The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Surface properties ofCeO2from first principles
Abstract
The surface energies and electronic structure of (111), (110), and (100) surfaces of ${\mathrm{CeO}}_{2}$ have been studied using the first-principles projector augmented-wave method within the local density approximation (LDA) and generalized gradient approximation (GGA) and are compared with molecular dynamics (MD) simulations at 10 K. Slabs of the same thicknesses were used for the two methods (lamellar three-dimensional boxes in the case of density functional theory and two-dimensional isolated slabs in the MD simulations). The polar (100) surface of ${\mathrm{CeO}}_{2}$ was modeled as an oxygen-terminated surface with half of the oxygen atoms moved from one surface to the other to fulfill the stoichiometric formula. Among a number of different possible terminations, the checkerboard termination was found to be the most stable. Out of all three low-index surfaces, the (111) surface was found to be the most stable, in agreement with experiment and previous calculations. Our calculated surface energy is $1.0{\mathrm{J}/\mathrm{m}}^{2}$ (LDA) and $0.7{\mathrm{J}/\mathrm{m}}^{2}$ (GGA). Both values are lower than most calculated surface energies for this surface in the literature, including our present MD results $(1.4{\mathrm{J}/\mathrm{m}}^{2}).$ For (110) our surface energies (LDA, GGA, and MD) are 40%--60% higher than for (111). The structural relaxation is considerably larger for (110) than for (111) and shows excellent agreement between LDA, GGA, and MD. Also the electronic density of states shows larger differences between surface and bulk for the (110) surface than for (111), with, for example, a decrease of the band gap between the valence band (essentially O $2p)$ and the empty Ce $4f$ band in the (110) surface region compared to the bulk.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Cites
From ultrasoft pseudopotentials to the projector augmented-wave method
Kresse, G., & Joubert, D. (1999) · Physical Review B · doi:10.1103/physrevb.59.1758 · Cited by 85,307
Alternative energy technologies
Dresselhaus, M. S., & Thomas, I. L. (2001) · Nature · doi:10.1038/35104599 · Cited by 4,894
Cited by
Ganduglia-Pirovano, M. V., Hofmann, A., & Sauer, J. (2007) · Surface Science Reports · doi:10.1016/j.surfrep.2007.03.002 · Cited by 1,284
Oxygen Defects and Surface Chemistry of Ceria: Quantum Chemical Studies Compared to Experiment
Paier, J., Penschke, C., & Sauer, J. (2013) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/cr3004949 · Cited by 1,075
First-principlesLDA+UandGGA+Ustudy of cerium oxides: Dependence on the effective U parameter
Loschen, C., Carrasco, J., Neyman, K. M., & Illas, F. (2007) · Physical Review B · doi:10.1103/physrevb.75.035115 · Cited by 721
The surface chemistry of cerium oxide
Mullins, D. R. (2015) · Surface Science Reports · doi:10.1016/j.surfrep.2014.12.001 · Cited by 684
Electronic and Atomistic Structures of Clean and Reduced Ceria Surfaces
Fabris, S., Vicario, G., Balducci, G., de Gironcoli, S., & Baroni, S. (2005) · The Journal of Physical Chemistry B · doi:10.1021/jp0511698 · Cited by 406
Metadata
- Authors
- Skorodumova, N. V., Baudin, M., & Hermansson, K.
- Venue
- Physical Review B
- Publisher
- American Physical Society (APS)
- Published
- 2004-02-06
- Volume
- 69
- Issue
- 7
- ISSN
- 1098-0121 (ISSN-L)
- 1550-235X
- OpenAlex
- W2994039657
- Cited by
- 349
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 7.29
- 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
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.