Tuning topological disorder in MgB$_{2}$

A. Palenzona; A. Sacchetti; D. Di Castro; E. Cappelluti; M. Lavagnini; M. Putti; P. Postorino

REVIEW

Tuning topological disorder in MgB$_{2}$

D. Di Castro, E. Cappelluti, M. Lavagnini, A. Sacchetti, A. Palenzona, M. Putti, P. Postorino

Superconductivity · Submitted 21 Feb 2006 · 36 references

Pith's verdict: New experimental data and a plausible but not fully constrained model: the q≠0 E2g explanation is probably right, but the eigenvector projection needs validation before it can be called unambiguous.

T0 · AI review

How this review was made: An AI referee (deepseek-v4-flash) read the paper on August 28, 2026 and answered a fixed list of questions about it. T0 is the starting level every paper gets. The levels describe how deeply Pith has checked the paper, never the authors.

T0 AI review An AI read the paper and answered a fixed list of questions.
T1 Audit Automatic checks that the references and files the paper relies on exist and match.
T2 Compute The paper's code or calculations re-run with the same results.
T3 Formal statement The claims written out in a formal math language a computer can read.
T4 Proof Those claims proved, and the proof checked by computer.

How Pith checks papers →

· 3 major objections · 5 minor · Ask about this paper · The compiled record · Read the full review →

Challenge this review Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗

Cite ▾

arXiv IDcond-mat/0602506 (version 1)

Pith ID34RQPX3N, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review

CitationA. Palenzona, A. Sacchetti, D. Di Castro, E. Cappelluti, M. Lavagnini, M. Putti, P. Postorino. "Tuning topological disorder in MgB$_{2}$." arXiv:cond-mat/0602506 (2006). https://pith.science/paper/34RQPX3N

Cite this reviewBibTeX for Pith's review of this paper

Claim paper

Why Pith says this

Highlight any text to comment on it.

Editor's note

read the letter

The paper reports the first Raman study of neutron-irradiated MgB2, showing that high-frequency structures appear and grow with fluence. The authors argue that these structures, and the similar ones in Al-doped samples, come from disorder-induced relaxation of Raman momentum selection rules, so the spectra reflect the E2g-projected phonon density of states rather than just the q=0 mode. The experimental part is solid and the interpretation is plausible, but the theoretical support is less definitive than the paper suggests.

What is actually new: the fluence-dependent evolution of the Raman spectra in neutron-irradiated samples, the direct comparison with Al-doped series, and the model with a q-space cutoff qc that reproduces the trend from clean to disordered samples. The similarity between the two series is a strong hint that topological disorder, not charge doping, is the key ingredient. The quantitative model is a step beyond earlier qualitative remarks about selection-rule breakdown.

The main soft spot is the reliance on the E2g-projected DOS computed from a twelve-parameter force-constant shell model. Fitting frequencies alone does not determine eigenvectors; different parameter sets that reproduce the phonon dispersion can give different projections at generic q points. The paper defers the fit parameters to a companion paper and gives no validation of the eigenvectors against first-principles calculations. This matters because the central claim is about the projection. The 100 cm-1 Lorentzian smearing is also wide enough to hide systematic weighting errors. The comparison with the neutron PDOS is convincing in the 500-1000 cm-1 range only after normalization, and the low-frequency region, where the E2g and total PDOS should differ most, is set aside with a hand-wavy reference to B1g contributions. Calling the explanation 'clear and unambiguous' overshoots the evidence; 'consistent with' would be more honest.

Who is this for? People working on MgB2 phonons, Raman scattering in disordered crystals, and the general problem of selection-rule breakdown. The experimental data justify publication, and the model offers a useful framing, but the eigenvector issue should be addressed. The paper deserves peer review; I would send it out, with a request to either validate the eigenvectors or tone down the claim.

