular packings can readily exceed this scale, the Summary's statement that a 'stable' noncentrosymmetric CO phase was found is not justified by the reported data. Please report convergence tests for the energy difference and either compute it with an independent method (e.g., different k-point mesh or HSE06-D3) or explicitly present it as a tentative near-degeneracy.
  3. [Sec. III (classical treatment of D nuclei)] The calculation treats H/D as classical point charges and does not distinguish H from D, as stated in Sec. III: 'the present study does not consider the quantum effects of H or D atoms.' This is load-bearing for the paper's title claim about deuterium-coupled ordering, because the experimental phenomenology is isotope-specific (only the deuterated samples undergo the CO transition), and the authors cite multicomponent DFT studies showing that nuclear quantum motion can change the hydrogen-bond potential from double-well to single-well. The HSE06 classical-nucleus relaxation therefore cannot exclude the possibility that the CO structure is stabilized by neglecting zero-point motion, and it cannot address why H and D behave differently. The authors acknowledge this limitation, but it should be stated in the abstract and conclusions as a condition on the stability claim.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. III] There is a typo in the phrase 'van dar Waals interactions'; it should read 'van der Waals interactions.'
  2. [Sec. I] The compound name appears as 'ethylenedithiote-tetrathiafulvalene'; the standard spelling is 'ethylenedithio-tetrathiafulvalene.'
  3. [Sec. V] The HSE06 result for D-Se is semimetallic while experiments show insulating behavior; this qualification is stated in the Discussion, but it should also appear in the Summary so that the accuracy claim for HSE06 is not overgeneralized.
  4. [Sec. VI and VII] In the Summary, 'We also proposed possible patterns' should be 'We also propose possible patterns'; in the Acknowledgements, 'One the authors' should be 'One of the authors.'
  5. [General] The optimized atomic coordinates for the HSE06 P-1 and P1 structures are not provided as supplemental data; making them available would significantly improve reproducibility and allow other groups to test the 8 meV energy difference.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the HSE06 functional is used with standard parameters and benchmarked against external experimental structures; neither the CO-structure reproduction nor the predicted noncentrosymmetric phase reduces to a fit or to self-citation.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is that HSE06, with its standard 25% exact exchange and 0.2 Å−1 range-separation parameter, preserves the experimentally observed low-temperature charge-ordered internal geometry under relaxation, while GGA-PBE relaxes the same starting structure toward the symmetric high-temperature phase. This is a functional benchmark against external experimental structural data, not a circular construction: no parameter is fitted to the CO structure, the energy differences, or the predicted P1 phase. The noncentrosymmetric P1 structure is a genuine prediction obtained by reversing the D displacements in the initial state and then relaxing, and its 8 meV/f.u. energy separation is reported as a computed result rather than imposed. Citations to the authors' earlier work (Ref. 16) provide context about prior H-S calculations and a shallow potential-energy surface; they are not load-bearing for the HSE06-vs-GGA comparison, which is carried out with standard functionals and checked against experimental C=C and O–D bond lengths. The paper explicitly discloses its main limitations in Sec. III: it uses experimental lattice parameters throughout and treats H/D nuclei classically, so the 'stability' statement concerns local structural relaxation at fixed experimental cell rather than a global phase diagram. These are important caveats to the strength of the conclusion, but they do not make the derived structures equivalent to the inputs by construction. No equation or fitted parameter reduces the prediction to the input, so the derivation chain is self-contained. The appropriate circularity score is therefore 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The calculations use standard HSE06 parameters and experimental lattice constants; no free parameters are fitted. The main auxiliary assumptions are the applicability of the hybrid functional to this correlated molecular system, the classical treatment of nuclei, and the fixed experimental lattice.

assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption HSE06 exchange-correlation functional accurately describes the energetics and structure of strongly correlated molecular conductors.
    The central claim rests on HSE06 being more accurate than GGA for this system; its validity for this class is asserted rather than derived.
  • domain assumption Nuclei, including deuterium, can be treated as classical point charges within the Born-Oppenheimer approximation.
    Sec. III states that quantum effects of H/D are not considered, even though the experimental isotope effect is central to the ordering phenomenon.
  • domain assumption The experimental lattice parameters are fixed throughout the structural optimization.
    Sec. III explains that lattice parameters are taken from experiment because dispersion interactions are not reliably described; this prevents a fully ab initio phase-stability determination.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of First-principles study of the charge ordered phase in $\kappa$-D$_3$(Cat-EDT-TTF/ST)$_2$: Stability of $\pi$-electron deuterium coupled ordering in hydrogen-bonded molecular conductors." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/VKBBCTAW

@misc{pith2026190802580,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: First-principles study of the charge ordered phase in $\kappa$-D$_3$(Cat-EDT-TTF/ST)$_2$: Stability of $\pi$-electron deuterium coupled ordering in hydrogen-bonded molecular conductors},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/VKBBCTAW}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.02580}
}
abstract

We study the electronic and structural properties of the low-temperature ordered phase of hydrogen-bonded molecular conductors, $\kappa$-D$_3$(Cat-EDT-TTF)$_2$ and its selenium-substituted analog $\kappa$-D$_3$(Cat-EDT-ST)$_2$, by means of first-principles density functional theory~(DFT) calculations. In these compounds, the charge ordering in the $\pi$-electron system is coupled with the ordering of the displacements in the deuteriums forming the hydrogen-bond, equally shared by two oxygens in the high-temperature phase. While the structural optimization within the standard DFT method based on the generalized gradient approximation fails to reproduce the structural stability of the charge-ordered (CO) phase, we show that a hybrid functional of Heyd, Scuseria, and Ernzerhof can reproduce structural characters of the CO phase, owing to the more localized nature of the wave functions. Furthermore, using the ability of the hybrid functional to predict the electronic and structural properties, we find a stable noncentrosymmetric CO phase with another pattern of deuterium ordering.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.02580 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (Color online) (a) Molecular structure of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. (a) Band structure and (b) local density of states [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. (Color online) Schematic energy diagram of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. (Color online) (a) HSE06 band structure and (b) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. (Color online) Optimized bond length of the C=C [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. (Color online) Two different ordering patterns of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

64 extracted references · 52 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Terakura , author T

    author author K. Terakura , author T. Oguchi , author A. R. \ Williams , \ and\ author J. K\"ubler ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevB.30.4734 journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 30 ,\ pages 4734 ( year 1984 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.30.4734 1984

  2. [2]

    Miyazaki \ and\ author T

    author author T. Miyazaki \ and\ author T. Ohno ,\ @noop journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 59 ,\ pages R5269 ( year 1999 ) NoStop

    work page 1999

  3. [3]

    Nakamura , author Y

    author author K. Nakamura , author Y. Yoshimoto , author T. Kosugi , author R. Arita , \ and\ author M. Imada ,\ @noop journal journal J. Phys. Soc. Jpn \ volume 78 ,\ pages 083710 ( year 2009 ) NoStop

    work page 2009

  4. [4]

    Yamauchi , author T

    author author K. Yamauchi , author T. Fukushima , \ and\ author S. Picozzi ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevB.79.212404 journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 79 ,\ pages 212404 ( year 2009 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.79.212404 2009

  5. [5]

    Yoshimi , author H

    author author K. Yoshimi , author H. Seo , author S. Ishibashi , \ and\ author S. E. \ Brown ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.096402 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 108 ,\ pages 096402 ( year 2012 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.108.096402 2012

  6. [6]

    author author A. C. \ Jacko , author H. Feldner , author E. Rose , author F. Lissner , author M. Dressel , author R. Valent\' , \ and\ author H. O. \ Jeschke ,\ @noop journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 87 ,\ pages 155139 ( year 2013 ) NoStop

    work page 2013

  7. [7]

    Yamakawa , author T

    author author H. Yamakawa , author T. Miyamoto , author T. Morimoto , author H. Yada , author Y. Kinoshita , author M. Sotome , author N. Kida , author K. Yamamoto , author K. Iwano , author Y. Matsumoto , author S. Watanabe , author Y. Shimoi , author M. Suda , author H. M. \ Yamamoto , author H. Mori , \ and\ author H. Okamoto ,\ @noop journal journal S...

