arxiv: 2605.11052 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-11 · ❄️ cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Recognition: no theorem link

Adamantane plasma polymers: fluorine-free vacuum-processable triboelectric thin films for all-triboelectric nanogenerator configurations

Gloria P. Moreno-Martinez , Fernando Nunez-Galvez , Hari Krishna Mishra , Triana Czermak , Xabier Garcia-Casas , Vanda Cristina Godinho , Bernd Wicklein , Juan Carlos Sanchez-Lopez

show 7 more authors

Javier Ferrer Isabel Montero Juan Ramon Sanchez-Valencia Andris Sutka Francisco Aparicio Angel Barranco Ana Borras

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-13 00:57 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.mtrl-sci

keywords adamantane plasma polymerstriboelectric nanogeneratorstribopositive tribonegative filmsplasma depositionfluorine-free thin filmsenergy harvestingdurability

0 comments

The pith

Adamantane plasma polymers can act as either tribopositive or tribonegative surfaces by changing whether the substrate faces or backs the plasma during deposition.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper shows that adamantane plasma polymers form thin films whose triboelectric polarity depends on simple changes in deposition geometry. Films made facing the plasma differ in dielectric constant, stiffness, and electron emission from those made on the opposite side, producing opposite charge signs without any additives or chemical treatments. This single-material approach supports direct use in solid-solid, solid-liquid, and hybrid generators, with buckling texturing and droplet testing demonstrating concrete voltage, current, and power outputs. The films remain stable through more than 100,000 solid contacts and 10,000 liquid impacts. The vacuum process itself is described as scalable and free of fluorinated compounds.

Core claim

Fabrication facing or backfacing the plasma yields adamantane polymer films with different dielectric constants, Young's moduli, and secondary electron emission. These property shifts allow the same base material to serve as either tribopositive or tribonegative layers. The resulting conformable, stable films operate across solid-solid, solid-liquid, and piezo-triboelectric configurations. Textured 2.8 micrometer tribonegative and 400 nanometer tribopositive pairs reach 90 V per square centimeter and 0.6 microamperes, while a 500 nanometer tribopositive layer produces 2.1 microwatts per square centimeter from salty droplets. Durability exceeds 10^5 solid-solid cycles and 10^4 droplet impacts

What carries the argument

Bivalent triboelectric character controlled by plasma-facing versus backfacing deposition orientation that alters dielectric constant, Young's modulus, and secondary electron emission.

If this is right

One base polymer family supplies both polarities for all-triboelectric nanogenerator designs.
Buckling texturization of 2.8 micrometer and 400 nanometer layers produces 90 V per square centimeter and 0.6 microamperes.
A 500 nanometer tribopositive film generates 2.1 microwatts per square centimeter from salty droplets in a switch-electrode drop configuration.
The layers maintain performance after more than 100,000 solid-solid contacts and 10,000 liquid impacts.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

Device layouts could use sequential deposition steps of the same material to create opposing surfaces without material switches.
The observed dependence on deposition geometry may extend to other hydrocarbon precursors processed by plasma.
Stability in droplet impacts points toward possible use in self-powered sensors exposed to liquid environments.

Load-bearing premise

That the facing or backfacing position during plasma deposition alone produces reliable, consistent differences in dielectric constant, Young's modulus, and secondary electron emission that determine the final triboelectric polarity.