Referee report

Significance

The experimental core of this Letter is a genuine contribution: the systematic neutron-fluence series is new, the similarity between irradiated and Al-doped spectra (Fig. 1) is convincingly demonstrated, and the comparison with the neutron total PDOS in Fig. 2 is a legitimate independent test, since the shell-model parameters are fitted to first-principles dispersion rather than to the Raman data, so the reasoning is not circular. Eq. (1) yields a falsifiable parametric prediction in which a single cutoff qc interpolates between the q = 0 Raman response and the full E2g-projected PDOS. If the central claim survives scrutiny, the paper resolves, in one stroke, the long-standing controversy over the broad E2g lineshape and the origin of the extra high-frequency features in substituted MgB2, and it establishes Raman spectroscopy as a sensitive probe of topological disorder in strongly coupled electron-phonon systems.

Major objections (3)

[Fig. 3, Eq. (1) (theoretical model)] The projection η_{q,μ} = |ε̂_{q,μ}·ε̂_{E2g}|² is the quantity that carries the theoretical weight of the paper, but it is computed from a twelve-parameter force-constant shell model whose parameters are fitted only to the phonon frequencies of Ref. [26], with the E2g branch along Γ–A excluded from the fit, and the fit details deferred to Ref. [36]. Frequencies alone do not determine eigenvectors: different parameter sets or interaction topologies can reproduce the dispersion while yielding different eigenvectors at generic q points, especially where branches approach or hybridize, and the 100 cm−1 Lorentzian smearing cannot rectify a systematically wrong projection. The manuscript offers no validation of the shell-model eigenvectors against the first-principles dynamical matrix of Ref. [26] or any independent calculation. I request that the fitted parameters and a comparison of fitted versus first-principles dispersion be included, and that the E2g projection be validated (for example, by comparing projected PDOS built from first-principles eigenvectors at selected q points, or by demonstrating that the 600 and 800 cm−1 features of the E2g-PDOS are robust to parameter variations).
[Fig. 2] The empirical comparison in Fig. 2 is made after all three curves are "empirically normalized to the same peak intensity," and the text acknowledges that both the neutron total PDOS and the calculated E2g-PDOS agree with the Raman spectrum over the 500–1000 cm−1 range. The region below 500 cm−1, where the total and E2g-projected DOS differ and where the projection hypothesis could be tested, is discussed only qualitatively, with the residual difference attributed to secondary B1g contributions. As it stands, the presented evidence does not uniquely establish that the Raman signal follows the E2g-projected rather than some other q-integrated combination of modes; the statement that the 750–850 cm−1 structures arise "mostly from contributions at q≠0 of the E2g mode" would be put on firmer ground by a quantitative comparison, e.g., a fit of the total and E2g-projected PDOS (with a common normalization window or a fitted weight ratio) to the full Raman spectrum, together with a display of the residuals over the whole 400–1000 cm−1 range.
[Eq. (1), Fig. 4] The title's "tuning" claim is supported only by a side-by-side visual parallel between the experimental series in Fig. 1 and the calculated intensities in Fig. 4; no fit of Eq. (1) to the measured spectra is performed, and no quantitative relation between neutron fluence (or Al content) and the cutoff qc is derived or measured. The linear form Γ_qc = α qc is introduced ad hoc, and the five values of qc (0.30 to 0.75 Å−1) are chosen by inspection. To make the claimed correspondence load-bearing, the authors should either fit Eq. (1) to the complete fluence/doping series with qc as the only disorder-dependent parameter, or explicitly frame the tuning as qualitative phenomenology rather than a demonstrated quantitative mapping.

Minor objections (5)

[Fig. 1(b)] The figure labels the second-irradiated sample with fluence φ = 1.0×10^18 n/cm², whereas the text states that the three irradiated samples received 7.6×10^17, 1.0×10^19, and 3.9×10^19 n/cm²; the low-fluence value should be made consistent between text and figure.
[Fig. 2] The figure label attributes the neutron data to "Renker et al. [16]", but the text cites this measurement as Ref. [17] (B. Renker et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 067001 (2002)); the reference numbering should be corrected.
[Eq. (1)] The text defines α = 120 Å/cm−1 in Γ_qc = α qc, but for Γ_qc in cm−1 and qc in Å−1 the constant must have units cm−1·Å; the stated units appear to be a typo.
[Fig. 3, definition of η] The manuscript does not state whether ε̂_{E2g} in the projection η_{q,μ} is the zone-center E2g eigenvector or a q-dependent E2g-symmetry basis; this should be specified.
[Introduction and captions] Typos: "carring out" should be "carrying out" in the introduction; the Fig. 3 caption reads "phonon densiy of states"; and the Fig. 4 caption gives "qc = 0.30,0,45,0.60,0.75" where 0.45 is intended.