    work page 2016

  8. [8]

    Katoh , author T

    author author N. Katoh , author T. Miyazaki , \ and\ author T. Ohno ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevB.59.R12723 journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 59 ,\ pages R12723 ( year 1999 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.59.r12723 1999

Show all 64 references
  1. [9]

    author author V. I. \ Anisimov , author I. S. \ Elfimov , author N. Hamada , \ and\ author K. Terakura ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevB.54.4387 journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 54 ,\ pages 4387 ( year 1996 ) NoStop

    1996 doi

  2. [10]

    \ Jeng , author G

    author author H.-T. \ Jeng , author G. Y. \ Guo , \ and\ author D. J. \ Huang ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.156403 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 93 ,\ pages 156403 ( year 2004 ) NoStop

    2004 doi

  3. [11]

    author author A. S. \ Botana , author V. Pardo , author W. E. \ Pickett , \ and\ author M. R. \ Norman ,\ @noop journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 94 ,\ pages 081105(R) ( year 2016 ) NoStop

    2016

  4. [12]

    Seo , author C

    author author H. Seo , author C. Hotta , \ and\ author H. Fukuyama ,\ @noop journal journal Chem. Rev. \ volume 104 ,\ pages 5005 ( year 2004 ) NoStop

    2004

  5. [13]

    Kamo , author A

    author author H. Kamo , author A. Ueda , author T. Isono , author K. Takahashi , \ and\ author H. Mori ,\ @noop journal journal Tetrahedron Lett. \ volume 53 ,\ pages 4385 ( year 2012 ) NoStop

    2012

  6. [14]

    Isono , author H

    author author T. Isono , author H. Kamo , author A. Ueda , author K. Takahashi , author A. Nakao , author R. Kumai , author H. Nakao , author K. Kobayashi , author Y. Murakami , \ and\ author H. Mori ,\ @noop journal journal Nat. Commun. \ volume 4 ,\ pages 1344 ( year 2013 ) NoStop

    2013

  7. [15]

    Isono , author H

    author author T. Isono , author H. Kamo , author A. Ueda , author K. Takahashi , author M. Kimata , author H. Tajima , author S. Tsuchiya , author T. Terashima , author S. Uji , \ and\ author H. Mori ,\ @noop journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 112 ,\ pages 177201 ( year...

    2014

  8. [16]

    Tsumuraya , author H

    author author T. Tsumuraya , author H. Seo , author R. Kato , \ and\ author T. Miyazaki ,\ @noop journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 92 ,\ pages 035102 ( year 2015 ) NoStop

    2015

  9. [17]

    Kino \ and\ author H

    author author H. Kino \ and\ author H. Fukuyama ,\ @noop journal journal J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. \ volume 65 ,\ pages 2158 ( year 1996 ) NoStop

    1996

  10. [18]

    Shimozawa , author K

    author author M. Shimozawa , author K. Hashimoto , author A. Ueda , author Y. Suzuki , author K. Sugii , author S. Yamada , author Y. Imai , author R. Kobayashi , author K. Itoh , author S. Iguchi , author M. Naka , author S. Ishihara , author H. Mori , author T. Sasaki , \ an...

    doi

  11. [19]

    Ueda , author S

    author author A. Ueda , author S. Yamada , author T. Isono , author H. Kamo , author A. Nakao , author R. Kumai , author H. Nakao , author Y. Murakami , author K. Yamamoto , author Y. Nishio , \ and\ author H. Mori ,\ @noop journal journal J. Am. Chem. Soc. \ volume 136 ,\ pag...