What would settle it

Side-by-side triboelectric charging tests on films deposited facing versus backfacing the plasma, performed under identical gas flow, power, and substrate temperature, to check whether polarity consistently reverses.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.11052 by Ana Borras, Andris Sutka, Angel Barranco, Bernd Wicklein, Fernando Nunez-Galvez, Francisco Aparicio, Gloria P. Moreno-Martinez, Hari Krishna Mishra, Isabel Montero, Javier Ferrer, Juan Carlos Sanchez-Lopez, Juan Ramon Sanchez-Valencia, Triana Czermak, Vanda Cristina Godinho, Xabier Garcia-Casas.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: TENG outputs of RPAVD ADA layers using cellulose counter-electrodes. Devices assembled with Top-ADA and Bottom-ADA against cellulose as tribopositive surface, as shown in the schematics at the left of the figure. a), d) Short circuit current vs time and b), e) Voltage vs time curves for an input frequency of 10 Hz and a load resistance of 150 MOhm. c), f) Mean power and peak-to-peak voltage output as a fun… view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: Maximum mean power output for Top-ADA (blue) and Bottom-ADA (orange) in intermittent contact mode against a series of counter tribomaterials ranging from tribonegative (PFA) to tribopositive (cellulose) evaluated at 2 N and 10 Hz, under the corresponding impedance matching conditions. 2.3 Effect of adamantane thickness on triboelectric performance: Buckled Top-ADA. The thickness of the adamantane layers is… view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Optical image (top) and cross-section SEM micrograph (bottom) of the bucklinginduced morphology for Buckled Top-ADA. To shed light on this apparent contradiction, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_4.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Buckled Top-ADA triboelectric nanogenerators. Illustration and a detailed comparison between reference ITO-PFA, Bottom-ADA vs PFA, and buckled Top-ADA (2.8 µm) vs PFA, cellulose, and Bottom-ADA devices, as shown in the schematics at the top of the figure. a1), b1, c1), d1), e1) Short circuit current vs time for an input frequency of 10 Hz; a2), b2), c2), d2), e2) Voltage current vs time curves and a3), b3)… view at source ↗

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: Device performance with a patterned Top ADA and a cellulose counter [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_6.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: Durability test for Bottom-ADA vs buckled Top-ADA TENG. a) Voltage output at 100 MΩ. b) Maximum power density and peak-to-peak voltage. The device was subjected to sustained intermittent vertical contact at 5 Hz and 2N over 100 000 cycles. These results confirm the high reliability and endurance of the system, validating its potential for long-term triboelectric energy harvesting without significant perfor… view at source ↗

**Figure 9.** Figure 9: Thin film Drop-TENGs enabled by plasma adamantane layers. Characteristic V-t curves for milliQ, rain, and salty droplets of DTENGs assembled in switch electrode configuration (see schematics) corresponding to Top-ADA (1800 nm) (a-c) and Bottom-ADA (500 nm) (e-g) layers; d) and h) Maximum power for impacts of 37 μl droplets as a function of the load resistance for Top-ADA and Bottom-ADA devices, correspondi… view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Triboelectric nanogenerators (TENGs) are major drivers in on-site power generation for smart devices, enable self-powered sensors, and introduce novel catalytic processes. Here, we present the advantages of adamantane plasma layers as bivalently triboelectric surfaces capable of exhibiting both tribopositive and tribonegative character through simple modification of the synthesis conditions without the need for additives or functionalization. Fabrication facing or backfacing the plasma yields thin film polymers with different dielectric constants, Young's moduli, and secondary electron emission. The conformality, stability, and processability of the polymers enable direct implementation across solid-solid, solid-liquid, and hybrid piezo-triboelectric configurations. Additional texturization by buckling is shown to provide voltage and current outputs as high as 90 V cm2 and 0.6 uA for a 2.8 um (tribonegative) vs. 400 nm (tribopositive) combination. A maximum power density of 2.1 uW cm-2 is generated from salty droplets in a switch-electrode drop-TENG configuration employing a 500 nm-thick tribopositive adamantane polymer as the triboelectric surface. These layers have demonstrated outstanding durability, enabling more than 10^5 cycles in solid-solid nanogenerators and 10^4 droplet impacts in solid-liquid configurations. The synthetic method is environmentally friendly and industrially scalable, making the adamantane plasma polymer a reliable and competitive solution for thin film triboelectric materials.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

Adamantane plasma polymers give a fluorine-free tunable TENG film, but thickness differences between the positive and negative versions complicate the polarity-switch claim.

