Understanding the difference in cohesive energies between alpha and beta tin in DFT calculations

The transition temperature between the low-temperature alpha phase of tin to beta tin is close to the room temperature (Tαβ = 130C), and the difference in cohesive energy of the two phases at 0 K of about ΔEcoh =0.02 eV/atom is at the limit of the accuracy of DFT (density functional theory) with ava...
Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Fleur Legrain [verfasserIn] Sergei Manzhos [verfasserIn]

Format:	E-Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2016

Übergeordnetes Werk:	In: AIP Advances - AIP Publishing LLC, 2011, 6(2016), 4, Seite 045116-045116-11
Übergeordnetes Werk:	volume:6 ; year:2016 ; number:4 ; pages:045116-045116-11

Links:	Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Journal toc

DOI / URN:	10.1063/1.4948434

Katalog-ID:	DOAJ072509880

Internformat


LEADER	01000caa a22002652 4500
001	DOAJ072509880
003	DE-627
005	20230309110618.0
007	cr uuu---uuuuu
008	230228s2016 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c
024	7		\|a 10.1063/1.4948434 \|2 doi
035			\|a (DE-627)DOAJ072509880
035			\|a (DE-599)DOAJadf92217753e4e20a9d2b9f1c9a25692
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rakwb
041			\|a eng
050		0	\|a QC1-999
100	0		\|a Fleur Legrain \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a Understanding the difference in cohesive energies between alpha and beta tin in DFT calculations
264		1	\|c 2016
336			\|a Text \|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a Computermedien \|b c \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Online-Ressource \|b cr \|2 rdacarrier
520			\|a The transition temperature between the low-temperature alpha phase of tin to beta tin is close to the room temperature (Tαβ = 130C), and the difference in cohesive energy of the two phases at 0 K of about ΔEcoh =0.02 eV/atom is at the limit of the accuracy of DFT (density functional theory) with available exchange-correlation functionals. It is however critically important to model the relative phase energies correctly for any reasonable description of phenomena and technologies involving these phases, for example, the performance of tin electrodes in electrochemical batteries. Here, we show that several commonly used and converged DFT setups using the most practical and widely used PBE functional result in ΔEcoh ≈0.04 eV/atom, with different types of basis sets and with different models of core electrons (all-electron or pseudopotentials of different types), which leads to a significant overestimation of Tαβ. We show that this is due to the errors in relative positions of s and p –like bands, which, combined with different populations of these bands in α and β Sn, leads to overstabilization of alpha tin. We show that this error can be effectively corrected by applying a Hubbard +U correction to s –like states, whereby correct cohesive energies of both α and β Sn can be obtained with the same computational scheme. We quantify for the first time the effects of anharmonicity on ΔEcoh and find that it is negligible.
653		0	\|a Physics
700	0		\|a Sergei Manzhos \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
773	0	8	\|i In \|t AIP Advances \|d AIP Publishing LLC, 2011 \|g 6(2016), 4, Seite 045116-045116-11 \|w (DE-627)641391706 \|w (DE-600)2583909-3 \|x 21583226 \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g volume:6 \|g year:2016 \|g number:4 \|g pages:045116-045116-11
856	4	0	\|u https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4948434 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u https://doaj.org/article/adf92217753e4e20a9d2b9f1c9a25692 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4948434 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	2	\|u https://doaj.org/toc/2158-3226 \|y Journal toc \|z kostenfrei
912			\|a GBV_USEFLAG_A
912			\|a SYSFLAG_A
912			\|a GBV_DOAJ
912			\|a GBV_ILN_20
912			\|a GBV_ILN_22
912			\|a GBV_ILN_23
912			\|a GBV_ILN_24
912			\|a GBV_ILN_31
912			\|a GBV_ILN_39
912			\|a GBV_ILN_40
912			\|a GBV_ILN_60
912			\|a GBV_ILN_62
912			\|a GBV_ILN_63
912			\|a GBV_ILN_65
912			\|a GBV_ILN_69
912			\|a GBV_ILN_70
912			\|a GBV_ILN_73
912			\|a GBV_ILN_95
912			\|a GBV_ILN_105
912			\|a GBV_ILN_110
912			\|a GBV_ILN_151
912			\|a GBV_ILN_161
912			\|a GBV_ILN_170
912			\|a GBV_ILN_213
912			\|a GBV_ILN_230
912			\|a GBV_ILN_285
912			\|a GBV_ILN_293
912			\|a GBV_ILN_370
912			\|a GBV_ILN_602
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2014
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4012
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4037
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4125
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4126
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4249
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4305
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4306
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4307
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4313
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4322
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4323
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4324
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4325
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4335
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4338
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4367
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4700
951			\|a AR
952			\|d 6 \|j 2016 \|e 4 \|h 045116-045116-11

