2006
DOI: 10.1016/j.ultramic.2005.06.057
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Determination of the mean inner potential in III–V semiconductors, Si and Ge by density functional theory and electron holography

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3

Citation Types

8
36
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 80 publications
(44 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
8
36
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The fact that the present DFT values are close to those in Ref. [3] (also reproduced in Table 3) provides confidence in the applicability of the GPAW simulator for calculations of V 0 for a wide range of materials. Table 3.…”
Section: Calculation Details and Resultssupporting
confidence: 85%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The fact that the present DFT values are close to those in Ref. [3] (also reproduced in Table 3) provides confidence in the applicability of the GPAW simulator for calculations of V 0 for a wide range of materials. Table 3.…”
Section: Calculation Details and Resultssupporting
confidence: 85%
“…The calculation volume contained the material of interest and a region with no material, as shown in Fig. 1 and also used by Kruse et al [3]. The Hartree potential V H was determined from the valence electrons, screened core electrons and nuclei for region B marked in Fig.…”
Section: Calculation Details and Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…As the effects of bonding are neglected, the results of simulations based on this approximation overestimate the mean phase of the electron wavefunction when compared to experimental measurements [5]. The accuracy of calculated mean electron phases has been shown to improve when using density functional theory (DFT) for the calculation of electrostatic potentials to take bonding effects into account [6,7]. However, to the best of our knowledge, no comparison between the DFTcalculated atomic-resolution spatial distribution of the electron phase and high-resolution electron holography experiments has been performed.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, the DFT method yields the lowest potentials, whereas the IAA and IDFT results exceed the DFT values by approximately 9% and 6%, respectively. The difference between the IDFT and IAA values can be explained by the use of a different computational technique: the scattering factors that were used as input for IAA electrostatic potentials were obtained from relativistic Hartree-Fock calculations [7]. In order to relate differences between the DFT and IDFT calculations to a spatial change in electron den- is the bulk mean inner potential of WSe2 [29].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%