read the letter

Adamantane plasma polymers look like a workable fluorine-free option for making thin films that switch between tribopositive and tribonegative behavior depending on whether the substrate faces the plasma or not. The new part is using plasma deposition of adamantane to get this tunability without additives or extra steps. They demonstrate the films in several TENG setups: solid-solid with texturization by buckling, solid-liquid with salty droplets, and even hybrid piezo-tribo. The durability stands out—over 100,000 cycles in solid contact and 10,000 droplet hits. The process is vacuum-based but scalable and green, which fits what the field needs for self-powered sensors. What they do well is show concrete outputs: up to 90 V per cm squared and 0.6 microamps from the thicker negative film paired with the thin positive one, plus 2.1 microwatts per cm squared from the drop-TENG. That gives a sense of real-world potential. The soft spot is around the mechanism for the polarity switch. The abstract notes different dielectric constants, Young's moduli, and secondary electron emission for the two geometries, but the films also differ a lot in thickness—2.8 micrometers for the negative versus 400 nanometers for the positive. Thickness changes can alter effective capacitance, contact area, and charge transfer on their own, so it's not obvious that the position alone drives the polarity through those three properties without other variables like deposition rate or surface chemistry shifting too. If the full paper has matched-thickness controls or detailed characterization showing the properties are independent of thickness, that would clear it up. Otherwise the causal claim feels under-supported. Performance figures also lack error bars or raw data details, which makes it tougher to assess how solid the numbers are. This paper is aimed at materials scientists and engineers building TENG devices who need thin, conformal, non-fluorinated layers. Someone looking for fabrication recipes and multi-configuration tests would find it useful. It has enough practical demonstration to warrant a serious referee, even with the open questions on the exact cause of the bivalent behavior. I'd recommend putting it through peer review rather than desk rejecting it. The revisions could focus on clarifying the controls and adding statistical backing.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript claims that adamantane plasma polymers can function as bivalently triboelectric thin films, exhibiting either tribopositive or tribonegative character solely by placing the substrate facing or backfacing the plasma during deposition, without additives or functionalization. The films are reported to enable direct use in solid-solid, solid-liquid, and hybrid piezo-triboelectric TENG configurations due to their conformality and stability, with performance metrics including outputs up to 90 V cm^{-2} and 0.6 µA for a 2.8 µm tribonegative / 400 nm tribopositive pair, a power density of 2.1 µW cm^{-2} in a salty-droplet switch-electrode drop-TENG, and durability exceeding 10^5 cycles in solid-solid devices and 10^4 droplet impacts.

Significance. If the central experimental claims are substantiated with adequate controls, this work offers a meaningful advance in triboelectric materials by demonstrating a simple, fluorine-free, vacuum-processable route to polarity-tunable thin films. The reported versatility across TENG types, combined with high durability and scalability, could reduce reliance on fluorinated polymers and simplify all-TENG device fabrication for self-powered sensors and energy harvesters.

major comments (2)

[Abstract] Abstract: The claim that facing versus backfacing geometry alone produces the polarity reversal via differences in dielectric constant, Young's modulus, and secondary electron emission is not isolated from confounds. The abstract reports substantially different thicknesses (2.8 µm tribonegative vs. 400 nm tribopositive), which can independently alter effective capacitance, contact area, and charge-transfer dynamics. The manuscript must demonstrate that thickness, roughness, deposition rate, and chemical composition were matched while varying only substrate position; absent such controls, the bivalent-triboelectric attribution rests on an under-constrained causal link.
[Results and Methods] Results and Methods: The performance numbers (90 V cm^{-2}, 0.6 µA, 2.1 µW cm^{-2}, >10^5 cycles) and the attribution to specific material properties lack supporting characterization data, error bars, replicate statistics, or full methods. Without these, it is impossible to evaluate whether the observed outputs and durability are reproducible or whether the claimed property differences (dielectric constant, modulus, secondary-electron emission) were directly measured and correlated with polarity.

minor comments (2)

[Abstract] Abstract: Unit notation is inconsistent and non-standard (e.g., '90 V cm2', '0.6 uA', '2.1 uW cm-2'); these should be rendered with proper superscripts as V cm^{-2}, µA, and µW cm^{-2}.
[Abstract] Abstract: The mention of 'additional texturization by buckling' is introduced without any description of the buckling process, its parameters, or quantitative comparison of performance with and without texturization.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and detailed comments. We have carefully reviewed the concerns about isolating the effect of substrate position from thickness and other variables, as well as the need for more complete data reporting. Our responses below address each point directly, and we indicate the revisions that will be made to the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The claim that facing versus backfacing geometry alone produces the polarity reversal via differences in dielectric constant, Young's modulus, and secondary electron emission is not isolated from confounds. The abstract reports substantially different thicknesses (2.8 µm tribonegative vs. 400 nm tribopositive), which can independently alter effective capacitance, contact area, and charge-transfer dynamics. The manuscript must demonstrate that thickness, roughness, deposition rate, and chemical composition were matched while varying only substrate position; absent such controls, the bivalent-triboelectric attribution rests on an under-constrained causal link.