Indexfelder

author_variant	f l fl s m sm
matchkey_str	article:21583226:2016----::nesadnteifrnenoeienriseweapanb
hierarchy_sort_str	2016
callnumber-subject-code	QC
publishDate	2016
allfields	10.1063/1.4948434 doi (DE-627)DOAJ072509880 (DE-599)DOAJadf92217753e4e20a9d2b9f1c9a25692 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng QC1-999 Fleur Legrain verfasserin aut Understanding the difference in cohesive energies between alpha and beta tin in DFT calculations 2016 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier The transition temperature between the low-temperature alpha phase of tin to beta tin is close to the room temperature (Tαβ = 130C), and the difference in cohesive energy of the two phases at 0 K of about ΔEcoh =0.02 eV/atom is at the limit of the accuracy of DFT (density functional theory) with available exchange-correlation functionals. It is however critically important to model the relative phase energies correctly for any reasonable description of phenomena and technologies involving these phases, for example, the performance of tin electrodes in electrochemical batteries. Here, we show that several commonly used and converged DFT setups using the most practical and widely used PBE functional result in ΔEcoh ≈0.04 eV/atom, with different types of basis sets and with different models of core electrons (all-electron or pseudopotentials of different types), which leads to a significant overestimation of Tαβ. We show that this is due to the errors in relative positions of s and p –like bands, which, combined with different populations of these bands in α and β Sn, leads to overstabilization of alpha tin. We show that this error can be effectively corrected by applying a Hubbard +U correction to s –like states, whereby correct cohesive energies of both α and β Sn can be obtained with the same computational scheme. We quantify for the first time the effects of anharmonicity on ΔEcoh and find that it is negligible. Physics Sergei Manzhos verfasserin aut In AIP Advances AIP Publishing LLC, 2011 6(2016), 4, Seite 045116-045116-11 (DE-627)641391706 (DE-600)2583909-3 21583226 nnns volume:6 year:2016 number:4 pages:045116-045116-11 https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4948434 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/adf92217753e4e20a9d2b9f1c9a25692 kostenfrei http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4948434 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2158-3226 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 6 2016 4 045116-045116-11
spelling	10.1063/1.4948434 doi (DE-627)DOAJ072509880 (DE-599)DOAJadf92217753e4e20a9d2b9f1c9a25692 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng QC1-999 Fleur Legrain verfasserin aut Understanding the difference in cohesive energies between alpha and beta tin in DFT calculations 2016 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier The transition temperature between the low-temperature alpha phase of tin to beta tin is close to the room temperature (Tαβ = 130C), and the difference in cohesive energy of the two phases at 0 K of about ΔEcoh =0.02 eV/atom is at the limit of the accuracy of DFT (density functional theory) with available exchange-correlation functionals. It is however critically important to model the relative phase energies correctly for any reasonable description of phenomena and technologies involving these phases, for example, the performance of tin electrodes in electrochemical batteries. Here, we show that several commonly used and converged DFT setups using the most practical and widely used PBE functional result in ΔEcoh ≈0.04 eV/atom, with different types of basis sets and with different models of core electrons (all-electron or pseudopotentials of different types), which leads to a significant overestimation of Tαβ. We show that this is due to the errors in relative positions of s and p –like bands, which, combined with different populations of these bands in α and β Sn, leads to overstabilization of alpha tin. We show that this error can be effectively corrected by applying a Hubbard +U correction to s –like states, whereby correct cohesive energies of both α and β Sn can be obtained with the same computational scheme. We quantify for the first time the effects of anharmonicity on ΔEcoh and find that it is negligible. Physics Sergei Manzhos verfasserin aut In AIP Advances AIP Publishing LLC, 2011 6(2016), 4, Seite 045116-045116-11 (DE-627)641391706 (DE-600)2583909-3 21583226 nnns volume:6 year:2016 number:4 pages:045116-045116-11 https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4948434 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/adf92217753e4e20a9d2b9f1c9a25692 kostenfrei http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4948434 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2158-3226 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 6 2016 4 045116-045116-11
