Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 71 references

Structural phase transitions between layered Indium Selenide for inte-grated photonic memory

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A single nanosecond laser pulse can reversibly switch In2Se3 between two layered crystal states, demonstrating a nonvolatile optical memory.

desk verdict Reversible crystalline-crystalline switching in In2Se3 on a microring is plausibly shown, but the device-level phase identity rests on Raman and thickness alone; worth refereeing with that gap addressed. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.09474 v1 pith:ZFKP3RAH submitted 2025-02-13 physics.optics

Tiantian Li , Yong Wang , Wei Li , Dun Mao , Chris J. Benmore , Igor Evangelista , Huadan Xing , Qiu Li
show 5 more authors
Feifan Wang Ganesh Sivaraman Anderson Janotti Stephanie Law Tingyi Gu
This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.optics
keywords In2Se3phase-changematerialintegratedphotonicmemorymicroringresonatornonvolatileopticalswitchingpairdistributionfunctioncrystalline-crystallinephasetransition
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 tries to establish that a single nanosecond laser pulse can switch indium selenide (In2Se3) between two layered crystalline states, α and β, without melting, and that this switch can serve as a nonvolatile optical memory in an integrated silicon photonic circuit. It matters because today's optical phase-change memories rely on slow, energy-hungry amorphous-to-crystalline transitions that must heat material above its melting point. If the claim holds, optical memory elements could be faster and far more energy-efficient, and because both In2Se3 states are transparent at telecom wavelengths, the memory would introduce little absorption loss. The paper supports the claim with device measurements on a hybrid In2Se3-silicon microring resonator, with atomistic transition pathways derived from high-energy X-ray pair distribution functions, and with density-functional-theory-calculated refractive index spectra.

What carries the argument

The central object is the α↔β polytype pair of layered In2Se3, two rhombohedral structures built of identical quintuple layers. The mechanism that carries the argument is the interlayer shear glide plus an isosymmetric intra-layer twist: thermal or photothermal energy exceeding the weak van der Waals bonding between quintuple layers lets whole layers slide so that outer selenium atoms fall into interstitial sites of neighbouring layers, compressing the interlayer distance; a subsequent intra-quintuple-layer twist from wurtzite-type to face-centred-cubic coordination completes the β-state (and reverses for β→α). Because both polytypes share the same rhombohedral space group, the transition is isosymmetric and needs no bond breaking, which is what makes single-pulse, non-melting switching plausible. The pathway is observed directly through high-resolution pair distribution functions and in-situ high-energy X-ray diffraction.

