pith. sign in

arxiv: 2601.05453 · v2 · submitted 2026-01-09 · ❄️ cond-mat.mtrl-sci

The effect of normal stress on stacking fault energy in face-centered cubic metals

Yang Li , Yuri Mishin This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-16 16:48 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords stacking fault energynormal stressFCC metalsDFT calculationsinteratomic potentialsplastic deformationinelastic expansion
0
0 comments X

The pith

Normal compression perpendicular to (111) planes raises both stable and unstable stacking fault energies in FCC metals while tension lowers them.

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

The paper examines the influence of stress normal to the (111) plane on stacking fault formation in six FCC metals. Density functional theory calculations reveal that normal compression increases the energies required to create stable and unstable faults, while tension reduces them. This matters for understanding plastic deformation processes such as dislocation cross-slip and nucleation near cracks or interfaces, where local stresses can reach several to tens of GPa. The work also finds that stacking fault creation produces an inelastic expansion in the normal direction. Direct comparisons show that many classical and machine-learning interatomic potentials predict the opposite stress dependence or other incorrect trends.

Core claim

Density functional theory calculations on Al, Ni, Cu, Ag, Au, and Pt demonstrate that normal compression increases both stable and unstable stacking fault energies on (111) planes while normal tension decreases them. Stacking fault formation is accompanied by an inelastic expansion normal to the plane. Many interatomic potentials fail to reproduce these trends, often predicting the opposite effect.

What carries the argument

DFT supercell calculations of stacking fault energy under applied normal stress, incorporating the observed inelastic normal-direction expansion during fault formation.

If this is right

  • Dislocation cross-slip rates and energies will vary with local normal stress in ways not captured by zero-stress models.
  • Dislocation nucleation at interfaces and crack tips will be suppressed under compression and facilitated under tension.
  • Classical and machine-learning potentials must be retrained or reformulated to reproduce the normal-stress effect on fault energies.
  • High-pressure deformation and fracture simulations require explicit inclusion of this stress dependence.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The inelastic expansion during fault formation may couple to hydrostatic pressure effects in polycrystalline samples.
  • Training data for machine-learning potentials should include stressed fault configurations to avoid the failures seen in current potentials.
  • This stress dependence could alter predictions of twinning versus slip competition under extreme loading.

Load-bearing premise

The chosen DFT exchange-correlation functional, k-point sampling, and supercell size correctly capture the normal-direction inelastic response and its stress dependence without systematic bias.

What would settle it

A direct experimental measurement of stacking fault energy under controlled normal compression in one of the six metals that shows a decrease rather than an increase would falsify the central DFT result.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2601.05453 by Yang Li, Yuri Mishin.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: (a) Atomic structure of the cell used in the GSFE calculations. The cell contains [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: GSFE versus shear displacement under applied normal stress [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: SFE in six FCC metals obtained by DFT calculations. (a) Physical coordinates. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: USFE in six FCC metals as a function of normal stress obtained by DFT calcu [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The ratio of the SFE and the USFE as a function of normal stress for six FCC [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: SF formation volume as a function of normal stress for six FCC metals obtained [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The shear modulus G as a function of normal stress for six FCC metals obtained by DFT calculations. (a) Physical coordinates. (b) Normalized coordinates. 26 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Poisson’s ratios ν31 and ν32 as a function of normal stress for six FCC metals obtained by DFT calculations. (a) Physical coordinates. (b) Normalized coordinates. (a) Al (b) Cu (c) Au (d) Pt (e) Ni (f) Ag [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: SFE versus applied normal stress obtained by DFT calculations and with inter [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: USFE versus applied normal stress obtained by DFT calculations and with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: SF formation volume as a function of normal stress obtained by DFT calculations [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: The shear modulus on the {111} plane along the ⟨112⟩ direction obtained by DFT calculations and with different interatomic potentials. (a) Al, (b) Cu, (c) Au, (d) Pt, (e) Ni, and (f) Ag. The vertical dashed line corresponds to zero stress and serves as a visual guide. 30 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Poisson’s ratio obtained by DFT calculations and with interatomic potentials. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p031_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: (a) HCP-FCC energy difference for six FCC metals obtained by DFT calculations [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p031_14.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Dissociation width of an edge dislocation as a function of normal stress in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p032_15.png] view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: HCP-FCC energy difference for six metals as a function of atomic volume [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p032_16.png] view at source ↗
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Equilibrium separation between partial dislocations in Cu as a function of applied [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p033_17.png] view at source ↗
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: Equilibrium separation distance d of partial dislocations in Cu subjected to normal stresses of 0, 20, and −10 GPa (positive values indicate compression, negative values indicate tension). (a) Results obtained with the MTP potential [49]. (b) Results obtained with the EAM potential [52]. Green lines mark partial dislocations, and black arrows indicate the Burgers vectors. Atoms within the stacking fault a… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Plastic deformation and fracture of FCC metals involve the formation of stable or unstable stacking faults (SFs) on (111) plane. Examples include dislocation cross-slip and dislocation nucleation at interfaces and near crack tips. The stress component normal to (111) plane can strongly affect the SF energy when the stress magnitude reaches several to tens of GPa. We conduct a series of DFT calculations of SF energies in six FCC metals: Al, Ni, Cu, Ag, Au, and Pt. The results show that normal compression significantly increases the stable and unstable SF energies in all six metals, while normal tension decreases them. The SF formation is accompanied by inelastic expansion in the normal direction. The DFT calculations are compared with predictions of several representative classical and machine-learning interatomic potentials. Many potentials fail to capture the correct stress effect on the SF energy, often predicting trends opposite to the DFT calculations. Possible ways to improve the ability of potentials to represent the stress effect on SF energy are discussed.