allfields_unstemmed	10.1063/1.4948434 doi (DE-627)DOAJ072509880 (DE-599)DOAJadf92217753e4e20a9d2b9f1c9a25692 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng QC1-999 Fleur Legrain verfasserin aut Understanding the difference in cohesive energies between alpha and beta tin in DFT calculations 2016 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier The transition temperature between the low-temperature alpha phase of tin to beta tin is close to the room temperature (Tαβ = 130C), and the difference in cohesive energy of the two phases at 0 K of about ΔEcoh =0.02 eV/atom is at the limit of the accuracy of DFT (density functional theory) with available exchange-correlation functionals. It is however critically important to model the relative phase energies correctly for any reasonable description of phenomena and technologies involving these phases, for example, the performance of tin electrodes in electrochemical batteries. Here, we show that several commonly used and converged DFT setups using the most practical and widely used PBE functional result in ΔEcoh ≈0.04 eV/atom, with different types of basis sets and with different models of core electrons (all-electron or pseudopotentials of different types), which leads to a significant overestimation of Tαβ. We show that this is due to the errors in relative positions of s and p –like bands, which, combined with different populations of these bands in α and β Sn, leads to overstabilization of alpha tin. We show that this error can be effectively corrected by applying a Hubbard +U correction to s –like states, whereby correct cohesive energies of both α and β Sn can be obtained with the same computational scheme. We quantify for the first time the effects of anharmonicity on ΔEcoh and find that it is negligible. Physics Sergei Manzhos verfasserin aut In AIP Advances AIP Publishing LLC, 2011 6(2016), 4, Seite 045116-045116-11 (DE-627)641391706 (DE-600)2583909-3 21583226 nnns volume:6 year:2016 number:4 pages:045116-045116-11 https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4948434 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/adf92217753e4e20a9d2b9f1c9a25692 kostenfrei http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4948434 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2158-3226 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 6 2016 4 045116-045116-11
allfieldsGer	10.1063/1.4948434 doi (DE-627)DOAJ072509880 (DE-599)DOAJadf92217753e4e20a9d2b9f1c9a25692 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng QC1-999 Fleur Legrain verfasserin aut Understanding the difference in cohesive energies between alpha and beta tin in DFT calculations 2016 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier The transition temperature between the low-temperature alpha phase of tin to beta tin is close to the room temperature (Tαβ = 130C), and the difference in cohesive energy of the two phases at 0 K of about ΔEcoh =0.02 eV/atom is at the limit of the accuracy of DFT (density functional theory) with available exchange-correlation functionals. It is however critically important to model the relative phase energies correctly for any reasonable description of phenomena and technologies involving these phases, for example, the performance of tin electrodes in electrochemical batteries. Here, we show that several commonly used and converged DFT setups using the most practical and widely used PBE functional result in ΔEcoh ≈0.04 eV/atom, with different types of basis sets and with different models of core electrons (all-electron or pseudopotentials of different types), which leads to a significant overestimation of Tαβ. We show that this is due to the errors in relative positions of s and p –like bands, which, combined with different populations of these bands in α and β Sn, leads to overstabilization of alpha tin. We show that this error can be effectively corrected by applying a Hubbard +U correction to s –like states, whereby correct cohesive energies of both α and β Sn can be obtained with the same computational scheme. We quantify for the first time the effects of anharmonicity on ΔEcoh and find that it is negligible. Physics Sergei Manzhos verfasserin aut In AIP Advances AIP Publishing LLC, 2011 6(2016), 4, Seite 045116-045116-11 (DE-627)641391706 (DE-600)2583909-3 21583226 nnns volume:6 year:2016 number:4 pages:045116-045116-11 https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4948434 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/adf92217753e4e20a9d2b9f1c9a25692 kostenfrei http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4948434 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2158-3226 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 6 2016 4 045116-045116-11
allfieldsSound	10.1063/1.4948434 doi (DE-627)DOAJ072509880 (DE-599)DOAJadf92217753e4e20a9d2b9f1c9a25692 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng QC1-999 Fleur Legrain verfasserin aut Understanding the difference in cohesive energies between alpha and beta tin in DFT calculations 2016 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier The transition temperature between the low-temperature alpha phase of tin to beta tin is close to the room temperature (Tαβ = 130C), and the difference in cohesive energy of the two phases at 0 K of about ΔEcoh =0.02 eV/atom is at the limit of the accuracy of DFT (density functional theory) with available exchange-correlation functionals. It is however critically important to model the relative phase energies correctly for any reasonable description of phenomena and technologies involving these phases, for example, the performance of tin electrodes in electrochemical batteries. Here, we show that several commonly used and converged DFT setups using the most practical and widely used PBE