What would settle it

Take the same transferred MBE flake from a switched microring device, after a single 0.25 nJ pulse, and collect high-energy X-ray diffraction or selected-area electron diffraction directly from the 1.5 µm covered region; if the pattern is not the β-In2Se3 pattern (or if the reverse pulse does not restore the α pattern), the central claim is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that α- and β-In2Se3, two layered polytypes built from identical Se–In–Se–In–Se quintuple layers, can be interconverted by a single ~15 ns, 1064 nm laser pulse through a low-energy interlayer shear glide followed by a small intra-layer atomic twist. Because both structures share the same rhombohedral symmetry, the switch requires little atomic rearrangement and does not break the crystal lattice, which is what distinguishes it from amorphous-crystalline phase-change materials. In a hybrid In2Se3–silicon microring resonator, one pulse at ~0.25 nJ shifts the resonance by ~100 pm and raises the extinction ratio from 4.45 to 6.27 dB, and a stronger pulse (~0.56 nJ) restores the original state. The paper traces the atomistic path with temperature-dependent pair distribution functions, identifies a first-order transition near 220°C in bulk powder, and reports large reversible resistivity changes (up to six orders of magnitude thermally) in the same material.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the optically switched state inside the microring device is the same α-to-β structural transition that was characterized in bulk powder, even though the device film contains bismuth doping, a seed layer, and a measured transition temperature of 400–600°C, well above the powder's ~220°C; if the switched state is instead caused by oxidation, strain relaxation, or another polytype, the memory claim fails.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A single ~15 ns pulse toggles the resonator between α- and β-states in a nonvolatile way, and a roughly two-times-stronger pulse restores the original state, so write and erase do not require melting or rapid quenching.
  • Both α- and β-In2Se3 have optical bandgaps above 1 eV, so a memory element based on this transition stays transparent at 1550 nm and can modulate phase rather than absorbing light.
  • The extracted effective-index change (Δn ≈ 0.45 at 1550 nm) and the fact that the α, β and silicon indices straddle each other allow hybrid silicon–In2Se3 waveguides to tune their resonance in either direction.
  • The same films show up to six orders of magnitude resistivity switching under heating, up to three orders under femtosecond pulsed light, and reproducible transistor hysteresis, so the material can serve both optical and electronic memory functions.
  • The measured incremental linear absorption rate of ~3.3 GHz for a 1.5 µm In2Se3 covered length is small enough that the phase-change element does not dominate resonator loss.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the Bi-doping explanation for the raised transition temperature is correct, then removing the seed-layer diffusion should lower the switching energy and improve cyclability; this is a testable prediction the authors raise but do not verify.
  • The AFM thickness change of 15±6% is roughly double the DFT-predicted 8% volume contrast, suggesting that strain or interface effects contribute to the device-level signal; whether those effects aid or limit retention is left open.
  • Because the switched state inside the microring was not directly structurally verified, an alternative mechanism such as local oxidation or strain relaxation would also fit some observations; settling this would confirm or refute the memory mechanism.
  • The same low-entropy shear-glide argument, if general, could make other layered chalcogenides candidates for fast crystalline-crystalline optical memory, but the paper only studies In2Se3.
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

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports a crystalline-crystalline phase-change platform based on α- and β-In2Se3 for integrated photonic memory. The authors combine HSE06 DFT calculations, temperature-dependent high-energy XRD/PDF and DSC on bulk powder, ellipsometry on MBE-grown films, and hybrid In2Se3-silicon microring resonator measurements. They demonstrate reversible resonance shifts upon pulsed 1064 nm excitation, correlate Raman spectra with the α↔β assignment, measure resistivity switching, and extract linear absorption and scattering losses via nonlinear coupled-mode theory. The central claim is that a single ~15 ns pulse can nonvolatily toggle the resonator between the two layered crystalline states with a refractive-index contrast around 0.45 at 1550 nm.

