Out of the Crystalline Comfort Zone: Sampling the Initial Oxide Formation At Cu(111)
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract Oxidizing transition metal surfaces are generally characterized by an increasing heterogeneity at simultaneous lowering of crystalline order. This complexity eludes present‐day first‐principles descriptions, with predictive‐quality surface phase diagrams commonly derived from comparing the stability of a small number of ordered surface structural models that are motivated by partial experimental characterization or chemical intuition. Here the computational acceleration brought by machine‐learned interatomic potentials is leveraged for a systematic sampling of the configurational phase space through replica exchange molecular dynamics. Thermodynamic averaging subsequently yields grand‐canonical expectation values for observables like O coverage that account for the disorder and diversity of the sampled structures. Application to the initial oxidation of the Cu(111) surface reveals the (purely entropic) stabilization of sparse O adsorbates at the onset, a plethora of energetically essentially degenerate polymeric –O–Cu–O– ring and chain networks at higher O loading, as well as the presence of experimentally discussed minority species. The in silico surface phase diagram correspondingly shows marked differences to one based merely on established ordered surface reconstructions.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Advanced Chemical Physics Studies · Machine Learning in Materials Science · Electrocatalysts for Energy Conversion
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Fritz‐Haber‐Institut der Max‐Planck‐Gesellschaft Faradayweg 4‐6 D‐14195 Berlin Germany
Funding
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
References (64)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1038/nmat459910.1038/nmat4599 ↗
2. 10.1016/j.snb.2013.11.00510.1016/j.snb.2013.11.005 ↗
3. 10.1016/j.pmatsci.2018.03.00110.1016/j.pmatsci.2018.03.001 ↗
4. Reuter K. · 2006 · 343
5. 10.1146/annurev.physchem.012809.10325410.1146/annurev.physchem.012809.103254 ↗
6. 10.1146/annurev-physchem-032511-14373710.1146/annurev-physchem-032511-143737 ↗
7. 10.1016/0079-6816(93)90006-H10.1016/0079-6816(93)90006-H ↗
8. 10.1088/0953-8984/18/30/R0110.1088/0953-8984/18/30/R01 ↗
9. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.96.06610610.1103/PhysRevLett.96.066106 ↗
10. 10.1007/s10562-015-1684-310.1007/s10562-015-1684-3 ↗
11. 10.1002/anie.20141073810.1002/anie.201410738 ↗
12. 10.1021/acs.chemrev.3c0035210.1021/acs.chemrev.3c00352 ↗
13. 10.1103/PhysRevB.65.03540610.1103/PhysRevB.65.035406 ↗
14. 10.1038/s41929-023-01088-y10.1038/s41929-023-01088-y ↗
15. 10.1021/acs.chemrev.1c0002210.1021/acs.chemrev.1c00022 ↗
16. 10.1021/acs.chemrev.0c0086810.1021/acs.chemrev.0c00868 ↗
17. 10.1021/acs.chemrev.0c0111110.1021/acs.chemrev.0c01111 ↗
18. 10.1021/acs.chemrev.1c0003310.1021/acs.chemrev.1c00033 ↗
19. 10.1209/0295-5075/19/6/00210.1209/0295-5075/19/6/002 ↗
20. 10.1016/S0009-2614(99)01123-910.1016/S0009-2614(99)01123-9 ↗
21. 10.1039/b509983h10.1039/b509983h ↗
22. 10.1103/PhysRevB.73.16542410.1103/PhysRevB.73.165424 ↗
23. Jensen F. · Surf. Sci. Lett. · 1991 · 259 · L774
24. 10.1016/0039-6028(92)91282-G10.1016/0039-6028(92)91282-G ↗
25. 10.1016/S0039-6028(00)00918-310.1016/S0039-6028(00)00918-3 ↗
26. 10.1016/j.apsusc.2021.15014810.1016/j.apsusc.2021.150148 ↗
27. 10.1063/1.499672910.1063/1.4996729 ↗
28. Zhu B. · J. Am. Chem. Soc. · 2024
29. 10.1021/acscatal.4c0641410.1021/acscatal.4c06414 ↗
30. 10.1038/s41467-020-17346-710.1038/s41467-020-17346-7 ↗
31. 10.1021/jp040080j10.1021/jp040080j ↗
32. 10.1021/jacs.5b0745110.1021/jacs.5b07451 ↗
33. Batatia I. · Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. · 2022 · 35
34. 10.1103/PhysRevB.54.1116910.1103/PhysRevB.54.11169 ↗
35. 10.1103/PhysRevB.59.175810.1103/PhysRevB.59.1758 ↗
36. 10.1103/PhysRevB.50.1795310.1103/PhysRevB.50.17953 ↗
37. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.77.386510.1103/PhysRevLett.77.3865 ↗
38. 10.1038/s41524-019-0236-610.1038/s41524-019-0236-6 ↗
39. 10.1021/acs.jpclett.0c0106110.1021/acs.jpclett.0c01061 ↗
40. 10.1063/5.007124910.1063/5.0071249 ↗
41. 10.1021/acs.jpcc.0c0445310.1021/acs.jpcc.0c04453 ↗
42. 10.1021/acs.jpcc.0c0546310.1021/acs.jpcc.0c05463 ↗
43. 10.1016/j.cpc.2021.10817110.1016/j.cpc.2021.108171 ↗
44. Rogal J. · DTIC · 2007 · 14 · 2
45. Chase M. W. · J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data. · 1998 · 1529
46. A.Hagberg P. J.Swart D. A.Schult Exploring network structure dynamics and function using networkx Technical report Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) Los Alamos NM (United States) 2008.
47. 10.1088/1361-648X/aa680e10.1088/1361-648X/aa680e ↗
48. 10.1016/j.commatsci.2012.10.02810.1016/j.commatsci.2012.10.028 ↗
49. 10.1016/j.surfrep.2015.07.00110.1016/j.surfrep.2015.07.001 ↗
50. 10.1021/acsnano.3c1224910.1021/acsnano.3c12249 ↗
51. 10.1021/jacs.2c0633510.1021/jacs.2c06335 ↗
52. F.Riccius H. H.Heenen K.Reuter 2025.
53. 10.1063/5.028575210.1063/5.0285752 ↗
54. 10.1103/PhysRevB.67.20542410.1103/PhysRevB.67.205424 ↗
55. M.Krummenacher O.Tayfuroglu J.Finkler H.Huber S.Goedecker 2024.
56. D.Frenkel B.Smit Understanding Molecular Simulation: From Algorithms to Applications Elsevier 2023.10.1016/B978-0-32-390292-2.00011-8 ↗
57. 10.1103/PhysRevB.100.17410610.1103/PhysRevB.100.174106 ↗
58. 10.1140/epjb/s10051-021-00172-110.1140/epjb/s10051-021-00172-1 ↗
59. 10.1039/D4CP00050A10.1039/D4CP00050A ↗
60. 10.1038/s41929-020-00505-w10.1038/s41929-020-00505-w ↗
61. 10.1038/s41560-020-0594-910.1038/s41560-020-0594-9 ↗
62. 10.1038/s41929-023-01009-z10.1038/s41929-023-01009-z ↗
63. 10.1021/acs.jpclett.4c0315710.1021/acs.jpclett.4c03157 ↗
64. 10.1039/D1SC04861A10.1039/D1SC04861A ↗