Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 160

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Interplanar binding and lattice relaxation in a graphite dilayer

Trickey, S. B., Müller-Plathe, F., Diercksen, G. H. F., Boettger, J. C.·1992·Physical Review B

Abstract

High-precision, large-basis-set calculations, in the local-density approximation (LDA) (using the all-electron, full-potential, linear combination of Gaussian orbitals, fitting-function technique), of the cohesive properties and electronic states (bare Kohn-Sham energies) of the isolated AB dilayer of graphite are reported. They show that the dilayer interplanar spacing (c axis) differs little from the value for ABABAB... crystalline graphite (0.7% expansion relative to one calculation, 2.5% contraction relative to another, 2% expansion relative to experiment). This result, which differs significantly from a preliminary report of strong c-axis contraction, is related to the weak interplanar binding. The intraplanar lattice spacing (a axis) is virtually identical with the crystalline value for both the graphite dilayer and monolayer. The interplanar binding energy (obtained directly via optimization of the monolayer ground state with the same techniques) is in excellent (perhaps fortuitous) agreement with the experimental value for the crystal, in contrast with crystalline calculations, which are too large (in magnitude) by 40--100 % or more. The dilayer cohesive energy agrees well with the crystalline value from an all-electron calculation. Both exceed the experimental value in magnitude by over 1 eV/atom, a problem already known to arise from inadequacies in the LDA treatment of the multiplet structure of the isolated C atom.The dilayer uniaxial compressibility is much larger than calculated for the crystal, apparently another manifestation of weak interplanar binding. Dilayer Kohn-Sham eigenvalues are largely consistent with those calculated self-consistently for the crystal using the same LDA model. Both differ substantially from the non-self-consistent band structure commonly used to parametrize graphite optical properties of interest in astrophysics. Calculated values of the dilayer work function are larger by about 0.6--0.7 eV than the crystalline experimental results. The dilayer density of states at the Fermi level is predicted to be much smaller than for the crystal, while the occupied bandwidth is in reasonable agreement with crystalline experimental results.

Overview

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 · 10.1103/physrevb.45.4460

Cites

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cited by

See all 160

Metadata

Authors
Trickey, S. B., Müller-Plathe, F., Diercksen, G. H. F., & Boettger, J. C.
Venue
Physical Review B
Published
1992-02-15
Volume
45
Issue
8
Pages
4460-4468
ISSN
  • 0163-1829 (ISSN-L)
  • 1095-3795
OpenAlex
W2052980547
Cited by
160
References
0
FWCI
3.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Interplanar binding and lattice relaxation in a graphite dilayer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1103/physrevb.45.4460
The paper
Trickey, S. B., Müller-Plathe, F., Diercksen, G. H. F., & Boettger, J. C. (1992). Interplanar binding and lattice relaxation in a graphite dilayer. Physical Review B. https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevb.45.4460

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.