Significance. If the claims hold, the work is significant because it proposes a low-energy crystalline-crystalline switching mechanism that could address the speed and energy bottlenecks of amorphous-crystalline optical phase-change materials. The paper's strengths include parameter-free HSE06 predictions of bandgaps and refractive-index spectra compared directly with ellipsometry, a detailed PDF-based transition pathway, and device-level resonator measurements with coupled-mode-theory analysis. The main caveats are the unverified phase identity of the switched device flake and quantitative inconsistencies in the reported pulse energies and loss values, which currently prevent full endorsement of the quantitative claims.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 2, Figure 1b-f, and SI Section S5] The central claim that the optically switched device flake is β-In2Se3 rests on the micro-Raman peak shift (104→110 cm⁻¹) and an AFM thickness change (33.1→27.9 nm), whereas the α↔β structural transition is established by XRD/PDF and DSC on bulk powder. The device flake is never examined by XRD or PDF, and its composition is not measured; SI Section S5 states that the (Bi,In)2Se3 seed layer stoichiometry and interface are 'not fully characterized,' and Section 7 attributes the much higher MBE transition temperature (400–600 °C versus ~220 °C) to Bi doping without verifying it. Because oxidation, strain relaxation, or a Bi-containing polytype could produce similar Raman and thickness changes, please provide direct structural/compositional evidence on the switched flake (e.g., micro-XRD/PDF, EDS, or control experiments) or explicitly qualify the claim as 'consistent with α↔β' rather than a demonstrated transition.
  2. [Section 2 and Table S5] The main text reports α→β and β→α switching at pulse energies of 0.25 nJ and 0.56 nJ, but Table S5 lists the same transitions at ~5 nJ/μm² and ~11 nJ/μm² for a 10 μm spot, which corresponds to total pulse energies of roughly 0.4 μJ and 0.9 μJ; the stated average powers (4 mW and 8.7 mW) at the relevant repetition rates also imply hundreds of nJ per pulse. These numbers are mutually inconsistent by about three orders of magnitude. Please correct the units or the fluence values, because the energy-efficiency advantage is a central quantitative claim.
  3. [Abstract and SI Section S3/Table S2] The abstract states that the nonlinear resonator transmission spectra measure an incremental linear loss rate of 3.3 GHz introduced by the 1.5 μm long In2Se3 covered layer, but the nonlinear spectroscopy in SI Section S3 and Table S2 compares a monolithic and a hybrid device with 5 μm long In2Se3 coverage; the 16.7→20 GHz difference is extracted for that 5 μm geometry. Please reconcile the coverage length used in the loss extraction or normalize the incremental loss to the covered length, and report the uncertainty of the fitted loss rates.
  4. [Sections 5 and 7, and SI Section S2] The phase-transition temperature of the MBE film is reported inconsistently—Section 5 shows a steep resistivity drop near 350 °C, while Section 7 quotes 400–600 °C for the MBE film—and the simulated photothermal profiles in SI Section S2 do not state the peak temperatures reached under the reported pulse energies. Without a quantitative comparison of the simulated peak temperature to the actual MBE transition temperature, the photo-thermal mechanism and the 'low activation energy' claim are not fully supported; please provide peak temperatures and reconcile the transition-temperature values.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract, Section 9, and Table S5] The abstract says 'single nanosecond pulse,' but the laser is described as ~15 ns pulses and Figure 1g uses 30-pulse trains; please specify the pulse duration and single-versus-multiple-pulse conditions precisely.
  2. [Figure 1d, Section 2, and SI Figure S3] The film thickness is given as ~50 nm in the Figure 1d caption, 33.1 nm for the α-state in Section 2, and 38.1 nm average including 5 nm residual in SI Figure S3; please unify these numbers and state which value is used in the mode simulations.
  3. [Abstract] The abstract contains 'ab-initial calculations,' which should be 'ab initio calculations,' and 'memoristive,' which should be 'memristive.'
  4. [Section 4] The statement about 'optical transparency at telecommunication wavelengths' should specify the wavelength range over which k is below 10⁻⁵; at the 1064 nm switching wavelength the measured k values are 0.011 (α) and 0.032 (β), which are not transparent.
  5. [Conclusion] The conclusion says 'nearly double energy' for the β→α transition, but 0.56 nJ versus 0.25 nJ is more than double; please rephrase.
  6. [SI Table S2] The entry 'β2(cm/GW) 1.5 6 a)' is poorly formatted; please clarify the value and the footnote placement.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central claims rest on independent measurements (DSC, XRD/PDF, ellipsometry, device transmission) and parameter-free HSE06 calculations, with no fitted parameter renamed as a prediction.

full rationale

Walking the derivation chain, each load-bearing step has independent content. The phase-transition mechanism is characterized on high-purity powder by DSC and in-situ high-energy XRD/PDF, and the MBE film states are verified by micro-Raman and XRD; the device-level switching is measured directly through microring transmission shifts and Raman checks. The DFT complex refractive index spectra are parameter-free HSE06 calculations compared against ellipsometry data, not fitted to them. The effective-index values (2.49 to 2.53) are computed from the measured refractive index and AFM thickness, and the resulting predicted resonance shift (148 pm) is compared to the measured 120 pm as a forward consistency check, not extracted by fitting the claim. The CMT fits in Supporting Table S2 extract loss rates from the same nonlinear transmission spectra; these are parameter extractions, not predictions of independent data, so they do not constitute fitted-input-called-prediction circularity. Self-citations such as [38], [41], and [69] provide prior computational and growth information with independent, stated assumptions and are not used to forbid alternatives or to import a uniqueness theorem. The skeptic's concern that the transferred Bi-doped flake's switched state was not directly identified by XRD is a correctness/verification risk, not a circularity: the paper does not define the device result in terms of the bulk characterization, it infers phase identity indirectly. No equation or claim reduces to its own input by construction, so the appropriate circularity verdict is no significant circularity (score 0).

