4.5 Article

Selecting 'convenient observers' to probe the atomic structure of CVD graphene on Ir(111) via photoelectron diffraction

期刊

JOURNAL OF PHYSICS-CONDENSED MATTER
卷 33, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/1361-648X/abceff

关键词

graphene; photoelectron diffraction; moiré

资金

  1. FAPESP [2016/21402-8, 2017/18574-4, 2007/54829-5, 2007/08244-5]
  2. CNPq [401826/2013-9]
  3. UFABC

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study revisited the surface structure determination of graphene on Ir(111) using synchrotron-based photoelectron diffraction, determining parameters such as average height and corrugation. Experimental data near high-symmetry adsorption sites can be described by three reduced systems simplifying the analysis.
CVD graphene grown on metallic substrates presents, in several cases, a long-range periodic structure due to a lattice mismatch between the graphene and the substrate. For instance, graphene grown on Ir(111), displays a corrugated supercell with distinct adsorption sites due to a variation of its local electronic structure. This type of surface reconstruction represents a challenging problem for a detailed atomic surface structure determination for experimental and theoretical techniques. In this work, we revisited the surface structure determination of graphene on Ir(111) by using the unique advantage of surface and chemical selectivity of synchrotron-based photoelectron diffraction. We take advantage of the Ir 4f photoemission surface state and use its diffraction signal as a probe to investigate the atomic arrangement of the graphene topping layer. We determine the average height and the overall corrugation of the graphene layer, which are respectively equal to 3.40 +/- 0.11 angstrom and 0.45 +/- 0.03 angstrom. Furthermore, we explore the graphene topography in the vicinity of its high-symmetry adsorption sites and show that the experimental data can be described by three reduced systems simplifying the moire supercell multiple scattering analysis.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据