functional result in ΔEcoh ≈0.04 eV/atom, with different types of basis sets and with different models of core electrons (all-electron or pseudopotentials of different types), which leads to a significant overestimation of Tαβ. We show that this is due to the errors in relative positions of s and p –like bands, which, combined with different populations of these bands in α and β Sn, leads to overstabilization of alpha tin. We show that this error can be effectively corrected by applying a Hubbard +U correction to s –like states, whereby correct cohesive energies of both α and β Sn can be obtained with the same computational scheme. We quantify for the first time the effects of anharmonicity on ΔEcoh and find that it is negligible. Physics Sergei Manzhos verfasserin aut In AIP Advances AIP Publishing LLC, 2011 6(2016), 4, Seite 045116-045116-11 (DE-627)641391706 (DE-600)2583909-3 21583226 nnns volume:6 year:2016 number:4 pages:045116-045116-11 https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4948434 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/adf92217753e4e20a9d2b9f1c9a25692 kostenfrei http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4948434 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2158-3226 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 6 2016 4 045116-045116-11
language	English
source	In AIP Advances 6(2016), 4, Seite 045116-045116-11 volume:6 year:2016 number:4 pages:045116-045116-11
sourceStr	In AIP Advances 6(2016), 4, Seite 045116-045116-11 volume:6 year:2016 number:4 pages:045116-045116-11
format_phy_str_mv	Article
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	Physics
isfreeaccess_bool	true
container_title	AIP Advances
authorswithroles_txt_mv	Fleur Legrain @@aut@@ Sergei Manzhos @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2016-01-01T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	641391706
id	DOAJ072509880
language_de	englisch
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ072509880</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230309110618.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230228s2016 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1063/1.4948434</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ072509880</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJadf92217753e4e20a9d2b9f1c9a25692</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">QC1-999</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Fleur Legrain</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Understanding the difference in cohesive energies between alpha and beta tin in DFT calculations</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2016</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">The transition temperature between the low-temperature alpha phase of tin to beta tin is close to the room temperature (Tαβ = 130C), and the difference in cohesive energy of the two phases at 0 K of about ΔEcoh =0.02 eV/atom is at the limit of the accuracy of DFT (density functional theory) with available exchange-correlation functionals. It is however critically important to model the relative phase energies correctly for any reasonable description of phenomena and technologies involving these phases, for example, the performance of tin electrodes in electrochemical batteries. Here, we show that several commonly used and converged DFT setups using the most practical and widely used PBE functional result in ΔEcoh ≈0.04 eV/atom, with different types of basis sets and with different models of core electrons (all-electron or pseudopotentials of different types), which leads to a significant overestimation of Tαβ. We show that this is due to the errors in relative positions of s and p –like bands, which, combined with different populations of these bands in α and β Sn, leads to overstabilization of alpha tin. We show that this error can be effectively corrected by applying a Hubbard +U correction to s –like states, whereby correct cohesive energies of both α and β Sn can be obtained with the same computational scheme. We quantify for the first time the effects of anharmonicity on ΔEcoh and find that it is negligible.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Physics</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Sergei Manzhos</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">AIP Advances</subfield><subfield code="d">AIP Publishing LLC, 2011</subfield><subfield code="g">6(2016), 4, Seite 045116-045116-11</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)641391706</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2583909-3</subfield><subfield code="x">21583226</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:6</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2016</subfield><subfield code="g">number:4</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:045116-045116-11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4948434</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/adf92217753e4e20a9d2b9f1c9a25692</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4948434</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2158-3226</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">6</subfield><subfield code="j">2016</subfield><subfield code="e">4</subfield><subfield code="h">045116-045116-11</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