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard computational methods (DFT/HSE06) and a set of material identification assumptions. The largest free parameters are the fitted loss parameters in the CMT model; the largest unverified assumption is that the device-level phase transition matches the bulk powder transition.

free parameters (5)
  • Linear absorption rate 1/tau_lin (hybrid device) = 20 GHz
    Fitted to the nonlinear transmission spectrum of the In2Se3-covered microring using coupled-mode theory (Supporting Table S2).
  • Effective TPA coefficient beta_2 (hybrid device) = 6 cm/GW
    Fitted to the same nonlinear transmission data.
  • Effective carrier lifetime tau_FCA (hybrid device) = 0.7 ns
    Fitted to the nonlinear transmission data.
  • Coupling quality factor Q_in (hybrid device) = 28k
    Fitted to resonance lineshape.
  • Intrinsic quality factor Q_v (hybrid device) = 28k
    Fitted to resonance lineshape.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math HSE06 hybrid functional provides accurate bandgaps and dielectric functions for In2Se3.
    Used for all DFT predictions of band structure and refractive index (Methods, Computational Methods).
  • domain assumption The alpha and beta phases are identified by Raman peaks at ~104 and ~110 cm-1 and by XRD peaks at 18.35 and 18.80 degrees.
    Assumed to correspond to the structural states; literature values vary and the paper notes controversy in refs 26-35.
  • ad hoc to paper The phase transition in the transferred MBE flake on the microring is the same alpha-beta transition as in bulk powder.
    The MBE film shows 400-600 degrees C transition temperature vs 220 degrees C in powder DSC; the paper attributes the difference to Bi doping without direct verification (Discussion).
  • domain assumption Photo-thermal heating is the dominant mechanism for the optically induced switching.
    The paper assumes the 1064 nm pulse is absorbed via Bi doping and heats the film above the transition temperature (Methods, Figure S4).
  • standard math The coupled-mode theory model accurately describes the resonator nonlinearities.
    Used to extract loss rates from nonlinear transmission spectra (Supporting Information S3).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Structural phase transitions between layered Indium Selenide for inte-grated photonic memory." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZFKP3RAH

@misc{pith2026250209474,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Structural phase transitions between layered Indium Selenide for inte-grated photonic memory},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZFKP3RAH}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.09474}
}
read the original abstract

The primary mechanism of optical memristive devices relies on the phase transitions between amorphous-crystalline states. The slow or energy hungry amorphous-crystalline transitions in optical phase-change materials are detrimental to the devices scalability and performance. Leveraging the integrated photonic platform, we demonstrate a single nanosecond pulse triggered nonvolatile and reversible switching between two layered structures of indium selenide (In2Se3). High resolution pair distribution function reveals the detailed atomistic transition pathways between the layered structures. With inter-layer shear glide and isosymmetric phase transition, the switching between alpha and beta structural states contain low re-configurational entropy, allowing reversible switching between layered structures. Broadband refractive index contrast, optical transparency, and volumetric effect in the crystalline-crystalline phase transition are experimentally characterized in molecular beam epitaxy-grown thin films and compared to ab initials calculations. The nonlinear resonator transmission spectra measure an incremental linear loss rate of 3.3 GHz introduced by 1.5 micrometer long In2Se3 covered lay-er, resulting from the combinations of material absorption and scattering.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.09474 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Nonvolatile all-optical memory in epitaxial In2Se3-silicon microring resonators. a, Calculated extinction coefficient spectra for the two layered crystalline states in In2Se3. Insets: Correspondent at Rhombohedral primitive cells for α- and β-states. b, Micro-Raman spectra of MBE grown thin film In2Se3. Inset: the optical microscope image for In2Se3-Si microring device. c, Normalized transmission spectra for the hyb… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Structural transition process in layered Indium (III) Selenide materials. a, Measured heat flow dynamics by differential scanning calorimetry. The red and black curves show endo￾thermic (220oC) and exothermic (190oC) peaks during heating and cooling, respectively. The sample temperature is cycled between 25oC to 350oC for two loops, at the rate of 20oC/min. b, Correspondent high-energy X-ray diffraction, named reduc… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Complex refractive indexes in MBE grown α- and β-In2Se3, with thermally activated phase transitions. a, Comparison of measured (solid curves) and DFT calculated (dashed curves) refractive index spectra in α- and b β-In2Se3. The blue and red curves represent real and imagi￾nary part of the complex refractive index. Inset in a: Band diagrams of the α-In2Se3 with optical bandgap of 1.44 eV, and b: β-In2Se3 with optical… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Resistance switching in MBE In2Se3 thin film with thermal, electric field, and pulsed laser excitations. a, In-situ measurement of resistance with ramping and declining substrate temperature. The lines are eye guiders. Inset: Hysteresis loop of a transistor defined on …