    2014

  12. [20]

    Ueda , author A

    author author A. Ueda , author A. Hatakeyama , author M. Enomoto , author R. Kumai , author Y. Murakami , \ and\ author H. Mori ,\ @noop journal journal Chem. Eur. J. \ volume 21 ,\ pages 15020 ( year 2015 ) NoStop

    2015

  13. [21]

    Ueda , author K

    author author A. Ueda , author K. Kishimoto , author Y. Sunairi , author J. Yoshida , author H. Yamakawa , author T. Miyamoto , author T. Terashige , author H. Okamoto , \ and\ author H. Mori ,\ @noop journal journal J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. \ volume 88 ,\ pages 034710 ( year 2019 ) NoStop

    2019

  14. [22]

    Yamashita , author Y

    author author S. Yamashita , author Y. Nakazawa , author A. Ueda , \ and\ author H. Mori ,\ https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevB.95.184425 journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 95 ,\ pages 184425 ( year 2017 ) NoStop

    2017 doi

  15. [23]

    Naka \ and\ author S

    author author M. Naka \ and\ author S. Ishihara ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevB.97.245110 journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 97 ,\ pages 245110 ( year 2018 ) NoStop

    2018 doi

  16. [24]

    author author J. P. \ Perdew , author K. Burke , \ and\ author M. Ernzerhof ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevLett.77.3865 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 77 ,\ pages 3865 ( year 1996 ) NoStop

    1996 doi

  17. [25]

    Heyd , author G

    author author J. Heyd , author G. E. \ Scuseria , \ and\ author M. Ernzerhof ,\ @noop journal journal J. Chem. Phys. \ volume 118 ,\ pages 8207 ( year 2003 ) NoStop

    2003

  18. [26]

    Heyd \ and\ author G

    author author J. Heyd \ and\ author G. E. \ Scuseria ,\ @noop journal journal J. Chem. Phys. \ volume 121 ,\ pages 1187 ( year 2004 ) NoStop

    2004

  19. [27]

    Heyd , author J

    author author J. Heyd , author J. E. \ Peralta , author G. E. \ Scuseria , \ and\ author R. L. \ Martin ,\ 10.1063/1.2085170 journal journal J. Chem. Phys. \ volume 123 ,\ pages 174101 ( year 2005 ) NoStop

    2005 doi

  20. [28]

    Heyd , author G

    author author J. Heyd , author G. E. \ Scuseria , \ and\ author M. Ernzerhof ,\ 10.1063/1.2204597 journal journal J. Chem. Phys. \ volume 124 ,\ pages 219906 ( year 2006 ) NoStop

    2006 doi

  21. [29]

    Giovannetti , author S

    author author G. Giovannetti , author S. Kumar , author A. Stroppa , author J. van den Brink , \ and\ author S. Picozzi ,\ @noop journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 103 ,\ pages 266401 ( year 2009 ) NoStop

    2009

  22. [30]

    Fonari , author C

    author author A. Fonari , author C. Sutton , author J.-L. \ Br\'edas , \ and\ author V. Coropceanu ,\ @noop journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 90 ,\ pages 165205 ( year 2014 ) NoStop

    2014

  23. [31]

    Wimmer , author H

    author author E. Wimmer , author H. Krakauer , author M. Weinert , \ and\ author A. J. \ Freeman ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevB.24.864 journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 24 ,\ pages 864 ( year 1981 ) NoStop

    1981 doi

  24. [32]

    author author D. D. \ Koellng \ and\ author G. O. \ Arbman ,\ @noop journal journal J. Phys. F: Metal Phys. \ volume 5 ,\ pages 2041 ( year 1975 ) NoStop

    1975

  25. [33]

    Weinert ,\ @noop journal journal J

    author author M. Weinert ,\ @noop journal journal J. Math. Phys. \ volume 22 ,\ pages 2433 ( year 1981 ) NoStop

    1981

  26. [34]

    Tsumuraya , author J.-H

    author author T. Tsumuraya , author J.-H. \ Song , \ and\ author A. J. \ Freeman ,\ @noop journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 86 ,\ pages 075114 ( year 2012 ) NoStop

    2012

  27. [35]

    Vanderbilt ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevB.41.7892 journal journal Phys

    author author D. Vanderbilt ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevB.41.7892 journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 41 ,\ pages 7892 ( year 1990 ) NoStop

    1990 doi

  28. [36]

    Kresse \ and\ author J

    author author G. Kresse \ and\ author J. Furthm\"uller ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevB.54.11169 journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 54 ,\ pages 11169 ( year 1996 ) NoStop

    1996 doi

  29. [37]