How Pith checks papers → · Full audit of this paper →

The paper

The paper claims

Neutron irradiation and Al doping turn MgB2's Raman spectrum into a q-integrated map of the E2g phonon density of states by relaxing the Raman momentum selection rules.

The reading

This paper establishes that the unexpected high-frequency Raman structures in neutron-irradiated and lightly Al-doped MgB2 are not new modes but $q\neq 0$ contributions of the $E_{2g}$ phonon branch across the Brillouin zone. Because neutron irradiation introduces only lattice defects, the close resemblance between irradiated and Al-doped spectra singles out topological disorder, not charge doping or volume compression, as the trigger. A force-constant shell model combined with the $E_{2g}$-projected phonon density of states reproduces the measured spectra once disorder is allowed to relax momentum conservation through a momentum cutoff $q_c$. If correct, this resolves the long-debated origin of MgB2's broad Raman line and turns Raman spectroscopy into a quantitative probe of topological disorder in strongly coupled superconductors.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the $E_{2g}$-projected phonon density of states, formed by projecting each phonon eigenvector $\hat{\epsilon}_{q,\mu}$ onto the $E_{2g}$ eigenvector $\hat{\epsilon}_{E_{2g}}$ and summing over the Brillouin zone. The Raman intensity is modelled by Eq. (1), a sum over all states with $|q|\leq q_c$ of these projections broadened by a Lorentzian of width $\Gamma_{q_c}=\alpha q_c$; the momentum cutoff $q_c$ is the disorder-tuned control parameter. The calculation is built on a twelve-parameter force-constant shell model fitted to first-principles phonon dispersions, with the $E_{2g}$ branch along $\Gamma$\,A excluded from the fit and electron-phonon renormalization added through a two-dimensional Lindhard self-energy. This machinery lets the same formula interpolate from the ordered limit ($q_c\to 0$, only the zone-center peak) to the fully disordered limit ($q_c$ larger than the Brillouin zone, the full $E_{2g}$-projected density of states), which is exactly the spectral evolution seen in the measured series.

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that in disordered MgB$_2$ the Raman spectrum is not governed by the $q=0$ $E_{2g}$ phonon alone but by the $E_{2g}$-projected phonon density of states over the whole Brillouin zone. Neutron irradiation creates homogeneous lattice defects through $^{10}$B$(n,\alpha)^7$Li recoils, and the resulting Raman spectra develop high-frequency structures near 750 and 850 cm$^{-1}$ that grow with fluence; the same structures appear in Al-doped samples as $x$ increases. The most irradiated spectrum agrees with the neutron-scattering phonon density of states over 500\,1000 cm$^{-1}$, and the calculated $E_{2g}$-projected density of states, from a twelve-parameter force-constant shell model fitted to first-principles dispersions with the strongly renormalized $E_{2g}$ branch along $\Gamma$\,A excluded from the fit, matches the high-frequency peaks. The paper concludes that topological disorder relaxes the Raman momentum selection rules, so that the measured intensity samples phonons with $|q|\leq q_c$, where $q_c$ grows with disorder. In this picture the peak near 620 cm$^{-1}$ and the high-frequency structures are the zone-center and zone-boundary portions of the same $E_{2g}$ branch, mostly from near $\Gamma$\,A and near K\,M, respectively.

Load-bearing premise

The central calculation assumes that the shell model's phonon eigenvectors stay accurate across the whole Brillouin zone even though the $E_{2g}$ branch along $\Gamma$\,A, the one most distorted by electron-phonon coupling, was left out of the fit, so that the projected density of states faithfully represents what disorder-activated Raman scattering measures.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

In any disordered MgB$_2$ sample, the peak near 620 cm$^{-1}$ and the high-frequency structures near 750 and 850 cm$^{-1}$ should be read as zone-center and zone-boundary parts of the same $E_{2g}$ branch, not as separate modes.
Raman spectroscopy becomes a quantitative disorder probe: the spectral shape fixes the momentum cutoff $q_c$, which grows with irradiation fluence or substitution level.
The high-frequency features seen in irradiated, Al-doped, and C-doped samples are predominantly a lattice-disorder effect; charge-doping and compression effects on the Raman spectrum become visible mainly at high doping, as in the frequency hardening at 30% Al.
The observed correlation between Raman intensity and superconducting properties across MgB$_2$ compounds follows naturally, because the same $E_{2g}$ branch governs both the Raman response and the electron-phonon pairing.