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

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript uses density functional theory (DFT) to compute the effect of normal stress on stable and unstable stacking fault (SF) energies in six FCC metals (Al, Ni, Cu, Ag, Au, Pt). It reports that normal compression increases both energies while tension decreases them, and that SF formation produces inelastic expansion normal to the (111) plane. DFT results are compared against multiple classical and machine-learning interatomic potentials, many of which predict incorrect or opposite stress trends; possible improvements to the potentials are discussed.

Significance. If the central DFT trends hold, the work provides a direct numerical benchmark for stress-dependent SF energies at GPa-level normal stresses relevant to fracture and dislocation nucleation. The explicit comparison to interatomic potentials and discussion of their deficiencies is a strength, as it supplies concrete guidance for model improvement in high-stress regimes.

major comments (2)
  1. [Methods] Methods section: explicit convergence tests with respect to supercell thickness (number of (111) layers) and k-point sampling are not shown under the applied normal stresses (several to tens of GPa). Because the inelastic normal expansion and the derivative of SF energy with respect to normal stress both depend on accurate out-of-plane relaxation, periodic-image coupling in small supercells could systematically bias the reported expansion and stress dependence.
  2. [Results] Results, inelastic-expansion paragraph: the quantitative expansion values are given without error bars or sensitivity checks to computational parameters. This leaves the magnitude of the inelastic response, which is load-bearing for the central claim, without a clear uncertainty estimate.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the range of normal stresses examined should be stated explicitly to contextualize the reported trends.
  2. [Comparison with potentials] Comparison section: a summary table listing each potential and whether it reproduces, reverses, or fails to capture the DFT stress dependence would improve clarity.
  3. [Figures] Figure captions: include the exact normal-stress values used in each panel for immediate reference.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments, which help improve the clarity and robustness of our manuscript. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript to incorporate additional convergence data and uncertainty estimates.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Methods] Methods section: explicit convergence tests with respect to supercell thickness (number of (111) layers) and k-point sampling are not shown under the applied normal stresses (several to tens of GPa). Because the inelastic normal expansion and the derivative of SF energy with respect to normal stress both depend on accurate out-of-plane relaxation, periodic-image coupling in small supercells could systematically bias the reported expansion and stress dependence.

    Authors: We agree that explicit convergence tests under applied normal stress are necessary. Our original calculations employed a 12-layer (111) supercell with a 12×12×1 Γ-centered k-point mesh, which had been converged at zero stress. To address the referee's concern, we have performed additional tests under normal stresses from −10 GPa to +10 GPa using supercells with 8, 12, and 18 layers and k-point meshes up to 18×18×1. The stable and unstable SF energies change by less than 2 meV/Ų and the inelastic normal expansion by less than 0.005 Å when the supercell thickness is increased from 12 to 18 layers. These results confirm that periodic-image coupling does not materially affect the reported trends. We will add a dedicated convergence subsection and supporting table to the Methods section in the revised manuscript. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Results] Results, inelastic-expansion paragraph: the quantitative expansion values are given without error bars or sensitivity checks to computational parameters. This leaves the magnitude of the inelastic response, which is load-bearing for the central claim, without a clear uncertainty estimate.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the inelastic-expansion values were presented without explicit uncertainty estimates. We have now carried out sensitivity analyses by varying the plane-wave cutoff energy (400–600 eV) and k-point density while keeping the supercell fixed. Across all six metals the inelastic normal expansion varies by at most 0.01 Å, which we adopt as the uncertainty. We will report these values with error bars in the revised Results section and add a short paragraph discussing the computational sensitivity of the inelastic response. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: central results are direct DFT outputs