    Kresse \ and\ author D

    author author G. Kresse \ and\ author D. Joubert ,\ @noop journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 59 ,\ pages 1758 ( year 1999 ) NoStop

    1999

  30. [38]

    Paier , author M

    author author J. Paier , author M. Marsman , author K. Hummer , author G. Kresse , author I. C. \ Gerber , \ and\ author J. G. \ \'A ngy \'a n ,\ @noop journal journal J. Chem. Phys. \ volume 124 ,\ pages 154709 ( year 2006 ) NoStop

    2006

  31. [39]

    Chen , author Y

    author author P. Chen , author Y. H. \ Chan , author X. Y. \ Fang , author Y. Zhang , author M. Y. \ Chou , author S. K. \ Mo , author Z. Hussain , author A. V. \ Fedorov , \ and\ author T. C. \ Chiang ,\ https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms9943 journal journal Nat. Commun. \ volume...

    doi

  32. [40]

    Hellgren , author J

    author author M. Hellgren , author J. Baima , author R. Bianco , author M. Calandra , author F. Mauri , \ and\ author L. Wirtz ,\ @noop journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 119 ,\ pages 176401 ( year 2017 ) NoStop

    2017

  33. [41]

    Foyevtsova , author A

    author author K. Foyevtsova , author A. Khazraie , author I. Elfimov , \ and\ author G. A. \ Sawatzky ,\ @noop journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 91 ,\ pages 121114(R) ( year 2015 ) NoStop

    2015

  34. [42]

    Smolyanyuk , author L

    author author A. Smolyanyuk , author L. Boeri , \ and\ author C. Franchini ,\ @noop journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 96 ,\ pages 035103 ( year 2017 ) NoStop

    2017

  35. [43]

    Ishii , author N

    author author F. Ishii , author N. Nagaosa , author Y. Tokura , \ and\ author K. Terakura ,\ @noop journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 73 ,\ pages 212105 ( year 2006 ) NoStop

    2006

  36. [44]

    Horiuchi , author Y

    author author S. Horiuchi , author Y. Tokunaga , author G. Giovannetti , author S. Picozzi , author H. Itoh , author R. Shimano , author R. Kumai , \ and\ author Y. Tokura ,\ @noop journal journal Nature \ volume 463 ,\ pages 789 ( year 2010 ) NoStop

    2010

  37. [45]

    Ishibashi , author S

    author author S. Ishibashi , author S. Horiuchi , \ and\ author R. Kumai ,\ @noop journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 97 ,\ pages 184102 ( year 2018 ) NoStop

    2018

  38. [46]

    @noop note We have checked that the optimized internal coordinates for the experimental lattice parameters considering van dar Waals dispersion corrections (HSE06-D3) Grimme_vdW_Disp_2010, GrimmeDampingD3, HSE_D3_Moellmann2014 are almost the same with those by HSE06. For examp...

  39. [47]

    @noop note BEDT-TTF = Bis(ethylenedithio)tetrathiafulvalene, X = anion molecule or atom NoStop

  40. [48]

    Naka \ and\ author S

    author author M. Naka \ and\ author S. Ishihara ,\ 10.1143/JPSJ.79.063707 journal journal J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. \ volume 79 ,\ pages 063707 ( year 2010 ) NoStop

    2010 doi

  41. [49]

    Abdel-Jawad , author I

    author author M. Abdel-Jawad , author I. Terasaki , author T. Sasaki , author N. Yoneyama , author N. Kobayashi , author Y. Uesu , \ and\ author C. Hotta ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevB.82.125119 journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 82 ,\ pages 125119 ( year 2010 ) NoStop

    doi

  42. [50]

    Gomi , author T

    author author H. Gomi , author T. Imai , author A. Takahashi , \ and\ author M. Aihara ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevB.82.035101 journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 82 ,\ pages 035101 ( year 2010 ) NoStop

    2010 doi

  43. [51]

    Naka \ and\ author S

    author author M. Naka \ and\ author S. Ishihara ,\ @noop journal journal J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. \ volume 82 ,\ pages 023701 ( year 2013 ) NoStop

