pith. sign in

arxiv: 2509.13155 · v2 · pith:Z6CBVXPFnew · submitted 2025-09-16 · ❄️ cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Understanding oxide surface stability: Theoretical insights from silver chromate

Augusto Facundes , Thiago T. Dorini , Theodora W. von Zuben , Miguel A. San-Miguel This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-21 22:56 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords silver chromatesurface stabilitydensity functional theoryatomistic thermodynamicsWulff constructionphotocatalysischromium coordinationoxide surfaces
0
0 comments X

The pith

The coordination of surface chromium-oxygen clusters determines silver chromate surface stability.

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

Silver chromate is studied for photocatalysis, where the exposed crystal faces strongly affect performance. The paper calculates the free energy of many surface orientations and terminations using density functional theory combined with atomistic thermodynamics that accounts for oxygen and silver chemical potentials. It finds that the number of oxygen atoms around chromium atoms on the surface is the main factor that lowers the energy and favors stability. These energies are then used to build Wulff constructions that show how the crystal shape and exposed facets change with external conditions. The results supply a practical way to predict the atomic structure of surfaces that will be present under realistic environments.

Core claim

The degree of coordination of surface chromium-oxygen clusters plays a decisive role in determining surface stability. The surface Gibbs free energy is evaluated as a function of oxygen and silver chemical potentials, enabling construction of stability trends under non-vacuum environments. Wulff constructions predict morphology evolution as a function of external conditions and identify the atomic structures of the exposed facets in the equilibrium crystal shape.

What carries the argument

The degree of coordination of surface chromium-oxygen clusters, which ranks different surface terminations by their effect on computed surface Gibbs free energy.

If this is right

  • Surfaces featuring more fully coordinated chromium-oxygen clusters exhibit lower surface energies and greater stability across ranges of chemical potentials.
  • Varying the oxygen and silver chemical potentials causes different facets to become favored, altering the overall equilibrium crystal morphology.
  • The identified stable atomic structures on exposed facets provide a basis for linking specific surface orientations to photocatalytic activity in silver chromate.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Coordination-based stability trends identified here may extend to related silver-based oxides or other transition-metal chromates under similar conditions.
  • The predicted morphology shifts could be checked by preparing crystals in controlled atmospheres and examining facet distributions with microscopy.
  • Knowing which facets dominate under given conditions offers a route to engineer nanoparticle shapes that maximize desired surface sites for catalysis.

Load-bearing premise

The first-principles atomistic thermodynamics model correctly computes surface Gibbs free energies from the oxygen and silver chemical potentials under non-vacuum conditions.

What would settle it

An experimental measurement of the dominant surface terminations or equilibrium crystal shape under controlled oxygen and silver chemical potentials that shows different facets than those predicted by the stability ordering and Wulff constructions.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.13155 by Augusto Facundes, Miguel A. San-Miguel, Theodora W. von Zuben, Thiago T. Dorini.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Representation of a Ag2CrO4 bulk and its clusters. The lattice parameters of the relaxed structure obtained in this work are very close to those found in experimental and theoretical investigations reported in the literature employ￾ing the PBE-GGA functional (as indicated in Table I), with an average percentage error of 7 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: A representation of the unrelaxed slab models for the (110) orien [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Surface Gibbs free energies as a function of oxygen chemical p [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Left side: surface diagram showing the regions of most stable ter [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (a) Termination classification in terms of the number of surface [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: At 100 K under silver-rich conditions (morphology 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Ideal Wulff morphologies for Ag2CrO4 as a function of temperature and silver chemical potential. 25 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Relaxed slab models for the most stable terminations present [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_7.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Silver chromate ($\mathrm{Ag_{2}CrO_{4}}$) has attracted considerable attention in recent years due to its promising photocatalytic performance, which strongly depends on the crystallographic orientation of its exposed surfaces. A detailed understanding of the structural stability of these surfaces under realistic conditions is therefore essential for advancing its applications. In this work, we combine density functional theory (DFT) with first-principles atomistic thermodynamics to systematically investigate the stability of multiple surface orientations and terminations of $\mathrm{Ag_{2}CrO_{4}}$. The surface Gibbs free energy was evaluated as a function of oxygen and silver chemical potentials, enabling the construction of stability trends under non-vacuum environments. Our results reveal that the degree of coordination of surface chromium-oxygen clusters plays a decisive role in determining surface stability. Furthermore, Wulff constructions predict morphology evolution as a function of external conditions, allowing us to identify the atomic structures of the exposed facets in the equilibrium crystal shape. These insights provide a fundamental framework for understanding surface-dependent photocatalytic activity in $\mathrm{Ag_{2}CrO_{4}}$ and related silver-based oxides.