callnumber-first	Q - Science
author	Fleur Legrain
spellingShingle	Fleur Legrain misc QC1-999 misc Physics Understanding the difference in cohesive energies between alpha and beta tin in DFT calculations
authorStr	Fleur Legrain
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)641391706
format	electronic Article
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut aut
collection	DOAJ
remote_str	true
callnumber-label	QC1-999
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	21583226
topic_title	QC1-999 Understanding the difference in cohesive energies between alpha and beta tin in DFT calculations
topic	misc QC1-999 misc Physics
topic_unstemmed	misc QC1-999 misc Physics
topic_browse	misc QC1-999 misc Physics
format_facet	Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource
format_main_str_mv	Text Zeitschrift/Artikel
carriertype_str_mv	cr
hierarchy_parent_title	AIP Advances
hierarchy_parent_id	641391706
hierarchy_top_title	AIP Advances
isfreeaccess_txt	true
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)641391706 (DE-600)2583909-3
title	Understanding the difference in cohesive energies between alpha and beta tin in DFT calculations
ctrlnum	(DE-627)DOAJ072509880 (DE-599)DOAJadf92217753e4e20a9d2b9f1c9a25692
title_full	Understanding the difference in cohesive energies between alpha and beta tin in DFT calculations
author_sort	Fleur Legrain
journal	AIP Advances
journalStr	AIP Advances
callnumber-first-code	Q
lang_code	eng
isOA_bool	true
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2016
contenttype_str_mv	txt
container_start_page	045116
author_browse	Fleur Legrain Sergei Manzhos
container_volume	6
class	QC1-999
format_se	Elektronische Aufsätze
author-letter	Fleur Legrain
doi_str_mv	10.1063/1.4948434
author2-role	verfasserin
title_sort	understanding the difference in cohesive energies between alpha and beta tin in dft calculations
callnumber	QC1-999
title_auth	Understanding the difference in cohesive energies between alpha and beta tin in DFT calculations
abstract	The transition temperature between the low-temperature alpha phase of tin to beta tin is close to the room temperature (Tαβ = 130C), and the difference in cohesive energy of the two phases at 0 K of about ΔEcoh =0.02 eV/atom is at the limit of the accuracy of DFT (density functional theory) with available exchange-correlation functionals. It is however critically important to model the relative phase energies correctly for any reasonable description of phenomena and technologies involving these phases, for example, the performance of tin electrodes in electrochemical batteries. Here, we show that several commonly used and converged DFT setups using the most practical and widely used PBE functional result in ΔEcoh ≈0.04 eV/atom, with different types of basis sets and with different models of core electrons (all-electron or pseudopotentials of different types), which leads to a significant overestimation of Tαβ. We show that this is due to the errors in relative positions of s and p –like bands, which, combined with different populations of these bands in α and β Sn, leads to overstabilization of alpha tin. We show that this error can be effectively corrected by applying a Hubbard +U correction to s –like states, whereby correct cohesive energies of both α and β Sn can be obtained with the same computational scheme. We quantify for the first time the effects of anharmonicity on ΔEcoh and find that it is negligible.
abstractGer	The transition temperature between the low-temperature alpha phase of tin to beta tin is close to the room temperature (Tαβ = 130C), and the difference in cohesive energy of the two phases at 0 K of about ΔEcoh =0.02 eV/atom is at the limit of the accuracy of DFT (density functional theory) with available exchange-correlation functionals. It is however critically important to model the relative phase energies correctly for any reasonable description of phenomena and technologies involving these phases, for example, the performance of tin electrodes in electrochemical batteries. Here, we show that several commonly used and converged DFT setups using the most practical and widely used PBE functional result in ΔEcoh ≈0.04 eV/atom, with different types of basis sets and with different models of core electrons (all-electron or pseudopotentials of different types), which leads to a significant overestimation of Tαβ. We show that this is due to the errors in relative positions of s and p –like bands, which, combined with different populations of these bands in α and β Sn, leads to overstabilization of alpha tin. We show that this error can be effectively corrected by applying a Hubbard +U correction to s –like states, whereby correct cohesive energies of both α and β Sn can be obtained with the same computational scheme. We quantify for the first time the effects of anharmonicity on ΔEcoh and find that it is negligible.
