Cited by 135Force Microscopy Techniques and ApplicationsSurface and Thin Film PhenomenaAdvanced Electron Microscopy Techniques and Applications

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 53 of the 53 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Surface point defects on bulk oxides: atomically-resolved scanning probe microscopy

Open access
Setvín, Martin, Wagner, Margareta, Schmid, Michael, Parkinson, Gareth S., Diebold, Ulrike·2017·Chemical Society Reviews

Abstract

Metal oxides are abundant in nature and they are some of the most versatile materials for applications ranging from catalysis to novel electronics. The physical and chemical properties of metal oxides are dramatically influenced, and can be judiciously tailored, by defects. Small changes in stoichiometry introduce so-called intrinsic defects, e.g., atomic vacancies and/or interstitials. This review gives an overview of using Scanning Probe Microscopy (SPM), in particular Scanning Tunneling Microscopy (STM), to study the changes in the local geometric and electronic structure related to these intrinsic point defects at the surfaces of metal oxides. Three prototypical systems are discussed: titanium dioxide (TiO 2 ), iron oxides (Fe 3 O 4 ), and, as an example for a post-transition-metal oxide, indium oxide (In 2 O 3 ). Each of these three materials prefers a different type of surface point defect: oxygen vacancies, cation vacancies, and cation adatoms, respectively. The different modes of STM imaging and the promising capabilities of non-contact Atomic Force Microscopy (nc-AFM) techniques are discussed, as well as the capability of STM to manipulate single point defects.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1039/c7cs00076f

Cites

53 of 53 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 53 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Lauritsen, 2010, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter, 22, 263001
  2. Noguera, 2000, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter, 12, R367

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–135 of 135

Metadata

Authors
Setvín, M., Wagner, M., Schmid, M., Parkinson, G. S., & Diebold, U.
Affiliations
TU Wien (AT)
Corresponding author
Diebold, Ulrike
Venue
Chemical Society Reviews
Published
2017
Volume
46
Issue
7
Pages
1772-1784
ISSN
  • 0306-0012 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-4744
OpenAlex
W2596263195
Cited by
134
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 7
FWCI
0.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Chemical Society Reviews (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • reposiTUm (TU Wien) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • H2020 European Research Council (ERC-2011-ADG_20110209)
  • Austrian Science Fund (Firnberg Grant T 749-N27, SFB FOXSI F4507-N16, START-Prize Y 847-N20, Wittgenstein-Prize Z 250-N27)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Force Microscopy Techniques and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Condensed Matter Physics › Surface and Thin Film Phenomena
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Structural Biology › Advanced Electron Microscopy Techniques and Applications
Keywords
surface point defects, oxygen vacancies, cation vacancies, atomic resolution imaging, scanning tunneling microscopy, non-contact atomic force microscopy, oxide surfaces

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review