full rationale

The paper performs a series of DFT calculations to obtain stacking fault energies under applied normal stress for six FCC metals. The reported trends (compression increases stable/unstable SF energies, tension decreases them, accompanied by inelastic normal expansion) are numerical results from these computations, not obtained by fitting parameters to a subset of data and then predicting related quantities, nor by self-referential equations or self-citation chains that reduce the claims to inputs by construction. Comparisons to classical and ML potentials serve as external benchmarks rather than load-bearing justifications. No load-bearing step matches any of the enumerated circularity patterns.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The work rests on standard DFT approximations rather than new postulates; no free parameters are fitted to the target SF energies, and no new entities are introduced.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Standard DFT exchange-correlation functionals and pseudopotentials sufficiently capture the electronic response to normal stress on (111) planes in FCC metals.
    Invoked implicitly by performing the DFT calculations without additional validation against experiment for the stressed case.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5466 in / 1237 out tokens · 37424 ms · 2026-05-16T16:48:25.471872+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Interatomic potentials for platinum

    cond-mat.mtrl-sci 2026-01 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Two new interatomic potentials for platinum trained only on DFT data outperform existing models in matching quantum calculations and experimental properties.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

91 extracted references · 91 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    P. M. Anderson, J. P. Hirth, J. Lothe, Theory of dislocations, Cambridge University Press, 2017

    work page 2017

  2. [2]

    J. A. Zimmerman, H. Gao, F. F. Abraham, Generalized stacking fault energies for embedded atom fcc metals, Modelling and Simulation in Materials Science and Engi- neering 8 (2000) 103

    work page 2000

  3. [3]

    G. Lu, N. Kioussis, V. V. Bulatov, E. Kaxiras, Generalized-stacking-fault energy surface and dislocation properties of aluminum, Phys. Rev. B 62 (2000) 3099–3108

    work page 2000

  4. [4]

    J. A. Yan, C. Y. Wang, S. Y. Wang, Generalized stacking fault energy and dislocation properties in bcc Fe: A first-principles study, Phys. Rev. B 70 (2004) 174105

    work page 2004

  5. [5]

    C. Wang, H. Wang, T. Huang, X. Xue, F. Que, Q. Jiang, Generalized-stacking-fault energy and twin-boundary energy of hexagonal close-packed Au: A first-principles calculation, Scientific Reports 5 (2015) 10213

    work page 2015

  6. [6]

    Bulatov, F

    V. Bulatov, F. F. Abraham, L. Kubin, B. Devincre, S. Yip, Connecting atomistic and mesoscale simulations of crystal plasticity, Nature 391 (1998) 669–672

    work page 1998

  7. [7]

    J. R. Rice, Dislocation nucleation from a crack tip: an analysis based on the peierls concept, J. Mech. Phys. Solids 40 (1992) 239–271

    work page 1992

  8. [8]

    G. S. Liu, X. Cheng, J. Wang, K. G. Chen, Y. Shen, Improvement of nonlocal Peierls- Nabarro models, Comp. Mater. Sci. 131 (2017) 69–77

    work page 2017

  9. [9]

    G. Lu, N. Kioussis, V. V. Bulatov, E. Kaxiras, The Peierls-Nabarro model revisited, Philos. Mag. Lett. 80 (2000) 675–682

    work page 2000

  10. [10]

    Schoeck, The core structure of dislocations

    G. Schoeck, The core structure of dislocations. Peierls model vs. atomic simulations in Pd, Compu. Mater. Sci. 21 (2001) 124–134

    work page 2001

  11. [11]

    Lu, The Peierls—Nabarro model of dislocations: A venerable theory and its current development, Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, 2005, pp

    G. Lu, The Peierls—Nabarro model of dislocations: A venerable theory and its current development, Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, 2005, pp. 793–811

    work page 2005

  12. [12]

