Unoccupied surface states on Cu(001): A comparison of experiment and theory

Hulbert, S. L.; Johnson, P. D.; Weinert, M.; Garrett, R. F.

doi:10.1103/physrevb.33.760

Cited by 74 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the case of Cu, Cortona and Sapet 2,3 have recently proposed a set of parameters obtained by fitting the bulk bands and a few surface states. They have shown 3 that band calculations using these parameters give results in full agreement with the available experimental data [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19] obtained by photoemission and inverse pho-toemission for the ͑100͒, ͑110͒, and ͑111͒ surfaces.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 64%

Investigation of the surface bands along theX¯−M¯line of the Cu(100) surface

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent semiempirical linear combination of atomic orbital method ͑LCAO͒ calculations for the Cu surfaces of low Miller indices have given surface bands which agree very well with the available experimental data. These calculations indicate the existence of various surface states and resonances, in particular, in the s-d band region, which have not yet been experimentally observed. We have checked a part of these predictions by performing angle-resolved photoemission measurements along the X -M direction of the ͑100͒ surface, a direction that, to our knowledge, has not yet been investigated. Most of the predicted surface states and resonances have been actually observed and are in good agreement with the calculations. Furthermore, the calculated effective k-resolved density of states quantitatively reproduces the experimental photoemission spectra, as it results from the comparison that we have done at the high-symmetry points. The results reported in the present paper confirm the predictive ability of LCAO calculations performed with a carefully chosen parameter set and provide experimental evidence of several previously unknown surface states.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 64%

Investigation of the surface bands along theX¯−M¯line of the Cu(100) surface

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…3 the probability amplitude ͑den-sity͒ of the first image state has no node in the vicinity of the geometrical edge. The node is observed for the nϭ1 state on close-packed metal and transition metal surfaces, 15,20 for which the surface corrugation effects are negligible. The Be͑1010͒ surface has a higher corrugation than ͑100͒ and ͑111͒ surfaces of fcc metals and this corrugation determines the very anisotropic behavior of the probability amplitude of image states in the (x,y) plane.…”

mentioning

confidence: 88%

Unusual dispersion of image potential states on the Be(101¯0) surface

1999

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present a self-consistent pseudopotential calculation of image potential states on the Be͑1010͒ surface. The one-electron potential inside the crystal and surface region is described by the local density approximation and by the image potential in the vacuum region ͑at zϾz im ). The calculated first image state (E 1 ϭϪ1.20 eV͒ lies in the symmetry gap and the second image state (E 2 ϭϪ0.31 eV͒ is located inside the absolute energy gap. High anisotropy of the dispersion of both image states is found. The effective masses that reflect this anisotropy are obtained m 1 */m e ϭ1.55Ϯ0.1, m 2 */m e ϭ1.30Ϯ0.1 along the ⌫ M direction and m 1 */m e ϭ0.40Ϯ0.05, m 2 */m e ϭ0.55Ϯ0.05 along ⌫ Ā . The unusual dispersion of the image states on Be͑1010͒ is due to a large penetration value p n of these states (p 1 ϭ0.34 and p 2 ϭ0.15), and the very anisotropic character of the symmetry energy gap edges. ͓S0163-1829͑99͒00135-6͔

show abstract

“…The different surfaces can be either made of different materials or different crystallographic orientations of the same material. For our theoretical study in this paper, we consider Cu(100) and Cu(111) surfaces, which have been widely investigated in energy-domain-spectroscopy and particle-scattering studies [30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38]. A similar type of comparative RABBITT study has been applied to two different atomic shells of gaseous argon targets [11].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative time-resolved photoemission from the Cu(100) and Cu(111) surfaces

Ambrosio

Thumm

2016

Phys. Rev. A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Motivated by the striking dependence of the valence electronic structure of transition metal surfaces on their crystallographic orientation, and by emerging experiments on laser-assisted extended ultraviolet (XUV) photoemission from solid surfaces, we calculate photoemission spectra from Cu(100) and Cu(111) surfaces as a function of the photoelectron final kinetic energy and the delay between the ionizing attosecond XUV pulse train and assisting infrared (IR) laser pulse. Our numerical simulations predict distinct differences in delaydependent photoelectron energy distributions and photoemission time delays for Cu(100) and Cu(111) surfaces. These differences can be scrutinized experimentally with existing technology in a suggested in situ comparative RABBITT (reconstruction of attosecond beating by interference of two-photon transitions) configuration by placing the two surfaces on a sliding platform while keeping all optical components and pathlengths fixed. Our calculations also show that the inclusion of the Fresnel-reflected incident IR pulse at the metal-vacuum interface modifies photoelectron spectra and photoemission time delays in a characteristic way that reveals the degree of spatial location of the initial electronic states.

show abstract

Unoccupied surface states on Cu(001): A comparison of experiment and theory

Cited by 74 publications

References 21 publications

Investigation of the surface bands along theX¯−M¯line of the Cu(100) surface

Investigation of the surface bands along theX¯−M¯line of the Cu(100) surface

Unusual dispersion of image potential states on the Be(101¯0) surface

Comparative time-resolved photoemission from the Cu(100) and Cu(111) surfaces

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About