4.6 Review

Epitaxy of hexagonal ABO3 quantum materials

期刊

APPLIED PHYSICS REVIEWS
卷 9, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

AIP Publishing
DOI: 10.1063/5.0098277

关键词

-

资金

  1. Air Force Office of Scientific Research (MURI) [FA9550-21-1-0429]
  2. Packard Foundation
  3. Swiss National Science Foundation [P2EZP2_195686]
  4. Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation's EPiQS Initiative [GBMF6760]
  5. Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) [P2EZP2_195686] Funding Source: Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Hexagonal ABO(3) oxides are a class of promising materials with unique properties, and their thin-film forms help realize novel oxide structures and properties. By stabilizing and controlling the thin-film structure, exploring metastable new hexagonal oxides is possible, aiming to discover high-temperature superconductivity and topological phases.
Hexagonal ABO(3) oxides (A, B = cation) are a class of rich materials for realizing novel quantum phenomena. Their hexagonal symmetry, oxygen trigonal bipyramid coordination, and quasi-two dimensional layering give rise to properties distinct from those of the cubic ABO(3) perovskites. As bulk materials, most of the focus in this class of materials has been on the rare-earth manganites, RMnO3 (R = rare earth); these materials display coupled ferroelectricity and antiferromagnetic order. In this review, we focus on the thin-film manifestations of the hexagonal ABO(3) oxides. We cover the stability of the hexagonal oxides and substrates which can be used to template the hexagonal structure. We show how the thin-film geometry not only allows for further tuning of the bulk-stable manganites but also allows for the realization of metastable hexagonal oxides such as the RFeO3 that combine ferroelectricity with weak ferromagnetic order. The thin-film geometry is a promising platform to stabilize additional metastable hexagonal oxides to search for predicted high-temperature superconductivity and topological phases in this class of materials.

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

4.6
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