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

71 extracted references · 70 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Feldmann, N

    J. Feldmann, N. Youngblood, M. Karpov, H. Gehring, X. Li, M. Stappers, M. Le Gallo, X. Fu, A. Lukashchuk, A. S. Raja, J. Liu, C. D. Wright, A. Sebastian, T. J. Kippenberg, W. H. P. Pernice, H. Bhaskaran, Nature 2021, 589, 52-58

    work page 2021

  2. [2]

    Zhang, R

    W. Zhang, R. Mazzarello, M. Wuttig, E. Ma, Nat. Rev. Mater. 2019, 4, 150-168. 13

    work page 2019

  3. [3]

    C. Ríos, M. Stegmaier, P. Hosseini, D. Wang, T. Scherer, C. D. Wright, H. Bhaskaran, W. H. P. Pernice, Nat. Photonics 2015, 182, 725-732

    work page 2015

  4. [4]

    Zhang, J

    Y. Zhang, J. B. Chou, J. Li, H. Li, Q. Du, A. Yadav, S. Zhou, M. Y. Shalaginov, Z. Fang, H. Zhong, C. Roberts, P. Robinson, B. Bohlin, C. Ríos, H. Lin, M. Kang, T. Gu, J. Warner, V. Liberman, K. Richardson, J. Hu, Nat. Commun. 2019, 10, 1-9

    work page 2019

  5. [5]

    Delaney, I

    M. Delaney, I. Zeimpekis, D. Lawson, D. W. Hewak, O. L. Muskens, Adv. Funct. Ma- ter. 2020, 30, 2002447

    work page 2020

  6. [6]

    Wuttig, H

    M. Wuttig, H. Bhaskaran, T. Taubner, Nat. Photonics 2017, 11, 465-476

    work page 2017

  7. [7]

    Raoux, F

    S. Raoux, F. Xiong, M. Wuttig, E. Pop, MRS Bull. 2014, 39, 703-710

    work page 2014

  8. [8]

    H. Liu, W. Dong, H. Wang, L. Lu, Q. Ruan, Y. S. Tan, R. E. Simpson, J. K. W. Yang, Sci. Adv. 2020, 6, eabb7171

    work page 2020

Show all 71 references
  1. [9]

    Y. Chen, S. Mu, G. Wang, X. Shen, J. Wang, S. Dai, T. Xu, Q. Nie, R. Wang, Appl. Phys. Express 2017, 10, 105601

    2017

  2. [10]

    B. Chen, G. H. ten Brink, G. Palasantzas, B. J. Kooi, Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 1-10

    2016

  3. [11]

    B. J. Kooi, M. Wutting, Adv. Mater. 2020, 32, 1908302

    2020

  4. [12]

    T. Kato, K. Tanaka, Jan. J. of Appl. Phys. 2005, 44, 7340-7344

    2005

  5. [13]

    Miscuglio, J

    M. Miscuglio, J. Meng, O. Yesiliurt, Y. Zhang, L. J. Prokopeva, A. Mehrabian, J. Hu, A. V. Kildishev, V. J. Sorger, arXiv preprint arXiv:1912.02221

