4.8 Article

Free-electron creation at the 60° twin boundary in Bi2Te3

期刊

NATURE COMMUNICATIONS
卷 7, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/ncomms12449

关键词

-

资金

  1. Technology Innovation Program - Ministry of Trade, Industry & Energy (MOTIE, Korea) [10046673]
  2. R&D Convergence Program of NST (National Research Council of Science & Technology) of the Republic of Korea
  3. KIST-UNIST Partnership Program [2V04450]
  4. KIST [2E26370]
  5. JSPS [2604376]
  6. Korea Evaluation Institute of Industrial Technology (KEIT) [10046673] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)
  7. Ministry of Science, ICT & Future Planning, Republic of Korea [2E26370] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Interfaces, such as grain boundaries in a solid material, are excellent regions to explore novel properties that emerge as the result of local symmetry-breaking. For instance, at the interface of a layered-chalcogenide material, the potential reconfiguration of the atoms at the boundaries can lead to a significant modification of the electronic properties because of their complex atomic bonding structure. Here, we report the experimental observation of an electron source at 60 degrees twin boundaries in Bi2Te3, a representative layered-chalcogenide material. First-principles calculations reveal that the modification of the interatomic distance at the 60 degrees twin boundary to accommodate structural misfits can alter the electronic structure of Bi2Te3. The change in the electronic structure generates occupied states within the original bandgap in a favourable condition to create carriers and enlarges the density-of-states near the conduction band minimum. The present work provides insight into the various transport behaviours of thermoelectrics and topological insulators.

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

4.8
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