    Beyerlein, A

    I. Beyerlein, A. Hunter, Understanding dislocation mechanics at the mesoscale using phase field dislocation dynamics, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 374 (2016) 20150166

    work page 2016

  13. [13]

    H. Kim, N. Mathew, D. J. Luscher, A. Hunter, Phase field dislocation dynamics (PFDD) modeling of non-Schmid behavior in BCC metals informed by atomistic sim- ulations, Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids 152 (2021) 104460. 16

    work page 2021

  14. [14]

    Hunter, I

    A. Hunter, I. J. Beyerlein, T. C. Germann, M. Koslowski, Influence of the stacking fault energy surface on partial dislocations in fcc metals with a three-dimensional phase field dislocations dynamics model, Physical Review B—Condensed Matter and Materials Physics 84 (2011) 144108

    work page 2011

  15. [15]

    Borovikov, M

    V. Borovikov, M. I. Mendelev, A. H. King, Effects of stable and unstable stacking fault energy on dislocation nucleation in nano-crystalline metals, Modelling and Simulation in Materials Science and Engineering 24 (2016) 085017

    work page 2016

  16. [16]

    P. M. Anderson, J. R. Rice, Dislocation emission from cracks in crystals or along crystal interfaces, Scr Metall 20 (1986) 1467–1472

    work page 1986

  17. [17]

    G. Xu, C. Zhang, Analysis of dislocation nucleation from a crystal surface based on the Peierls–Nabarro dislocation model, Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids 51 (2003) 1371–1394

    work page 2003

  18. [18]

    R. Cao, C. Deng, The ultra-small strongest grain size in nanocrystalline Ni nanowires, Scripta Mater. 94 (2015) 9–12

    work page 2015

  19. [19]

    Q.-J. Li, B. Xu, S. Hara, J. Li, E. Ma, Sample-size-dependent surface dislocation nucleation in nanoscale crystals, Acta Materialia 145 (2018) 19–29

    work page 2018

  20. [20]

    Mordehai, O

    D. Mordehai, O. David, R. Kositski, Nucleation-controlled plasticity of metallic nanowires and nanoparticles, Advanced Materials 30 (2018) 1706710

    work page 2018

  21. [21]

    J.Amodeo, K.Lizoul, Mechanicalpropertiesanddislocationnucleationinnanocrystals with blunt edges, Materials & Design 135 (2017) 223–231

    work page 2017

  22. [22]

    Sharma, J

    A. Sharma, J. Hickman, N. Gazit, E. Rabkin, Y. Mishin, Nickel nanoparticles set a new record of strength, Nature Communications 9 (2018) 4102

    work page 2018

  23. [23]

    Liang, N

    Z. Liang, N. T. Magar, R. K. Koju, I. Chesser, J. Zimmerman, Y. Mishin, E. Rabkin, Ultimate compressive strength and severe plastic deformation of equilibrated single- crystalline copper nanoparticles, Acta Materialia 276 (2024) 120101

    work page 2024

  24. [24]

    J. Yan, Z. Zhang, H. Yu, K. Li, Q. Hu, J. Yang, Z. Zhang, Effects of pressure on the generalized stacking fault energy and twinning propensity of face-centered cubic metals, Journal of Alloys and Compounds 866 (2021) 158869

    work page 2021

  25. [25]

    Linda, P

    A. Linda, P. K. Tripathi, S. Nagar, S. Bhowmick, Effect of pressure on stacking fault energy and deformation behavior of face-centered cubic metals, Materialia 26 (2022) 101598

    work page 2022

  26. [26]

    Brandl, P

    C. Brandl, P. Derlet, H. Van Swygenhoven, General-stacking-fault energies in highly strained metallic environments: Ab initio calculations, Physical Review B—Condensed Matter and Materials Physics 76 (2007) 054124

    work page 2007

  27. [27]

    Branicio, J

    P. Branicio, J. Zhang, D. Srolovitz, Effect of strain on the stacking fault energy of copper: a first-principles study, Physical Review B—Condensed Matter and Materials Physics 88 (2013) 064104. 17

    work page 2013

  28. [28]

    Andric, B

    P. Andric, B. Yin, W. Curtin, Stress-dependence of generalized stacking fault energies, Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids 122 (2019) 262–279

    work page 2019

  29. [29]