    1912 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Mavlonov, T

    A. Mavlonov, T. Razykov, F. Raziq, J. Gan, J. Chantana, Y. Kawano, T. Nishimura, H. Wei, A. Zakutayev, T. Minemoto, X. Zu, S. Li, L. Qiao, Sol. Energy 2020, 201, 227-246

    2020

  7. [15]

    Siegel, A

    J. Siegel, A. Schropp, J. Solis, C. N. Afonso,M. Wuttig, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2004, 84, 2250

    2004

  8. [16]

    Jeyasingh, S

    R. Jeyasingh, S. W. Fong, J. Lee, Z. Li, K.-W. Chang, D. Mantegazza, M. Asheghi, K. E. Goodson, and H.-S. P. Wong, Nano Lett. 2014, 14, 3419-3426

    2014

  9. [17]

    M. J. Müller, A. Yadav, C. Persch, So. Wahl, F. Hoff, M. Wuttig, Adv. Electron Ma- ter., https://doi.org/10.1002/aelm.202100974

    doi

  10. [18]

    J. Y. Raty, W. Zhang, J. Luckas, C. Chen, R. Mazzarello, C. Bichara, M. Wuttig, Nat. Commun. 2015, 6, 1-8

    2015

  11. [20]

    F. Rao, K. Ding, Y. Zhou, Y. Zheng, M. Xia, S. Lv, Z. Song, S. Feng, I. Ronneberger, R. Mazzarello, W. Zhang, E. Ma, Science 2017, 358, 1423

    2017

  12. [21]

    D. Loke, T. H. Lee, W. J. Wang, L. P. Shi, R. Zhao, Y. C. Yeo, T.C. Chong, S. R. El- liott, Science 2012, 336, 1566. 14

    2012

  13. [22]

    R. E. Simpson, P. Fons, A. V. Kolobov, T. Fukaya, M. Krbal, T. Yagi, J. Tominaga, Nat. Nanotechnol. 2011, 6, 501-505

    2011

  14. [23]

    K.-A. N. Duerloo, Y. Li, E. J. Reed, Nat. Commun. 2014, 5, 1-9

    2014

  15. [24]

    Bergeron, D

    H. Bergeron, D. Lebedev, M. C. Hersam, Chem. Rev. 2021, 121, 2713-2775

    2021

  16. [25]

    Y. Wang, J. Xiao, H. Zhu, Y. Li, Y. Alsaid, K. Z. Fong, Y. Zhou, S. Wang, W. Shi, Y. Wang, A. Zettl, E. J. Reed, X. Zhang, Nature 2017, 550, 487-491

    2017

  17. [26]

    Y. -T. Huang, C. -W. Huang, J. -Y. Chen, Y. -H. Ting, K. -C. Lu, Y. -L. Chueh, and W. -W. Wu, ACS Nano 2014, 8, 9457-9462

    2014

  18. [27]

    X. Tao, Y. Gu, Nano Lett. 2013, 13, 3501-3505

    2013

  19. [28]

    A. M. Rasmussen, S. T. Teklemichael, E. Mafi, G. Yi, M. D. Mccluskey, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2013, 102, 062105

    2013

  20. [29]

    Bruns, P

    G. Bruns, P. Merkelbach, C. Schlockermann, M. Salinga, M. Wuttig, T. D. Happ, J. B. Philipp, M. Kund, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2009, 95, 043108

    2009

  21. [30]

    J. V. Landuyt, G. V. Tendeloo, S. Amelinckx, Phys. Status Solidi A 1975, 30, 299-314

    1975

  22. [31]

    W. Ding, J. Zhu, Z. Wang, Y. Gao, D. Xiao, Y. Gu, Z. Zhang, W. Zhu, Nat. Commun. 2017, 8, 1-8

    2017

  23. [32]

    M. S. Choi, B. -K. Cheong, C. H. Ra, S. Lee, J. -H. Bae, S. Lee, G. -D. Lee, C. -W. Yang, J. Hone, W. J. Yoo, Adv. Mater. 2017, 29, 1703568

    2017

  24. [33]