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.

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. This manuscript applies density functional theory calculations combined with first-principles atomistic thermodynamics to investigate the stability of various surface terminations and orientations of silver chromate (Ag2CrO4). The surface Gibbs free energy is calculated as a function of Ag and O chemical potentials to determine stability under different conditions. The key finding is that the coordination degree of surface Cr-O clusters is the primary determinant of surface stability, with Wulff constructions used to predict the equilibrium morphology and exposed facets.

Significance. If the results hold, this work contributes to the understanding of surface-dependent properties in photocatalytic materials like Ag2CrO4. The chemical potential approach allows for realistic modeling of non-vacuum conditions, and the morphology predictions can inform experimental synthesis of specific facets. The study employs standard computational tools in the field and provides a framework for related silver-based oxides.

major comments (1)
  1. [Surface stability analysis] The claim that the degree of coordination of surface chromium-oxygen clusters plays a decisive role (abstract) may be influenced by changes in surface stoichiometry. Although the Gibbs free energy formula corrects for composition, the manuscript does not provide an explicit decomposition or fixed-stoichiometry comparison to isolate the coordination effect from overall atom count deviations. This makes the causal attribution to coordination correlative rather than definitively established.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract does not report error bars, convergence checks, or direct experimental comparisons for the stability claims, which would help support the central conclusions.
  2. [Methods] Additional details on the DFT settings, including the exchange-correlation functional, cutoff energy, and slab models, would improve reproducibility.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of our manuscript and for the constructive comment, which helps clarify the interpretation of our results. We address the point below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The claim that the degree of coordination of surface chromium-oxygen clusters plays a decisive role (abstract) may be influenced by changes in surface stoichiometry. Although the Gibbs free energy formula corrects for composition, the manuscript does not provide an explicit decomposition or fixed-stoichiometry comparison to isolate the coordination effect from overall atom count deviations. This makes the causal attribution to coordination correlative rather than definitively established.

    Authors: We appreciate the referee's observation. The surface Gibbs free energy expression does correct for stoichiometric deviations through the Ag and O chemical potential terms, and our comparisons across multiple terminations already show that lower-coordinated Cr-O clusters consistently yield higher energies even when stoichiometry varies. Nevertheless, we agree that an explicit isolation strengthens the causal claim. In the revised manuscript we will add a supplementary analysis that compares surfaces of fixed stoichiometry but differing Cr-O coordination (or, equivalently, decomposes the excess energy into coordination versus composition contributions). This will be presented as a new figure or table to demonstrate that coordination remains the dominant factor. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; standard atomistic thermodynamics applied to DFT results

full rationale

The paper computes surface Gibbs free energies via the standard first-principles atomistic thermodynamics expression γ(μ_Ag, μ_O) = [E_slab − Σ n_i μ_i]/A, treating chemical potentials as independent external variables bounded by bulk stability. Stability trends and the observed correlation with Cr-O coordination degree are direct outputs of these calculations across terminations, not quantities fitted from the same dataset or defined in terms of the target result. No self-citation chains, uniqueness theorems, or ansatzes imported from prior author work are invoked as load-bearing steps in the provided text. The derivation chain remains self-contained and externally falsifiable against independent DFT benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard DFT approximations for energies and the validity of first-principles thermodynamics for constructing surface phase diagrams; no new free parameters, ad-hoc entities, or fitted constants are introduced beyond the variable chemical potentials.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Density functional theory yields sufficiently accurate relative surface energies for stability ordering in this oxide system.
    Invoked implicitly when using DFT to evaluate surface Gibbs free energies.
  • domain assumption First-principles atomistic thermodynamics correctly describes equilibrium surface terminations as a function of external chemical potentials.
    Central to constructing the stability trends and Wulff shapes described in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5740 in / 1268 out tokens · 44775 ms · 2026-05-21T22:56:10.476796+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

87 extracted references · 87 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    (Theoretical) 10.224 7.025 5.653 406.200

    work page

  2. [2]

    (Theoretical) 10.117 7.011 5.618 400.730

    work page

  3. [3]

