2021
DOI: 10.1103/physrevmaterials.5.124008
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Quasihydrostatic versus nonhydrostatic pressure effects on the electrical properties of NiPS3

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 36 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…More recent efforts combining transport and x-ray diffraction reveal a series of different crystal structures under pressure, time-dependent and somewhat sluggish character to several of the transitions, and an insulator-to-metal transition near 30 GPa (Matsuoka et al, 2021). Systematic studies of hydrostatic pressure vs. strain demonstrates that the critical pressure of the insulator-to metal transition (as identified by transport measurements) is reduced from 30 to 12.5 GPa under uniaxial strain (Cui et al, 2021) -an observation that again emphasizes the need for hydrostatic pressure conditions. This confusing and somewhat contradictory picture was resolved by bringing together synchrotron-based infrared absorption, Raman scattering, x-ray diffraction, and first-principles calculations under pressure to show that in fact NiPS 3 is quite different from the other MPS 3 materials (Harms et al, 2022a) with a series of five different critical pressures.…”
Section: Nips 3 and Nipsementioning
confidence: 99%
“…More recent efforts combining transport and x-ray diffraction reveal a series of different crystal structures under pressure, time-dependent and somewhat sluggish character to several of the transitions, and an insulator-to-metal transition near 30 GPa (Matsuoka et al, 2021). Systematic studies of hydrostatic pressure vs. strain demonstrates that the critical pressure of the insulator-to metal transition (as identified by transport measurements) is reduced from 30 to 12.5 GPa under uniaxial strain (Cui et al, 2021) -an observation that again emphasizes the need for hydrostatic pressure conditions. This confusing and somewhat contradictory picture was resolved by bringing together synchrotron-based infrared absorption, Raman scattering, x-ray diffraction, and first-principles calculations under pressure to show that in fact NiPS 3 is quite different from the other MPS 3 materials (Harms et al, 2022a) with a series of five different critical pressures.…”
Section: Nips 3 and Nipsementioning
confidence: 99%