Authors: We agree that the reported thickness difference constitutes a potential confound that must be addressed to strengthen the causal attribution. The facing and backfacing positions inherently influence plasma sheath effects and deposition kinetics, which in turn affect thickness along with the other film properties. To isolate the positional variable, we have performed additional depositions in which total deposition time was adjusted to produce films of comparable thickness (~500 nm) for both orientations. In these thickness-matched samples, the polarity reversal persists (facing: tribonegative; backfacing: tribopositive), accompanied by measurable differences in dielectric constant, Young's modulus, and secondary-electron emission yield. Roughness (AFM), deposition rate, and XPS-derived chemical composition data for the matched films are now included. These results have been added as a new supplementary figure and the abstract has been revised to note that thickness is one resulting property rather than the sole driver. revision: yes
Referee: [Results and Methods] Results and Methods: The performance numbers (90 V cm^{-2}, 0.6 µA, 2.1 µW cm^{-2}, >10^5 cycles) and the attribution to specific material properties lack supporting characterization data, error bars, replicate statistics, or full methods. Without these, it is impossible to evaluate whether the observed outputs and durability are reproducible or whether the claimed property differences (dielectric constant, modulus, secondary-electron emission) were directly measured and correlated with polarity.

Authors: We acknowledge that the original presentation of performance metrics and property correlations was insufficiently detailed. In the revised manuscript we have added error bars (standard deviation from n ≥ 3 independent devices) to all reported voltage, current, power-density, and durability values. Replicate statistics and the exact number of cycles/impacts tested are now stated explicitly. Expanded methods in the supplementary information describe the protocols for dielectric-constant measurements (impedance spectroscopy), Young's modulus (nanoindentation), and secondary-electron emission (electron-beam setup), together with the raw data correlating these quantities to triboelectric polarity for both film orientations. Full device-fabrication and testing procedures have also been provided. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: purely experimental claims with no derivations or self-referential reductions

full rationale

The manuscript reports direct experimental results from plasma deposition of adamantane films under facing versus backfacing geometries, followed by measurements of dielectric constant, Young's modulus, secondary electron emission, and TENG device outputs. No equations, fitted models, predictions derived from parameters, or load-bearing self-citations appear in the provided text or abstract. Thickness differences are noted but treated as observed outcomes rather than inputs to a tautological derivation. The bivalency claim rests on empirical variation of synthesis conditions and subsequent characterization, with no step reducing by construction to its own inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on experimental demonstration that plasma synthesis orientation controls triboelectric polarity in adamantane films; no free parameters are fitted to data, and no new entities are postulated.

axioms (1)

domain assumption Plasma polymerization of adamantane yields stable, conformal thin films whose surface properties can be modulated by substrate orientation relative to the plasma.
Invoked to explain the bivalent triboelectric behavior; treated as background from plasma processing literature.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5649 in / 1276 out tokens · 44592 ms · 2026-05-13T00:57:26.609803+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

94 extracted references · 94 canonical work pages

[1]

Fan, Z.-Q

F.-R. Fan, Z.-Q. Tian, Z. Lin Wang, Nano Energy 2012, 1, 328

work page 2012
[2]

Z. L. Wang, A. C. Wang, Materials Today 2019, 30, 34

work page 2019
[3]

Khandelwal, N

G. Khandelwal, N. P. Maria Joseph Raj, S.-J. Kim, Advanced Energy Materials 2021, 11, 2101170

work page 2021
[4]

Zhang, H

R. Zhang, H. Olin, EcoMat 2020, 2, e12062

work page 2020
[5]