Reading between the lines

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

A natural but unstated extension is that the $q_c$ picture should hold for any superconductor with one strongly coupled optical phonon: introducing controlled defects should reproduce the same continuous crossover from a zone-center peak to a phonon-density-of-states Raman profile.
One testable prediction is that in the fully disordered limit the Raman spectrum should approach the full $E_{2g}$-projected density of states; a high-fluence series with finer intermediate steps could map how $q_c$ depends on defect density.
The quantitative case would be strengthened if a fully first-principles calculation of the $E_{2g}$-projected density of states, with no shell-model fit, reproduced the measured irradiated spectrum as well as the present calculation does.
Because the projected density of states inherits the shell model's eigenvectors, an independent check of those eigenvectors against other first-principles methods would tell whether the good match reflects the physics or partly the fit.

Original abstract

We carried out Raman measurements on neutron-irradiated and Al-doped MgB$_2$ samples. The irradiation-induced topological disorder causes an unexpected appearance of high frequency spectral structures, similar to those observed in lightly Al-doped samples. Our results show that disorder-induced violations of the selection rules are responsible for the modification of the Raman spectrum in both irradiated and Al-doped samples. Theoretical calculations of the phonon density of states support this hypothesis, and demonstrate that the high frequency structures arise mostly from contributions at ${\bf q}\not=0$ of the E$_{2g}$ phonon mode.

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged, kept beside the review and separate from it. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Compiled by classifier-1.13-20260917 via OpenRouter, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 3,634 input tokens, $0.0002 reported.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.03 · states limitation 0.07 · human participants 0.02 · controlled comparison 0.32 · randomized assignment 0.02 · states quantitative result 0.05 · compares with prior results 0.78 · mentions code or data availability 0.02.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v1. Results and the main claim are underlined; show every role.

We carried out Raman measurements on neutron-irradiated and Al-doped MgB$_2$ samples. The irradiation-induced topological disorder causes an unexpected appearance of high frequency spectral structures, similar to those observed in lightly Al-doped samples. Our results show that disorder-induced violations of the selection rules are responsible for the modification of the Raman spectrum in both irradiated and Al-doped samples. Theoretical calculations of the phonon density of states support this hypothesis, and demonstrate that the high frequency structures arise mostly from contributions at ${\bf q}\not=0$ of the E$_{2g}$ phonon mode.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#	sentence	role	the authors' own work	states the main conclusion	strength
s0	We carried out Raman measurements on neutron-irradiated and Al-doped MgB$_2$ samples.	method 0.74	0.97	0.02	asserted 0.99
s1	The irradiation-induced topological disorder causes an unexpected appearance of high frequency spectral structures, similar to those observed in lightly Al-doped samples.	result 1.00	0.79	0.14	asserted 1.00
s2	Our results show that disorder-induced violations of the selection rules are responsible for the modification of the Raman spectrum in both irradiated and Al-doped samples.	interpretation 0.94	0.93	0.80	asserted 1.00
s3	Theoretical calculations of the phonon density of states support this hypothesis, and demonstrate that the high frequency structures arise mostly from contributions at ${\bf q}\not=0$ of the E$_{2g}$ phonon mode.	result 0.48	0.84	0.19	asserted 1.00

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: empirical study 1.00 · evidence from observation or experiment 1.00.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read

arXiv listing abstract v1

not examined

full text
figures and tables
references and citing sentences
relations to other papers

levels run

P abstract

not run

S sections
T body sentences
C citations
R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

Figures

**Figure 1.** FIG. 1: Background subtracted Raman spectra of Al-doped

**Figure 3.** FIG. 3: Left panel: phonon dispersion of MgB

**Figure 4.** FIG. 4: Raman intensity from Eqs. (1) for different val

Showing 3 of the paper's 4 figures. See all figures in the PDF ↗ Figures reproduced from arXiv:cond-mat/0602506 by the authors.