    (Theoretical) 10.194 7.001 5.634 400.090

    work page

  4. [4]

    (Experimental) 10.066 7.025 5.540 391.830

    work page

  5. [5]

    rich” and “poor conditions

    (Experimental) 10.065 7.0013 5.538 390.900 From the optimized bulk structure, the surface models were c ut out along the (110), (111), (100), (010), (001), (011), and (101) directions based on pr eviously published results in the literature regarding the photocatalytic activities of the material [7]. Symmetric slabs were chosen due to their ease of achiev...

    work page 2022

  6. [6]

    Y. V. B. De Santana, J. E. C. Gomes, L. Matos, G. H. Cruvinel, A. Perrin, C. Perrin, J. Andr` es, J. A. Varela, and E. Longo, Nanomaterials and Nanotechnology 4, 22 (2014), publisher: SAGE Publications Ltd STM

    work page 2014

  7. [7]

    L. F. d. Silva, A. C. Catto, W. Avansi, L. S. Cavalcante, J. Andr´ es, K. Agui r, V. R. Mastelaro, and E. Longo, Nanoscale 6, 4058 (2014), publisher: The Royal Society of Chemistry

    work page 2014

  8. [8]

    Soofivand, F

    F. Soofivand, F. Mohandes, and M. Salavati-Niasari, Materials Research B ulletin 48, 2084 (2013)

    work page 2084

  9. [9]

    Arslan Hamat and M

    B. Arslan Hamat and M. K. Aydinol, Journal of Solid State Chemistry 290, 121571 (2020)

    work page 2020

  10. [10]

    D. Xu, B. Cheng, J. Zhang, W. Wang, J. Yu, and W. Ho, Journal of Materials Chem istry A 3, 20153 (2015), publisher: The Royal Society of Chemistry

    work page 2015

  11. [11]

    a. C. Foggi, M. T. Fabbro, L. P. S. Santos, Y. V. B. de Santana, C. E. Vergani, A. L. M achado, E. Cordoncillo, J. Andr´ es, and E. Longo, Chemical Physics Letters 674, 125 (2017)

    work page 2017

  12. [12]

    Assis, C

    M. Assis, C. C. de Foggi, V. Teodoro, J. a. P. de Campos da Costa, C. E. Silva, T. Robeldo, P. F. Caperucci, C. E. Vergani, R. C. Borra, I. Sorribes, A. F. Gouveia, M . A. San-Miguel, J. Andr´ es, and E. Longo, Applied Surface Science 545, 148964 (2021)

    work page 2021

  13. [13]

    K. S. Ong, Y. L. Cheow, and S. M. Lee, Journal of Advanced Research 8, 393 (2017), publisher: Elsevier

    work page 2017

  14. [14]

    Dryden, International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents 51, 299 (2018)

    M. Dryden, International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents 51, 299 (2018). 29

    work page 2018

  15. [15]

    Gouveia, R

    A. Gouveia, R. Roca, N. Macedo, L. S. Cavalcante, E. Longo, M. A. San-Miguel, A. Al tomare, G. S. da Silva, and J. Andres, Journal of Materials Research and Technology 21, 4023 (2022)

    work page 2022

  16. [16]

    A. F. Gouveia, G. V. Bellucci, L. K. Ribeiro, M. Assis, I. L. V. Rosa, E. Longo, J. Andr´ es, and M. A. San-Miguel, Ecl´ etica Qu ´ ımica47, 80 (2022)

    work page 2022

  17. [17]

    P. F. d. S. Pereira, C. C. De Foggi, A. F. Gouveia, I. M. Pinatti, L. A. Cabr al, E. Guillamon, I. Sorribes, M. A. San-Miguel, C. E. Vergani, A. Z. Sim˜ oes, et al., International Journal of Molecular Sciences 23, 10589 (2022)

    work page 2022

  18. [18]

    De Sousa, A

    P. De Sousa, A. Gouveia, J. Sczancoski, I. Nogueira, E. Longo, M. San-Miguel, an d L. Caval- cante, Journal of Alloys and Compounds 855, 157377 (2021)

    work page 2021

  19. [19]

    Alvarez-Roca, A

    R. Alvarez-Roca, A. F. Gouveia, C. C. De Foggi, P. S. Lemos, L. Gracia, L. F. Da Silva, C. E. Vergani, M. San-Miguel, E. Longo, and J. Andres, Inorganic Chemistry 60, 1062 (2020)

    work page 2020

  20. [20]