    Zhang, Z

    F. Zhang, Z. Wang, J. Dong, A. Nie, J. Xiang, W. Zhu, Z. Liu, C. Tao, ACS Nano 2019, 13, 8004-8011

    2019

  25. [34]

    B. Yu, S. Ju, X. Sun, G. Ng, T. D. Nguyen, M. Meyyappan, D. B. Janes, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2007, 91, 133119

    2007

  26. [35]

    W. Feng, F. Gao, Y. Hu, M. Dai, H. Liu, L. Wang, P. Hu, ACS Appl. Mater. Inter. 2018, 10, 27584-27588

    2018

  27. [36]

    Vilaplana, S

    R. Vilaplana, S. G. Parra, A. Jorge-Montero, P. Rodríguez-Hernández, A. Munoz, D. Errandonea, A. Segura, F. J. Manjón, Inorg. Chem. 2018, 57, 8241-8252

    2018

  28. [37]

    C. J. Benmore, ISRN Mater. Sci. 2012, 2012, 1-9

    2012

  29. [38]

    G. G. D. Han, H. Li, J. C. Grossman, Nat. Commun. 2017, 8, 1-10

    2017

  30. [39]

    W. Li, F. P. Sabino, F. C. de Lima, T. Wang, R. H. Miwa, A. Janotti, Phys. Rev. B 2018, 98, 165134

    2018

  31. [40]

    C. -H. Ho, C. -H. Lin, Y. -P. Wang, Y. -C. Chen, S. -H. Chen, Y. -S. Huang, ACS Appl. Mater. Inter. 2013, 5, 2269-2277

    2013

  32. [41]

    S. M. Poh, S. J. R. Tan, H. Wang, P. Song, I. H. Abidi, X. Zhao, J. Dan, J. Chen, Z. Luo, S. J. Pennycook, A. H. C. Neto, K. P. Loh, Nano Lett. 2018, 18, 6340-6346

    2018

  33. [42]

    Y. Wang, S. Law, Opt. Mater. Express 2018, 8, 2570-2578

    2018

  34. [43]

    M. Si, A. K. Saha, S. Gao, G. Qiu, J. Qin, Y. Duan, J. Jian, C. Niu, H. Wang, W. Wu, 15 S. K. Gupta, P. D. Ye, Nat. Electron. 2019, 2, 580-586

    2019

  35. [44]

    C. Ríos, N. Youngblood, Z. Cheng, M. L. Gallo, W. H. P. Pernice, C. D. Wright, A. Sebastian, H. Bhaskaran, Sci. Adv. 2019, 5, eaau5759

    2019

  36. [45]

    Vandoorne, P

    K. Vandoorne, P. Mechet, T. Van Vaerenbergh, M. Fiers, G. Morthier, D. Verstraeten, B. Schrauwen, J. Dambre, P. Bienstman, Nat. Commun. 2014, 5, 3541

    2014

  37. [46]

    Bergman, J

    K. Bergman, J. Shalf, T. Hausken, Opt. Photonics News 2016, 27, 32-39

    2016

  38. [47]

    N. Wang, T. Li, B. Sun, Z. Wang, L. Zhou, T. Gu, Opt. Lett. 2021, 46, 4088-4091

    2021

  39. [48]

    Manolikas, J

    C. Manolikas, J. of Solid State Chem. 1988, 74, 319-328

    1988

  40. [49]

    Julien, A

    C. Julien, A. Chevy, D. Siapkas, Phys. Status Solidi A 1990, 118, 553-559

    1990

  41. [50]

    Q. Li, Y. Wang, T. Li, W. Li, F. Wang, A. Janotti, S. Law, T. Gu, ACS Omega 2020, 5, 8090-8096

    2020

  42. [51]

    D. Mao, M. Chen, X. Ma, A. Soman, H. Xing, T. Kananen, N. Augenbraun, C. Cheng, M. Doty, T. Gu, Opt. Mater. Express 2020, 10, 2126-2134

    2020

  43. [52]

    F, Wang, L. Zhao, Y. Xiao, T. Li, Y. Wang, A. Soman, H. Lee, T. Kananen, X. Hu, B. P. Rand, T. Gu, Adv. Optical Mater. 2021, 2100783