    2013

  44. [52]

    Gomi , author M

    author author H. Gomi , author M. Ikenaga , author Y. Hiragi , author D. Segawa , author A. Takahashi , author T. J. \ Inagaki , \ and\ author M. Aihara ,\ @noop journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 87 ,\ pages 195126 ( year 2013 ) NoStop

    2013

  45. [53]

    Gati , author J

    author author E. Gati , author J. K. H. \ Fischer , author P. Lunkenheimer , author D. Zielke , author S. K\"ohler , author F. Kolb , author H.-A. K. \ von Nidda , author S. M. \ Winter , author H. Schubert , author J. A. \ Schlueter , author H. O. \ Jeschke , author R. Valent...

    doi

  46. [54]

    Hassan , author S

    author author N. Hassan , author S. Cunningham , author M. Mourigal , author E. I. \ Zhilyaeva , author S. A. \ Torunova , author R. N. \ Lyubovskaya , author J. A. \ Schlueter , \ and\ author N. Drichko ,\ @noop journal journal Science \ volume 360 ,\ pages 1101 ( year 2018 ) NoStop

    2018

  47. [55]

    author author R. D. \ King-Smith \ and\ author D. Vanderbilt ,\ https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevB.47.1651 journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 47 ,\ pages 1651 ( year 1993 ) NoStop

    1993 doi

  48. [56]

    Resta ,\ 10.1103/RevModPhys.66.899 journal journal Rev

    author author R. Resta ,\ 10.1103/RevModPhys.66.899 journal journal Rev. Mod. Phys. \ volume 66 ,\ pages 899 ( year 1994 ) NoStop

    1994 doi

  49. [57]

    Ishibashi , author K

    author author S. Ishibashi , author K. Terakura , \ and\ author S. Horiuchi ,\ @noop journal journal J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. \ volume 79 ,\ pages 043703 ( year 2010 ) NoStop

    2010

  50. [58]

    Yue , author K

    author author Y. Yue , author K. Yamamoto , author M. Uruichi , author C. Nakano , author K. Yakushi , author S. Yamada , author T. Hiejima , \ and\ author A. Kawamoto ,\ 10.1103/PhysRevB.82.075134 journal journal Phys. Rev. B \ volume 82 ,\ pages 075134 ( year 2010 ) NoStop

    doi

  51. [59]

    Tsumuraya , author T

    author author T. Tsumuraya , author T. Shishidou , \ and\ author T. Oguchi ,\ @noop journal journal J. Phys.: Condens. Matter \ volume 21 ,\ pages 185501 ( year 2009 ) NoStop

    2009

  52. [60]

    Yamamoto , author Y

    author author K. Yamamoto , author Y. Kanematsu , author U. Nagashima , author A. Ueda , author H. Mori , \ and\ author M. Tachikawa ,\ 10.1039/C6CP05414E journal journal Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. \ volume 18 ,\ pages 29673 ( year 2016 ) NoStop

    doi

  53. [61]

    Yamamoto , author Y

    author author K. Yamamoto , author Y. Kanematsu , author U. Nagashima , author A. Ueda , author H. Mori , \ and\ author M. Tachikawa ,\ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cplett.2017.02.073 journal journal Chem. Phys. Lett. \ volume 674 ,\ pages 168 ( year 2017 ) NoStop

    2017 doi

  54. [62]

    Grimme , author J

    author author S. Grimme , author J. Antony , author S. Ehrlich , \ and\ author H. Krieg ,\ @noop journal journal J. Chem. Phys. \ volume 132 ,\ pages 154104 ( year 2010 ) NoStop

    2010

  55. [63]

    Grimme , author S

    author author S. Grimme , author S. Ehrlich , \ and\ author L. Goerigk ,\ @noop journal journal J. Comput. Chem. \ volume 32 ,\ pages 1456 ( year 2011 ) NoStop

    2011

  56. [64]

    Moellmann \ and\ author S

    author author J. Moellmann \ and\ author S. Grimme ,\ @noop journal journal J. Phys. Chem. C \ volume 118 ,\ pages 7615 ( year 2014 ) NoStop

    2014

Pith tools

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