H. Zou, Y. Zhang, L. Guo, P. Wang, X. He, G. Dai, H. Zheng, C. Chen, A. C. Wang, C. Xu, Z. L. Wang, Nat Commun 2019, 10, 1427

work page 2019
[6]

Kim, D.-W

W.-G. Kim, D.-W. Kim, I.-W. Tcho, J.-K. Kim, M.-S. Kim, Y.-K. Choi, ACS Nano 2021, 15, 258

work page 2021
[7]

L. Zhou, D. Liu, J. Wang, Z. L. Wang, Friction 2020, 8, 481

work page 2020
[8]

J. Hu, M. Iwamoto, X. Chen, Nano-Micro Lett. 2023, 16, 7

work page 2023
[9]

Jiang, X

Y. Jiang, X. Liang, T. Jiang, Z. L. Wang, Engineering 2024, 33, 204

work page 2024
[10]

C. Lee, Y. Qin, Y.-C. Wang, MRS Bulletin 2025, 50, 428

work page 2025
[11]

Y. Zhou, M. Shen, X. Cui, Y. Shao, L. Li, Y. Zhang, Nano Energy 2021, 84, 105887

work page 2021
[12]

X. Li, Y. Cao, X. Yu, Y. Xu, Y. Yang, S. Liu, T. Cheng, Z. L. Wang, Applied Energy 2022, 306, 117977

work page 2022
[13]

H. Guo, J. Chen, L. Wang, A. C. Wang, Y. Li, C. An, J.-H. He, C. Hu, V. K. S. Hsiao, Z. L. Wang, Nat Sustain 2021, 4, 147

work page 2021
[14]

Li, W.-Z

C.-L. Li, W.-Z. Song, D.-J. Sun, M. Zhang, J. Zhang, Y.-Q. Chen, S. Ramakrishna, Y.- Z. Long, Chemical Engineering Journal 2023, 452, 139428

work page 2023
[15]

P. K. Szewczyk, D. P. Ura, J. Knapczyk-Korczak, L. Halagačka, K. Postava, J. Nizioł, U. Stachewicz, Advanced Materials Interfaces 2025, 12, e00352

work page 2025
[16]

M. Hua, R. Jiang, Y. Lu, Y. Su, Y. Zhao, Nano Energy 2025, 135, 110676

work page 2025
[17]

Z. Wang, X. Dong, X.-F. Li, Y. Feng, S. Li, W. Tang, Z. L. Wang, Nat Commun 2024, 15, 757

work page 2024
[18]

J. C. Lee, S. Smaoui, J. Duffill, B. Marandi, T. Varzakas, 2025, DOI 10.20944/preprints202501.1698.v1

work page doi:10.20944/preprints202501.1698.v1 2025
[19]

P. C. Sherrell, A. Šutka, M. Timusk, A. Šutka, Small 2024, 20, 2311570

work page 2024
[20]

Alcaire, J

M. Alcaire, J. R. Sanchez-Valencia, F. J. Aparicio, Z. Saghi, J. C. Gonzalez-Gonzalez, A. Barranco, Y. O. Zian, A. R. Gonzalez-Elipe, P. Midgley, J. P. Espinos, P. Groening, A. Borras, Nanoscale 2011, 3, 4554

work page 2011
[21]

F. J. Aparicio, M. Holgado, A. Borras, I. Blaszczyk-Lezak, A. Griol, C. A. Barrios, R. Casquel, F. J. Sanza, H. Sohlström, M. Antelius, A. R. González-Elipe, A. Barranco, Advanced Materials 2011, 23, 684

work page 2011
[22]

Idígoras, F

J. Idígoras, F. J. Aparicio, L. Contreras-Bernal, S. Ramos-Terrón, M. Alcaire, J. R. Sánchez-Valencia, A. Borras, Á. Barranco, J. A. Anta, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2018, 10, 11587

work page 2018
[23]

Barranco, M

A. Barranco, M. Bielmann, R. Widmer, P. A. Groening, Advanced Engineering Materials 2005, 7, 396

work page 2005
[24]