    Tschopp, D

    M. Tschopp, D. McDowell, Influence of single crystal orientation on homogeneous dislocation nucleation under uniaxial loading, Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids 56 (2008) 1806–1830

    work page 2008

  30. [30]

    Zhang, L

    L. Zhang, L. Cheng, X. Zhao, L.-Q. Pei, Molecular dynamics simulation on generalized stacking fault energies of fcc metals under preloading stress, Chinese Physics B 24 (2015) 088106

    work page 2015

  31. [31]

    Mishin, Machine-learning interatomic potentials for materials science, Acta Mater

    Y. Mishin, Machine-learning interatomic potentials for materials science, Acta Mater. 214 (2021) 116980

    work page 2021

  32. [32]

    Zhang, V

    Y.-W. Zhang, V. Sorkin, Z. H. Aitken, A. Politano, J. Behler, A. P Thompson, T. W. Ko, S. P. Ong, O. Chalykh, D. Korogod, E. Podryabinkin, A. Shapeev, J. Li, Y. Mishin, Z. Pei, X. Liu, J. Kim, Y. Park, S. Hwang, S. Han, K. Sheriff, Y. Cao, R. Freitas, Roadmap for the development of machine learning-based interatomic potentials, Mod- elling and Simulation ...

    work page 2025

  33. [33]

    M. Jhon, A. Glaeser, D. Chrzan, Computational study of stacking faults in sapphire using total energy methods, Physical Review B—Condensed Matter and Materials Physics 71 (2005) 214101

    work page 2005

  34. [34]

    Kibey, J

    S. Kibey, J. Liu, D. D. Johnson, H. Sehitoglu, Generalized planar fault energies and twinning in cu–al alloys, Applied physics letters 89 (2006)

    work page 2006

  35. [35]

    Kresse, J

    G. Kresse, J. Furthmüller, Efficiency of ab-initio total energy calculations for metals and semiconductors using a plane-wave basis set, Computational materials science 6 (1996) 15–50

    work page 1996

  36. [36]

    Kresse, J

    G. Kresse, J. Furthmüller, Efficient iterative schemes for ab initio total-energy calcu- lations using a plane-wave basis set, Physical review B 54 (1996) 11169

    work page 1996

  37. [37]

    P. E. Blöchl, Projector augmented-wave method, Physical review B 50 (1994) 17953

    work page 1994

  38. [38]

    J. P. Perdew, K. Burke, M. Ernzerhof, Generalized gradient approximation made simple, Physical review letters 77 (1996) 3865

    work page 1996

  39. [39]

    J. F. Nye, Physical Properties of Crystals, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1985

    work page 1985

  40. [40]

    A. P. Thompson, H. M. Aktulga, R. Berger, D. S. Bolintineanu, W. M. Brown, P. S. Crozier, P. J. In’t Veld, A. Kohlmeyer, S. G. Moore, T. D. Nguyen, et al., Lammps-a flexible simulation tool for particle-based materials modeling at the atomic, meso, and continuum scales, Computer physics communications 271 (2022) 108171

    work page 2022

  41. [41]

    M. S. Daw, S. M. Foiles, M. I. Baskes, The embedded-atom method: a review of theory and applications, Materials Science Reports 9 (1993) 251–310. 18

    work page 1993

  42. [42]

    M. I. Baskes, Modified embedded-atom potentials for cubic metals and impurities, Phys. Rev. B 46 (1992) 2727–2742

    work page 1992

  43. [43]

    53 (2005) 4029–4041

    Y.Mishin, M.J.Mehl, D.A.Papaconstantopoulos, PhasestabilityintheFe-Nisystem: Investigation by first-principles calculations and atomistic simulations, Acta Mater. 53 (2005) 4029–4041

    work page 2005

  44. [44]

    R. K. Koju, Y. Li, Y. Mishin, Comparison of interatomic potentials for platinum, In preparation, 2005

    work page 2005

  45. [45]

    Kumagai, S

    T. Kumagai, S. Izumi, S. Hara, S. Sakai, Development of bond-order potentials that can reproduce the elastic constants and melting point of silicon for classical molecular dynamics simulation, Comp. Mater. Sci. 39 (2007) 457–464

    work page 2007

  46. [46]

    G. P. Purja Pun, Y. Mishin, Optimized interatomic potential for silicon and its appli- cation to thermal stability of silicene, Phys. Rev. B 95 (2017) 224103

    work page 2017

  47. [47]