References

Works cited (36)

[26]

K. P. Bohnen et al. , Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 5771 (2001)

View on Pith 2001
[36]

G. Campi et al. , cond-mat/0601656 (2006)

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2006
[1]

S. L. Budko et al. , Phys. Rev. Lett. 86 1877 (2001)

View on Pith 2001
[2]

R. S. Gonnelli et al. , Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 247004 (2002)

View on Pith 2002
[3]

S. Souma et al. , Nature (London) 423, 65 (2003)

View on Pith 2003
[4]

A.Y. Liu et al. , Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 087005 (2001)

View on Pith 2001
[5]

H.J. Choi et al. , Nature 418, 758 (2002)

View on Pith 2002
[6]

J. Kortus et al. , Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 4656 (2001)

View on Pith 2001
[7]

M. Monni et al. , cond-mat/0506162

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[8]

J. M. An and W. E. Pickett Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 4366 (2001)

View on Pith 2001
[9]

Y. Kong et al. , Phys. Rev. B 64, 020501(R) (2001)

View on Pith 2001
[10]

T Yildirim et al. , Phys. Rev. Lett. 87 037001 (2001)

View on Pith 2001
[11]

A. F. Goncharov et al. , Phys. Rev. B 64, 100509(R) (2001)

View on Pith 2001
[12]

D. Di Castro et al. , Phys. Rev. B 72, 094504 (2005)

View on Pith 2005
[13]

Y. Bugoslavsky et al. , Nature 411, 561 (2001)

View on Pith 2001
[14]

M. Eisterer et al. , Supercond. Sci. Technol. 15, L9-L12 (2002)

View on Pith 2002
[15]

M. Putti et al. , Appl. Phys. Lett. 86, 112503 (2005)

View on Pith 2005
[16]

D. Di Castro et al. , Europhys. Lett. 58(2), 278 (2002)

View on Pith 2002
[17]

B. Renker et al. , Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 067001 (2002)

View on Pith 2002
[18]

T. Masui et al. , Phys. Rev. B 70, 024504 (2004)

View on Pith 2004
[19]

J. Arvanitidis et al. , J. Phys. Chem. Solids 65, 73 (2004)

View on Pith 2004
[20]

O. de la Pena et al. , Phys. Rev. B 66, 012511 (2002)

View on Pith 2002
[21]

G. Profeta et al. , Phys. Rev. B 68, 144508 (2003)

View on Pith 2003
[22]

J. Kortus et al. , Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 027002 (2005)

View on Pith 2005
[23]

S.C. Erwin, and I.I. Mazin, Phys. Rev. B 68, 132505 (2003)

View on Pith 2003
[24]

K. Kunc et al., J. Phys. Condens. Matter 13, 9945 (2001)

View on Pith 2001
[25]

P. Postorino et al. , Phys. Rev. B 65, 020507(R) (2001)

View on Pith 2001
[27]

G. Satta et al. , Phys. Rev. B 64, 104507 (2001)

View on Pith 2001
[28]

X. Chen et al. , Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 157002 (2001)

View on Pith 2001
[29]

M. Calandra and F. Mauri Phys. Rev. B 71, 064501 (2005)

View on Pith 2005
[30]

H. Martinho et al. , Solid State Comm. 125, 499 (2003)

View on Pith 2003
[31]

E. Cappelluti, cond-mat/0512198 (2005)

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2005
[32]

D. A. Tenne et al. , Phys. Rev. B 71, 132512 (2005)

View on Pith 2005
[33]

K. A. Yates et al. , Phys. Rev. B 68, 220512(R) (2003)

View on Pith 2003
[34]

A.V. Pogrebnyakov et al. , Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 147006 (2004)

View on Pith 2004
[35]

M. Putti et al. , Phys. Rev. B 71, 144505 (2005)

View on Pith 2005

Discussion

Disagree with the review, or know something it missed? Leave a comment, highlight any passage above to comment on it, or challenge this review formally.

