First observation of a ferromagnetic-to-paramagnetic phase transition on a ferromagnetic surface using spin-polarized photoelectron diffraction

Core-level spectroscopy of the Ni/W(110) interface: Correlation of W interfacial core-level shifts with first-layer Ni phases

“…Notice that this single peak is at a slightly lower BE than the bulk peak of the clean surface, indicating that the core levels of the Ni influenced atoms have a BE that is close to, but slightly lower than, the bulk atoms. Other core-level studies of the growth of transition metal layers on W surfaces have shown that, in general, a transition- metal overlayer increases the core-level BEs of the firstlayer tungsten atoms [12,49,54,55,58,[67][68][69][70][71][72]. Our data clearly exhibit this same behavior.…”

“…The combination of the sharpness of the W 4f 7/2 core level and the simple core-level structure of W(110) make this face of W an ideal substrate for XPS investigation of interfacial electronic structure. This has been previously taken advantage of in investigations of hydrogen [43,44], oxygen [45][46][47][48], metallic overlayers [12,[49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56][57][58], and mixtures of metallic overlayers and oxygen on W(110) [47,49,[59][60][61][62].…”

Core-level spectroscopy of the Pd/W(110) interface: Evidence of long-range Pd-island–W interactions at submonolayer Pd coverages

“…This explanation is supported by several ab initio structure calculations of the Fe/W(110) interface, all of which indicate an outward displacement (+3.3 ± 0.2 % [70], +4.0% [71], +4.6% [72]) of the first-layer W atoms upon deposition of a ps Fe ML. Photoelectron-diffraction [64] and X-ray-diffraction [73] measurements are consistent with the theoretically calculated values. Still, in this case the second W layer is only ∼1 W lattice constant away from the adsorbed Fe layer.…”

“…Apparently, however, diffraction of the outgoing electrons causes the layer-dependent intensities to vary somewhat from a simple escape-depth description. This is not uncommon for 4f 7/2 photoemission from W(110) [63,64]. The overall good agreement between Fig.…”

“…Core-level data from Fe/W(110) near a ps ML show that the overlayer of Fe perturbs the second W layer, producing an ICS of −87 ± 3 meV (in addition to the first-layer ICS of −231 ± 5 meV) [51,64,69]. It was speculated that this next-nearest-neighbor shift is the result of the Fe layer inducing a change in relaxation of the near-surface W layers, which produces the core-level shift of the second-layer W atoms [69].…”