abstract_unstemmed	The transition temperature between the low-temperature alpha phase of tin to beta tin is close to the room temperature (Tαβ = 130C), and the difference in cohesive energy of the two phases at 0 K of about ΔEcoh =0.02 eV/atom is at the limit of the accuracy of DFT (density functional theory) with available exchange-correlation functionals. It is however critically important to model the relative phase energies correctly for any reasonable description of phenomena and technologies involving these phases, for example, the performance of tin electrodes in electrochemical batteries. Here, we show that several commonly used and converged DFT setups using the most practical and widely used PBE functional result in ΔEcoh ≈0.04 eV/atom, with different types of basis sets and with different models of core electrons (all-electron or pseudopotentials of different types), which leads to a significant overestimation of Tαβ. We show that this is due to the errors in relative positions of s and p –like bands, which, combined with different populations of these bands in α and β Sn, leads to overstabilization of alpha tin. We show that this error can be effectively corrected by applying a Hubbard +U correction to s –like states, whereby correct cohesive energies of both α and β Sn can be obtained with the same computational scheme. We quantify for the first time the effects of anharmonicity on ΔEcoh and find that it is negligible.
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700
container_issue	4
title_short	Understanding the difference in cohesive energies between alpha and beta tin in DFT calculations
url	https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4948434 https://doaj.org/article/adf92217753e4e20a9d2b9f1c9a25692 http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4948434 https://doaj.org/toc/2158-3226
remote_bool	true
author2	Sergei Manzhos
author2Str	Sergei Manzhos
ppnlink	641391706
callnumber-subject	QC - Physics
mediatype_str_mv	c
isOA_txt	true
hochschulschrift_bool	false
doi_str	10.1063/1.4948434
callnumber-a	QC1-999
up_date	2024-07-04T01:20:55.772Z
_version_	1803609498741374976
fullrecord_marcxml	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ072509880</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230309110618.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230228s2016 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1063/1.4948434</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ072509880</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJadf92217753e4e20a9d2b9f1c9a25692</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">QC1-999</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Fleur Legrain</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Understanding the difference in cohesive energies between alpha and beta tin in DFT calculations</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2016</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">The transition temperature between the low-temperature alpha phase of tin to beta tin is close to the room temperature (Tαβ = 130C), and the difference in cohesive energy of the two phases at 0 K of about ΔEcoh =0.02 eV/atom is at the limit of the accuracy of DFT (density functional theory) with available exchange-correlation functionals. It is however critically important to model the relative phase energies correctly for any reasonable description of phenomena and technologies involving these phases, for example, the performance of tin electrodes in electrochemical batteries. Here, we show that several commonly used and converged DFT setups using the most practical and widely used PBE functional result in ΔEcoh ≈0.04 eV/atom, with different types of basis sets and with different models of core electrons (all-electron or pseudopotentials of different types), which leads to a significant overestimation of Tαβ. We show that this is due to the errors in relative positions of s and p –like bands, which, combined with different populations of these bands in α and β Sn, leads to overstabilization of alpha tin. We show that this error can be effectively corrected by applying a Hubbard +U correction to s –like states, whereby correct cohesive energies of both α and β Sn can be obtained with the same computational scheme. We quantify for the first time the effects of anharmonicity on ΔEcoh and find that it is negligible.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Physics</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Sergei Manzhos</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">AIP Advances</subfield><subfield code="d">AIP Publishing LLC, 2011</subfield><subfield code="g">6(2016), 4, Seite 045116-045116-11</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)641391706</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2583909-3</subfield><subfield code="x">21583226</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:6</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2016</subfield><subfield code="g">number:4</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:045116-045116-11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4948434</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/adf92217753e4e20a9d2b9f1c9a25692</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4948434</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2158-3226</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">6</subfield><subfield code="j">2016</subfield><subfield code="e">4</subfield><subfield code="h">045116-045116-11</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.3999014

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

Understanding the difference in cohesive energies between alpha and beta tin in DFT calculations

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?