[1] [26]

K. P. Bohnen et al. , Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 5771 (2001)

View on Pith 2001

[2] [36]

G. Campi et al. , cond-mat/0601656 (2006)

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2006

[3] [1]

S. L. Budko et al. , Phys. Rev. Lett. 86 1877 (2001)

View on Pith 2001

[4] [2]

R. S. Gonnelli et al. , Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 247004 (2002)

View on Pith 2002

[5] [3]

S. Souma et al. , Nature (London) 423, 65 (2003)

View on Pith 2003

[6] [4]

A.Y. Liu et al. , Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 087005 (2001)

View on Pith 2001

[7] [5]

H.J. Choi et al. , Nature 418, 758 (2002)

View on Pith 2002

[8] [6]

J. Kortus et al. , Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 4656 (2001)

View on Pith 2001

[9] [7]

M. Monni et al. , cond-mat/0506162

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[10] [8]

J. M. An and W. E. Pickett Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 4366 (2001)

View on Pith 2001

[11] [9]

Y. Kong et al. , Phys. Rev. B 64, 020501(R) (2001)

View on Pith 2001

[12] [10]

T Yildirim et al. , Phys. Rev. Lett. 87 037001 (2001)

View on Pith 2001

[13] [11]

A. F. Goncharov et al. , Phys. Rev. B 64, 100509(R) (2001)

View on Pith 2001

[14] [12]

D. Di Castro et al. , Phys. Rev. B 72, 094504 (2005)

View on Pith 2005

[15] [13]

Y. Bugoslavsky et al. , Nature 411, 561 (2001)

View on Pith 2001

[16] [14]

M. Eisterer et al. , Supercond. Sci. Technol. 15, L9-L12 (2002)

View on Pith 2002

[17] [15]

M. Putti et al. , Appl. Phys. Lett. 86, 112503 (2005)

View on Pith 2005

[18] [16]

D. Di Castro et al. , Europhys. Lett. 58(2), 278 (2002)

View on Pith 2002

[19] [17]

B. Renker et al. , Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 067001 (2002)

View on Pith 2002

[20] [18]

T. Masui et al. , Phys. Rev. B 70, 024504 (2004)

View on Pith 2004

[21] [19]

J. Arvanitidis et al. , J. Phys. Chem. Solids 65, 73 (2004)

View on Pith 2004

[22] [20]

O. de la Pena et al. , Phys. Rev. B 66, 012511 (2002)

View on Pith 2002

[23] [21]

G. Profeta et al. , Phys. Rev. B 68, 144508 (2003)

View on Pith 2003

[24] [22]

J. Kortus et al. , Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 027002 (2005)

View on Pith 2005

[25] [23]

S.C. Erwin, and I.I. Mazin, Phys. Rev. B 68, 132505 (2003)

View on Pith 2003

[26] [24]

K. Kunc et al., J. Phys. Condens. Matter 13, 9945 (2001)

View on Pith 2001

[27] [25]

P. Postorino et al. , Phys. Rev. B 65, 020507(R) (2001)

View on Pith 2001

[28] [27]

G. Satta et al. , Phys. Rev. B 64, 104507 (2001)

View on Pith 2001

[29] [28]

X. Chen et al. , Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 157002 (2001)

View on Pith 2001

[30] [29]

M. Calandra and F. Mauri Phys. Rev. B 71, 064501 (2005)

View on Pith 2005

[31] [30]

H. Martinho et al. , Solid State Comm. 125, 499 (2003)

View on Pith 2003

[32] [31]

E. Cappelluti, cond-mat/0512198 (2005)

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2005

[33] [32]

D. A. Tenne et al. , Phys. Rev. B 71, 132512 (2005)

View on Pith 2005

[34] [33]

K. A. Yates et al. , Phys. Rev. B 68, 220512(R) (2003)

View on Pith 2003

[35] [34]

A.V. Pogrebnyakov et al. , Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 147006 (2004)

View on Pith 2004

[36] [35]

M. Putti et al. , Phys. Rev. B 71, 144505 (2005)

View on Pith 2005