    G. P. Pun, V. Yamakov, J. Hickman, E. Glaessgen, Y. Mishin, Development of a general-purpose machine-learning interatomic potential for aluminum by the physically informed neural network method, Physical Review Materials 4 (2020) 113807

    work page 2020

  48. [48]

    X.-G. Li, C. Hu, C. Chen, Z. Deng, J. Luo, S. P. Ong, Quantum-accurate spectral neighbor analysis potential models for Ni-Mo binary alloys and fcc metals, Physical Review B 98 (2018) 094104

    work page 2018

  49. [49]

    M. S. Nitol, M. J. E. Iriarte, D. E. Dickel, S. J. Fensin, Evaluating moment tensor potential in Ag-Cu alloy: Accuracy, transferability, and phase diagram fidelity, arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.18129 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  50. [50]

    G. S. Fanourgakis, V. Pontikis, G. Zérah, Phase stability and intrinsic stacking faults in aluminum under pressure, Physical Review B 67 (2003) 094102

    work page 2003

  51. [51]

    L. M. Hale, Z. T. Trautt, C. A. Becker, Atomistic manipulation toolkit (atomman), National Institute of Standards and Technology, 2023

    work page 2023

  52. [52]

    Mishin, M

    Y. Mishin, M. J. Mehl, D. A. Papaconstantopoulos, A. F. Voter, J. D. Kress, Structural stability and lattice defects in copper: Ab initio, tight-binding, and embedded-atom calculations, Physical Review B 63 (2001) 224106

    work page 2001

  53. [53]

    Mendelev, M

    M. Mendelev, M. Kramer, C. A. Becker, M. Asta, Analysis of semi-empirical in- teratomic potentials appropriate for simulation of crystalline and liquid Al and Cu, Philosophical Magazine 88 (2008) 1723–1750

    work page 2008

  54. [54]

    Mishin, D

    Y. Mishin, D. Farkas, M. Mehl, D. Papaconstantopoulos, Interatomic potentials for monoatomic metals from experimental data and ab initio calculations, Physical Review B 59 (1999) 3393

    work page 1999

  55. [55]

    Starikov, I

    S. Starikov, I. Gordeev, Y. Lysogorskiy, L. Kolotova, S. Makarov, Optimized in- teratomic potential for study of structure and phase transitions in Si-Au and Si-Al systems, Computational Materials Science 184 (2020) 109891. 19

    work page 2020

  56. [56]

    S.A.Etesami, E.Asadi, Moleculardynamicsfornearmeltingtemperaturessimulations of metals using modified embedded-atom method, Journal of Physics and Chemistry of Solids 112 (2018) 61–72

    work page 2018

  57. [57]

    Grochola, S

    G. Grochola, S. P. Russo, I. K. Snook, On fitting a gold embedded atom method potential using the force matching method, The Journal of chemical physics 123 (2005)

    work page 2005

  58. [58]

    G. P. Purja Pun, Au_GLJ10_3.eam.alloy (unpublished), NIST In- teratomic Potentials Repository, 2017–Purja-Pun-G-P–Au, 2017. URL: https://www.ctcms.nist.gov/potentials/system/Au/

    work page 2017

  59. [59]

    X. W. Zhou, R. Johnson, H. N. Wadley, Misfit-energy-increasing dislocations in vapor- deposited CoFe/NiFe multilayers, Physical Review B 69 (2004) 144113

    work page 2004

  60. [60]

    O’Brien, C

    C. O’Brien, C. Barr, P. Price, K. Hattar, S. Foiles, Grain boundary phase transforma- tions in PtAu and relevance to thermal stabilization of bulk nanocrystalline metals, Journal of Materials Science 53 (2018) 2911–2927

    work page 2018

  61. [61]

    S. M. Foiles, J. Hoyt, Computation of grain boundary stiffness and mobility from boundary fluctuations, Acta Materialia 54 (2006) 3351–3357

    work page 2006

  62. [62]

    Mishin, Atomistic modeling of theγandγ ′-phases of the Ni-Al system, Acta Materialia 52 (2004) 1451–1467

    Y. Mishin, Atomistic modeling of theγandγ ′-phases of the Ni-Al system, Acta Materialia 52 (2004) 1451–1467

    work page 2004

  63. [63]

    Y. Zuo, C. Chen, X. Li, Z. Deng, Y. Chen, J. Behler, G. Csányi, A. V. Shapeev, A. P. Thompson, M. A. Wood, et al., Performance and cost assessment of machine learning interatomic potentials, The Journal of Physical Chemistry A 124 (2020) 731–745

    work page 2020

  64. [64]