F. J. Aparicio, M. Alcaire, A. Borras, J. C. Gonzalez, F. López-Arbeloa, I. Blaszczyk- Lezak, A. R. González-Elipe, A. Barranco, J. Mater. Chem. C 2014, 2, 6561

work page 2014
[25]

Alcaire, L

M. Alcaire, L. Cerdán, F. L. Zamarro, F. J. Aparicio, J. C. González, F. J. Ferrer, A. Borras, J. P. Espinós, A. Barranco, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2017, 9, 8948

work page 2017
[26]

Blaszczyk-Lezak, F

I. Blaszczyk-Lezak, F. J. Aparicio, A. Borrás, A. Barranco, A. Álvarez-Herrero, M. Fernández-Rodríguez, A. R. González-Elipe, J. Phys. Chem. C 2009, 113, 431

work page 2009
[27]

F. J. Aparicio, I. Blaszczyk-Lezak, J. R. Sánchez-Valencia, M. Alcaire, J. C. González, C. Serra, A. R. González-Elipe, A. Barranco, J. Phys. Chem. C 2012, 116, 8731. 36

work page 2012
[28]

Alcaire, A

M. Alcaire, A. N. Filippin, M. Macias-Montero, J. R. Sanchez-Valencia, T. C. Rojas, A. Mora-Boza, C. Lopez-Santos, J. P. Espinos, A. Barranco, A. Borras, Plasma Processes and Polymers 2016, 13, 287

work page 2016
[29]

A. N. Filippin, J. R. Sanchez-Valencia, J. Idígoras, M. Macias-Montero, M. Alcaire, F. J. Aparicio, J. P. Espinos, C. Lopez-Santos, F. Frutos, A. Barranco, J. A. Anta, A. Borras, Advanced Materials Interfaces 2017, 4, 1601233

work page 2017
[30]

J. M. Obrero, A. N. Filippin, M. Alcaire, J. R. Sanchez-Valencia, M. Jacob, C. Matei, F. J. Aparicio, M. Macias-Montero, T. C. Rojas, J. P. Espinos, Z. Saghi, A. Barranco, A. Borras, Front. Chem. 2020, 8, 520

work page 2020
[31]

Ali Mansoori, in Advances in Chemical Physics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2007, pp

G. Ali Mansoori, in Advances in Chemical Physics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2007, pp. 207–258

work page 2007
[32]

Alcaire, C

M. Alcaire, C. Lopez-Santos, F. J. Aparicio, J. R. Sanchez-Valencia, J. M. Obrero, Z. Saghi, V. J. Rico, G. de la Fuente, A. R. Gonzalez-Elipe, A. Barranco, A. Borras, Langmuir 2019, 35, 16876

work page 2019
[33]

Nabil, L

M. Nabil, L. Contreras-Bernal, G. P. Moreno-Martinez, J. Obrero-Perez, J. Castillo- Seoane, J. A. Anta, G. Oskam, P. Pistor, A. Borrás, J. R. Sanchez-Valencia, A. Barranco, Materials Today Energy 2025, 54, 102117

work page 2025
[34]

W. Xu, H. Zheng, Y. Liu, X. Zhou, C. Zhang, Y. Song, X. Deng, M. Leung, Z. Yang, R. X. Xu, Z. L. Wang, X. C. Zeng, Z. Wang, Nature 2020, 578, 392

work page 2020
[35]

Alcaire, F

M. Alcaire, F. J. Aparicio, J. Obrero, C. López-Santos, F. J. Garcia-Garcia, J. R. Sánchez-Valencia, F. Frutos, K. (Ken) Ostrikov, A. Borrás, A. Barranco, Advanced Functional Materials 2019, 29, 1903535

work page 2019
[36]

Barranco, F

A. Barranco, F. Aparicio, A. Yanguas-Gil, P. Groening, J. Cotrino, A. R. González- Elipe, Chemical Vapor Deposition 2007, 13, 319

work page 2007
[37]

Lin-Vien, The Handbook of Infrared and Raman Characteristic Frequencies of Organic Molecules, Academic Press, Boston, 1991

D. Lin-Vien, The Handbook of Infrared and Raman Characteristic Frequencies of Organic Molecules, Academic Press, Boston, 1991

work page 1991
[38]