    Teodoro, A

    V. Teodoro, A. F. Gouveia, T. R. Machado, A. B. Trench, N. Jacomaci, M. Assis, G. E. Marques, M. D. Teodoro, M. A. San-Miguel, J. Andr´ es, et al., Ceramics International 48, 3740 (2022)

    work page 2022

  21. [21]

    Lipsky, L

    F. Lipsky, L. H. da Silveira Lacerda, S. R. de Lazaro, E. Longo, J. Andr´ es, and M. A. San- Miguel, RSC Advances 10, 30640 (2020)

    work page 2020

  22. [22]

    J. C. Souza, S. C. Lemos, M. Assis, C. H. Fernandes, L. K. Ribeiro, Y. Nune z-de la Rosa, M. D. Teodoro, L. Gracia, J. Andres, L. H. Mascaro, et al., ACS Omega 9, 35537 (2024)

    work page 2024

  23. [23]

    Y. Du, J. Li, X. Ma, and Q. Guo, Vacuum 226, 113323 (2024)

    work page 2024

  24. [24]

    X. Ren, X. Zhang, R. Guo, X. Li, Y. Peng, X. Zhao, and X. Pu, Separation and Purificat ion Technology 270, 118797 (2021)

    work page 2021

  25. [25]

    Y. Deng, L. Tang, G. Zeng, J. Wang, Y. Zhou, J. Wang, J. Tang, Y. Liu, B. Peng, and F. Chen, Journal of Molecular Catalysis A: Chemical 421, 209 (2016)

    work page 2016

  26. [26]

    D. Xu, B. Cheng, S. Cao, and J. Yu, Applied Catalysis B: Environmental 164, 380 (2015)

    work page 2015

  27. [27]

    Y. Liu, H. Yu, M. Cai, and J. Sun, Catalysis Communications 26, 63 (2012)

    work page 2012

  28. [28]

    Nosaka and A

    Y. Nosaka and A. Y. Nosaka, Chemical Reviews 117, 11302 (2017), publisher: American Chemical Society

    work page 2017

  29. [29]

    Feizpoor, A

    S. Feizpoor, A. Habibi-Yangjeh, and S. Vadivel, Journal of Photochemi stry and Photobiology A: Chemistry 341, 57 (2017)

    work page 2017

  30. [30]

    J. Luo, X. Zhou, L. Ma, and X. Xu, Applied Surface Science 390, 357 (2016)

    work page 2016

  31. [31]

    Zhang, X

    C. Zhang, X. Wang, J. Du, Z. Gu, and Y. Zhao, Advanced Science 8, 2002797 (2021). 30

    work page 2021

  32. [32]

    Bayati-Komitaki, S

    N. Bayati-Komitaki, S. H. Ganduh, A. H. Alzaidy, and M. Salavati-Niasari, Bi omedicine & Pharmacotherapy 180, 117457 (2024)

    work page 2024

  33. [33]

    M. Dai, Q. Niu, S. Wu, Y. Lin, J. K. Biswas, and C. Yang, Environmental Ch emistry Letters 22, 3059 (2024)

    work page 2024

  34. [34]

    K. N. Shoudho, S. Uddin, M. M. H. Rumon, and M. S. Shakil, ACS Omega 9, 33303 (2024)

    work page 2024

  35. [35]

    F. O. Osazee, K. E. Mokobia, and I. H. Ifijen, Biomedical Materials & Dev ices 2, 614 (2024)

    work page 2024

  36. [36]

    Lipsky, L

    F. Lipsky, L. H. D. S. Lacerda, L. Gracia, B. G. Foschiani, M. Assis, M. Oli va, E. Longo, J. Andr´ es, and M. A. San-Miguel, The Journal of Physical Chemistry C 127, 23235 (2023)

    work page 2023

  37. [37]

    J. Wang, B. Wu, X. Zheng, J. Ma, W. Yu, B. Chen, and C. Chu, Environmen tal Science & Technology 58, 10623 (2024)

    work page 2024

  38. [38]

    J. Cao, Q. Wu, X. Liu, X. Zhu, C. Huang, X. Wang, and Y. Song, Journal of Environment al Sciences 151, 200 (2025)

    work page 2025

  39. [39]