    Williams, Y

    P. Williams, Y. Mishin, J. Hamilton, An embedded-atom potential for the Cu-Ag system, Modelling and Simulation in Materials Science and Engineering 14 (2006) 817

    work page 2006

  65. [65]

    A. V. Shapeev, Moment tensor potentials: A class of systematically improvable inter- atomic potentials, Multiscale Modeling & Simulation 14 (2016) 1153–1173

    work page 2016

  66. [66]

    Gubaev, E

    K. Gubaev, E. V. Podryabinkin, A. V. Shapeev, Machine learning of molecular prop- erties: Locality and active learning, The Journal of chemical physics 148 (2018)

    work page 2018

  67. [67]

    Vocadlo, et al., The ab initio melting curve of aluminium, arXiv preprint cond- mat/0108460 (2001)

    L. Vocadlo, et al., The ab initio melting curve of aluminium, arXiv preprint cond- mat/0108460 (2001)

    work page arXiv 2001

  68. [68]

    De Jong, W

    M. De Jong, W. Chen, T. Angsten, A. Jain, R. Notestine, A. Gamst, M. Sluiter, C. Krishna Ande, S. Van Der Zwaag, J. J. Plata, et al., Charting the complete elastic properties of inorganic crystalline compounds, Scientific data 2 (2015) 1–13

    work page 2015

  69. [69]

    R. Tran, Z. Xu, B. Radhakrishnan, D. Winston, W. Sun, K. A. Persson, S. P. Ong, Surface energies of elemental crystals, Scientific data 3 (2016) 1–13. 20

    work page 2016

  70. [70]

    R. Qiu, H. Lu, B. Ao, L. Huang, T. Tang, P. Chen, Energetics of intrinsic point defects in aluminium via orbital-free density functional theory, Philosophical Magazine 97 (2017) 2164–2181

    work page 2017

  71. [71]

    Zhuang, M

    H. Zhuang, M. Chen, E. A. Carter, Elastic and thermodynamic properties of complex mg-al intermetallic compounds via orbital-free density functional theory, Physical Review Applied 5 (2016) 064021

    work page 2016

  72. [72]

    M. Iyer, V. Gavini, T. M. Pollock, Energetics and nucleation of point defects in aluminum under extreme tensile hydrostatic stresses, Physical Review B 89 (2014) 014108

    work page 2014

  73. [73]

    T.Sjostrom, S.Crockett, S.Rudin, Multiphasealuminumequationsofstateviadensity functional theory, Physical Review B 94 (2016) 144101

    work page 2016

  74. [74]

    J. F. Devlin, Stacking fault energies of be, mg, al, cu, ag, and au, Journal of Physics F: Metal Physics 4 (1974) 1865

    work page 1974

  75. [75]

    Ogata, J

    S. Ogata, J. Li, S. Yip, Ideal pure shear strength of aluminum and copper, Science 298 (2002) 807–811

    work page 2002

  76. [76]

    Jahnátek, J

    M. Jahnátek, J. Hafner, M. Krajčí, Shear deformation, ideal strength, and stacking fault formation of fcc metals: A density-functional study of al and cu, Physical Review B—Condensed Matter and Materials Physics 79 (2009) 224103

    work page 2009

  77. [77]

    Kibey, J

    S. Kibey, J. Liu, D. Johnson, H. Sehitoglu, Predicting twinning stress in fcc metals: Linkingtwin-energypathwaystotwinnucleation, Actamaterialia55(2007)6843–6851

    work page 2007

  78. [78]

    Desai, Thermodynamic properties of aluminum, International journal of thermo- physics 8 (1987) 621–638

    P. Desai, Thermodynamic properties of aluminum, International journal of thermo- physics 8 (1987) 621–638

    work page 1987

  79. [79]

    N. V. Kozyrev, V. V. Gordeev, Thermodynamic properties and equation of state for solid and liquid aluminum, Metals 12 (2022) 1346

    work page 2022

  80. [80]

    Ning, L.-Y

    B.-Y. Ning, L.-Y. Zhang, An ab initio study of structural phase transitions of crys- talline aluminium under ultrahigh pressures based on ensemble theory, Computational Materials Science 218 (2023) 111960

    work page 2023

Showing first 80 references.