A. C. Ferrari, J. Robertson, Phys. Rev. B 2000, 61, 14095

work page 2000
[39]

Casiraghi, F

C. Casiraghi, F. Piazza, A. C. Ferrari, D. Grambole, J. Robertson, Diamond and Related Materials 2005, 14, 1098

work page 2005
[40]

P. C. Sherrell, A. Sutka, N. A. Shepelin, L. Lapcinskis, O. Verners, L. Germane, M. Timusk, R. A. Fenati, K. Malnieks, A. V. Ellis, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2021, 13, 44935

work page 2021
[41]

Šutka, K

A. Šutka, K. Mālnieks, L. Lapčinskis, P. Kaufelde, A. Linarts, A. Bērziņa, R. Zābels, V. Jurķāns, I. Gorņevs, J. Blūms, M. Knite, Energy Environ. Sci. 2019, 12, 2417

work page 2019
[42]

Bartali, Next Materials 2024, 3, 100120

R. Bartali, Next Materials 2024, 3, 100120

work page 2024
[43]

M. R. VanLandingham, J. S. Villarrubia, W. F. Guthrie, G. F. Meyers, Macromolecular Symposia 2001, 167, 15

work page 2001
[44]

Núñez-Gálvez, X

F. Núñez-Gálvez, X. García-Casas, L. Contreras-Bernal, A. Descalzo, J. M. Obrero- Pérez, J. Castillo-Seoane, A. Ginés, G. Leger, J. C. Sánchez-Lopez, J. P. Espinós, Á. Barranco, A. Borrás, J. R. Sánchez-Valencia, C. López-Santos, Nano Energy 2026, 148, 111678

work page 2026
[45]

Carneiro De Oliveira, A

J. Carneiro De Oliveira, A. Airoudj, P. Kunemann, F. Bally-Le Gall, V. Roucoules, SN Appl. Sci. 2021, 3, 656

work page 2021
[46]

Verwolf, G

A. Verwolf, G. White, C. Poling, J of Applied Polymer Sci 2013, 127, 2969

work page 2013
[47]

A.-Y. Jee, M. Lee, Polymer Testing 2010, 29, 95

work page 2010
[48]

A. M. Díez-Pascual, M. A. Gómez-Fatou, F. Ania, A. Flores, Progress in Materials Science 2015, 67, 1

work page 2015
[49]

S. Ji, J. Yang, J. Zhao, Y. Hu, H. Gao, Polymers 2018, 10, 173. 37

work page 2018
[50]

Ishida, D

H. Ishida, D. J. Allen, J. Polym. Sci. B Polym. Phys. 1996, 34, 1019

work page 1996
[51]

Olano, I

L. Olano, I. Montero, Results in Physics 2020, 19, 103456

work page 2020
[52]

T. Hu, I. Montero, P. Perez-Villacastin, W. Cui, M. Cao, Q. Wang, in 2017 Sixth Asia- Pacific Conference on Antennas and Propagation (APCAP), IEEE, Xi’an, 2017, pp. 1–3

work page 2017
[53]

Galli, in Computer-Based Modeling of Novel Carbon Systems and Their Properties (Eds.: L

G. Galli, in Computer-Based Modeling of Novel Carbon Systems and Their Properties (Eds.: L. Colombo, A. Fasolino), Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, 2010, pp. 37–56

work page 2010
[54]

T. Xu, L. Donà, J.-C. Tan, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2026, 18, 18221

work page 2026
[55]

S. Li, Y. Zhou, Y. Zi, G. Zhang, Z. L. Wang, ACS Nano 2016, 10, 2528

work page 2016
[56]

Acharya, S

S. Acharya, S. Liyanage, P. Parajuli, S. Rumi, J. Shamshina, N. Abidi, Polymers 2021, 13, DOI 10.3390/polym13244344

work page doi:10.3390/polym13244344 2021
[57]

Coupeau, J

C. Coupeau, J. Durinck and G. Parry, MPS 2024, DOI 10.47485/2832-9384.1046

work page doi:10.47485/2832-9384.1046 2024
[58]

K. C. Pradel, N. Fukata, Nano Energy 2021, 83, 105856

work page 2021
[59]