    Gonz´ alez and X

    S. Gonz´ alez and X. Jaramillo-Fierro, International Journal of Molecular S ciences 26, 1756 (2025)

    work page 2025

  40. [40]

    K. M. Ta, C. J. Neal, M. Coathup, S. Seal, L. J. Gillie, D. J. Cooke, S. C . Parker, and M. Molinari, The Journal of Physical Chemistry C https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jp cc.5c03050 (2025)

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.jp 2025

  41. [41]

    Jiang, J.-G

    W.-X. Jiang, J.-G. Han, and H. Guo, Separation and Purification Technology 330, 125309 (2024)

    work page 2024

  42. [42]

    Hohenberg and W

    P. Hohenberg and W. Kohn, Physical Review 136, B864 (1964), publisher: American Physical Society

    work page 1964

  43. [43]

    Kohn and L

    W. Kohn and L. J. Sham, Physical Review 140, A1133 (1965), publisher: American Physical Society

    work page 1965

  44. [44]

    A. F. Gouveia, F. Lipsky, M. A. San-Miguel, E. Longo, and J. Andr´ es, Comput ational Mate- rials Today 1, 100001 (2024)

    work page 2024

  45. [45]

    A. F. Gouveia, L. Gracia, E. Longo, M. A. San-Miguel, and J. Andres, Computation al Mate- rials Science 188, 110217 (2021)

    work page 2021

  46. [46]

    A. F. Gouveia, L. H. S. Lacerda, E. de Oliveira Gomes, L. Gracia, M. Assis, C . C. de Foggi, E. Longo, J. Andr´ es, and M. A. San-Miguel, in Advanced Semiconductors (Springer, 2025) pp. 55–85. 31

    work page 2025

  47. [47]

    Santamar ´ ıa-P´ erez, E

    D. Santamar ´ ıa-P´ erez, E. Bandiello, D. Errandonea, J. Ruiz-Fuertes, O. Gomis, J. A. Sans, F. J. Manj´ on, P. Rodr ´ ıguez-Hern´ andez, and A. Mu˜ noz, The Journal of Physical Chemistry C 117, 12239 (2013), publisher: American Chemical Society

    work page 2013

  48. [48]

    Zhang, W

    J. Zhang, W. Yu, J. Liu, and B. Liu, Applied Surface Science Graphene and C3N4-based Photocatalysts, 358, 457 (2015)

    work page 2015

  49. [49]

    G. S. Silva, L. Gracia, M. T. Fabbro, L. P. Serejo dos Santos, H. Beltr´ an- Mir, E. Cordoncillo, E. Longo, and J. Andr´ es, Inorganic Chemistry55, 8961 (2016), publisher: American Chemical Society

    work page 2016

  50. [50]

    M. T. Fabbro, L. Gracia, G. S. Silva, L. P. S. Santos, J. Andr´ es, E. Cordon cillo, and E. Longo, Journal of Solid State Chemistry 239, 220 (2016)

    work page 2016

  51. [51]

    A. K. Kushwaha, S. Ugur, S. Akbudak, and G. Ugur, Journal of Alloys and Compound s 704, 101 (2017)

    work page 2017

  52. [52]

    Sousa, S

    C. Sousa, S. Tosoni, and F. Illas, Chemical Reviews 113, 4456 (2013), publisher: American Chemical Society

    work page 2013

  53. [53]

    L. H. d. S. Lacerda, E. Longo, J. Andr´ es, and M. A. San-Miguel, Journal of Solid S tate Chemistry 305, 122670 (2022)

    work page 2022

  54. [54]

    S. K. Meena, N. L. Heda, G. Arora, L. Meena, and B. L. Ahuja, Physica B: Condens ed Matter 560, 236 (2019)

    work page 2019

  55. [55]

    Reuter and M

    K. Reuter and M. Scheffler, Physical Review B 65, 035406 (2001)

    work page 2001

  56. [56]

    Rogal and K

    J. Rogal and K. Reuter, Experiment, modeling and simulation of gas-su rface interactions for reactive flows in hypersonic flights 14, 2 (2007)

    work page 2007

  57. [57]

    Stampfl, M

    C. Stampfl, M. Veronica Ganduglia-Pirovano, K. Reuter, and M. Scheffl er, Surface Science 500, 368 (2002)

    work page 2002

  58. [58]

