Cited by 3,196Advanced Chemical Physics StudiesAdvanced Physical and Chemical Molecular InteractionsSpectroscopy and Quantum Chemical Studies

Implicit solvation model for density-functional study of nanocrystal surfaces and reaction pathways

Open access
Mathew, Kiran, Sundararaman, Ravishankar, Letchworth-Weaver, Kendra, Arias, T. A., Hennig, Richard G.·2014·The Journal of Chemical Physics

Abstract

Solid-liquid interfaces are at the heart of many modern-day technologies and provide a challenge to many materials simulation methods. A realistic first-principles computational study of such systems entails the inclusion of solvent effects. In this work, we implement an implicit solvation model that has a firm theoretical foundation into the widely used density-functional code Vienna ab initio Software Package. The implicit solvation model follows the framework of joint density functional theory. We describe the framework, our algorithm and implementation, and benchmarks for small molecular systems. We apply the solvation model to study the surface energies of different facets of semiconducting and metallic nanocrystals and the SN2 reaction pathway. We find that solvation reduces the surface energies of the nanocrystals, especially for the semiconducting ones and increases the energy barrier of the SN2 reaction.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1063/1.4865107

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mathew, K., Sundararaman, R., Letchworth-Weaver, K., Arias, T. A., & Hennig, R. G.
Affiliations
  • Cornell University (US)
  • Cornell University 2 Department of Physics, , Ithaca, New York 14853, USA
Venue
The Journal of Chemical Physics
Published
2014-02-26
Volume
140
Issue
8
Pages
084106-084106
ISSN
  • 0021-9606 (ISSN-L)
  • 1089-7690
OpenAlex
W2115234257
Cited by
3,196
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 511 · 2025: 587 · 2024: 469 · 2023: 408 · 2022: 356 · 2021: 280 · 2020: 220 · 2019: 136 · 2018: 110 · 2017: 53 · 2016: 43 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 5
FWCI
19.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Journal of Chemical Physics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • OSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
DOE (DE-SC0001086)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Advanced Chemical Physics Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Physical and Theoretical Chemistry › Advanced Physical and Chemical Molecular Interactions
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Spectroscopy and Quantum Chemical Studies
Keywords
implicit solvation models, solid-liquid interface, nanocrystal surfaces, surface energy, semiconducting nanocrystals, metal nanocrystals, reaction barriers, solvent effects

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