    2021

  44. [53]

    Jaeger, Arch

    G. Jaeger, Arch. Hist. Exact Sci. 1998, 53, 51-81

    1998

  45. [54]

    B. H. Toby, R. B. Von Dreele, J. Appl. Crystallogr 2013, 46, 544-549

    2013

  46. [55]

    F. Ke, C. Liu, Y. Gao, J. Zhang, C. Gao, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2014, 104, 212102

    2014

  47. [56]

    Küpers, P

    M. Küpers, P. M. Konze, A. Meledin, J. Mayer, R. Dronskowski, Inorg. Chem. 2018, 57, 11775-11781

    2018

  48. [57]

    L. Liu, J. Dong, J. Huang, A. Nie, K. Zhai, J. Xiang, B. Wang, F. Wen, C. Mu, Z. Zhao, Y. Gong, Y. Tian, Z.Liu, Chem. Mater. 2019, 31, 10143-10149

    2019

  49. [58]

    Popović, A

    S. Popović, A. Tonejc, B. Čelustka, B. Gržeta-Plenković, R. Trojko, J. Appl. Cryst. 1979, 12, 416-420

    1979

  50. [59]

    Q. Wang, L. Yang, S. Zhou, X. Ye, Z. Wang, W. Zhu, M. D. Mccluskey, Y. Gu, J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 2017, 8, 2887

    2017

  51. [60]

    M. Si, A. K. Saha, S. Gao, G. Qiu, J. Qin, Y. Duan, J. Jian, C. Niu, H. Wang, W. Wu, S. K. Gupta, P. D. Ye, Nat. Electron. 2019, 2, 580-586

    2019

  52. [61]

    F. Xue, W. Hu, K.-C. Lee, L.-S. Lu, J. Zhang, H.-L. Tang, A. Han, W.-T. Hsu, S. Tu, W.-H. Chang, C.-H. Lien, J.-H. He, Z. Zhang, L.-J. Li, X. Zhang, Adv. Funct. Mater. 2018, 28, 1803738

    2018

  53. [62]

    Q. Li, C. Yuan, T. Yu, Q. Wang, J. Li, J. Phy. D: Appl. Phys. 2019, 53, 075108

    2019

  54. [63]

    H. G. Bouanani, D. Eddike, B. Liautard, G. Brun, Mater. Res. Bull. 1996, 31, 177-187. 16

    1996

  55. [64]

    W. Kohn, L. J. Sham, Phys. Rev. 1965, 140, A1133

    1965

  56. [65]

    Hohenberg, W

    P. Hohenberg, W. Kohn, Phys. Rev. 1964, 136B, 864

    1964

  57. [66]

    J. Heyd, G. E. Scuseria, M. Ernzerhof, J. Chem. Phys. 2003, 118, 8207

    2003

  58. [67]

    G. G. Kresse, J. J. Furthmüller, Phys. Rev. B 1996, 54, 11169-11186

    1996

  59. [68]

    P. E. Blöchl, Phys. Rev. B 1994 50, 17953-17979

    1994

  60. [69]

    A. P. Hammersley, A.P. J. Appl. Crystallogr. 2016, 49, 646-652

    2016

  61. [70]

    Y. Wang, T. P. Ginley, S. Law, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 2018, 36, 02D101. 17 Figures Figure 1. Nonvolatile all-optical memory in epitaxial In 2Se3-silicon microring resonators. a, Calculated extinction coefficient spectra for the two layered crystalline states in In2Se3. Insets...

    2018

  62. [71]

    Exfoliate from Bulk α - β 300 oC β: 0.78 eV γ: 1.86 eV

  63. [72]

    [4,5,11- 14,15,17,S13,S18]: Ge2Sb2Te5, Ge2Sb2Se4Te1, Sb2Se3 and In2Se3

    Melting the elements (from 600 oC to 800 oC) with rapid cooling (bismuth doped) β - another state 620 oC S-14 S8.Performance comparison between different optical phase-change materials Table S5 compares the performance matrix reported for optical phase change materials. [4,5,1...

    1990

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.