    Reuter, C

    K. Reuter, C. Stampf, and M. Scheffler, in Handbook of Materials Modeling: Methods (Springer, 2005) pp. 149–194

    work page 2005

  59. [59]

    Dai, J.-W

    J.-Q. Dai, J.-W. Xu, and J.-H. Zhu, ACS Applied Materials & Interfac es 9, 3168 (2017), publisher: American Chemical Society

    work page 2017

  60. [60]

    Heifets, S

    E. Heifets, S. Piskunov, E. A. Kotomin, Y. F. Zhukovskii, and D. E. Ellis, Physical Review B 75, 115417 (2007), publisher: American Physical Society

    work page 2007

  61. [61]

    Heifets, J

    E. Heifets, J. Ho, and B. Merinov, Physical Review B 75, 155431 (2007)

    work page 2007

  62. [62]

    Bottin, F

    F. Bottin, F. Finocchi, and C. Noguera, Physical Review B 68, 035418 (2003). 32

    work page 2003

  63. [63]

    B. Liu, J. H. Liu, J. Yang, D. Wang, C. C. Ye, D. Y. Wang, M. Avdeev, S. Shi, J . H. Yang, and W. Q. Zhang https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2019.227693 (2020)

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jpowsour.2019.227693 2019

  64. [64]

    Zeng and J

    Z. Zeng and J. Greeley, Nano Energy Electrocatalysis, 29, 369 (2016)

    work page 2016

  65. [65]

    Dorini, F

    T. Dorini, F. Lipsky, A. Rodrigues-Pinheiro, J. Andr´ es, E. Longo, and M. San-Miguel, Surfaces and Interfaces 56, 105530 (2025)

    work page 2025

  66. [66]

    Lee and A

    T. Lee and A. Soon, Nature Catalysis 7, 4 (2024)

    work page 2024

  67. [67]

    Suleiman, N

    I. Suleiman, N. Assaf, M. M. Al-Rajabi, and Z. Al-Qodah, Physica Scri pta 100, 065911 (2025)

    work page 2025

  68. [68]

    Muller, A

    A. Muller, A. Comas-Vives, and C. Coperet, The Journal of Physical Chem istry C 125, 396 (2020)

    work page 2020

  69. [69]

    Poberˇ znik, G

    M. Poberˇ znik, G. Herrero-Saboya, D. Makovec, D. Lisjak, and L. Martin -Samos, Applied Surface Science 637, 157890 (2023)

    work page 2023

  70. [70]

    Kresse and J

    G. Kresse and J. Furthm¨ uller, Physical Review B 54, 11169 (1996), publisher: American Physical Society

    work page 1996

  71. [71]

    Kresse and D

    G. Kresse and D. Joubert, Phys. Rev. B 59, 1758 (1999)

    work page 1999

  72. [72]

    J. P. Perdew, K. Burke, and M. Ernzerhof, Physical Review Lette rs 77, 3865 (1996), publisher: American Physical Society

    work page 1996

  73. [73]

    J. P. Perdew, J. A. Chevary, S. H. Vosko, K. A. Jackson, M. R. Pederson, D. J. Singh, and C. Fiolhais, Physical Review B 46, 6671 (1992), publisher: American Physical Society

    work page 1992

  74. [74]

    P. E. Bl¨ ochl, Physical Review B 50, 17953 (1994), publisher: American Physical Society

    work page 1994

  75. [75]

    H. J. Monkhorst and J. D. Pack, Physical review B 13, 5188 (1976)

    work page 1976

  76. [76]

    R. Tran, Z. Xu, B. Radhakrishnan, D. Winston, W. Sun, K. A. Persson, an d S. P. Ong, Scientific Data 3, 1 (2016)

    work page 2016

  77. [77]

    V. Wang, N. Xu, J.-C. Liu, G. Tang, and W.-T. Geng, Computer Physics Commu nications 267, 108033 (2021)

    work page 2021

  78. [78]

    Trevizam Dorini and M

    T. Trevizam Dorini and M. San Miguel, Applied Surface Science 714, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2025.164350 (2025)

    work page doi:10.1016/j.apsusc.2025.164350 2025

  79. [79]

    Kittel and P

    C. Kittel and P. McEuen, Introduction to solid state physics (John Wiley & Sons, 2018)

    work page 2018

  80. [80]

    D. A. McQuarrie, Statistical Mechanics (Harper & Row, 1973)

    work page 1973

Showing first 80 references.