Tcho, W.-G

I.-W. Tcho, W.-G. Kim, S.-B. Jeon, S.-J. Park, B. J. Lee, H.-K. Bae, D. Kim, Y.-K. Choi, Nano Energy 2017, 42, 34

work page 2017
[60]

C. K. Chung, K. H. Ke, Applied Surface Science 2020, 508, 145310

work page 2020
[61]

Huang, C.-H

Y.-J. Huang, C.-H. Tsai, C.-W. Hung, C.-K. Chung, Polymers 2024, 16, DOI 10.3390/polym16233397

work page doi:10.3390/polym16233397 2024
[62]

Zhang, C

M. Zhang, C. Hu, T. Zhang, C. R. Bowen, R. Li, Y. Huang, Y. Su, Z. L. Wang, Y. Yang, Science Bulletin 2025, 70, 148

work page 2025
[63]

C. A. Mizzi, L. D. Marks, Nano Lett. 2022, 22, 3939

work page 2022
[64]

Delgado-Alvarez, H

J. Delgado-Alvarez, H. K. Mishra, F. J. Aparicio, X. García-Casas, A. Barranco, J. R. Sanchez-Valencia, V. Lopez-Flores, A. Borras, APL Electronic Devices 2025, 1, 036122

work page 2025
[65]

Zhang, S

K. Zhang, S. Wang, Y. Yang, Advanced Energy Materials 2017, 7, 1601852

work page 2017
[66]

S. Z. Hussain, V. P. Singh, M. S. B. Sadeque, S. Yavari, G. Kalimuldina, M. Ordu, Small 2025, 21, 2504626

work page 2025
[67]

Zhang, Z

Q. Zhang, Z. Zhang, Q. Liang, F. Gao, F. Yi, M. Ma, Q. Liao, Z. Kang, Y. Zhang, Nano Energy 2019, 55, 151

work page 2019
[68]

L. Xie, N. Zhai, Y. Liu, Z. Wen, X. Sun, Research 2021, 2021, DOI 10.34133/2021/9143762

work page doi:10.34133/2021/9143762 2021
[69]

S. M. A. Z. Shawon, A. X. Sun, V. S. Vega, B. D. Chowdhury, P. Tran, Z. D. Carballo, J. A. Tolentino, J. Li, M. S. Rafaqut, S. Danti, M. J. Uddin, Nano Energy 2021, 82, 105691

work page 2021
[70]

Abu Ali, J

T. Abu Ali, J. Pilz, P. Schäffner, M. Kratzer, C. Teichert, B. Stadlober, A. M. Coclite, physica status solidi (a) 2020, 217, 2000319

work page 2020
[71]

Nagao, T

M. Nagao, T. Morimoto, J. Phys. Chem. 1980, 84, 2054

work page 1980
[72]

E.-Y. Jung, H. O. Suleiman, H.-S. Tae, C.-S. Park, Polymers 2024, 16, DOI 10.3390/polym16111548

work page doi:10.3390/polym16111548 2024
[73]

García-Casas, A

X. García-Casas, A. Ghaffarinejad, F. J. Aparicio, J. Castillo-Seoane, C. López-Santos, J. P. Espinós, J. Cotrino, J. R. Sánchez-Valencia, Á. Barranco, A. Borrás, Nano Energy 2022, 91, 106673

work page 2022
[74]

R. T. Leon, P. C. Sherrell, A. Šutka, A. V. Ellis, Nano Energy 2023, 110, 108445

work page 2023
[75]

J. M. Obrero-Perez, L. Contreras-Bernal, F. Nuñez-Galvez, J. Castillo-Seoane, K. Valadez-Villalobos, F. J. Aparicio, J. A. Anta, A. Borras, J. R. Sanchez-Valencia, A. Barranco, Advanced Energy Materials 2022, 12, 2200812

work page 2022
[76]

Zhong, P

T. Zhong, P. Liu, S. Yang, G. Xu, W. Mao, H. Zhou, J. Dong, C. Xu, S. Zhang, Q. Song, Nano Energy 2024, 121, 109191. 38

work page 2024
[77]

Ghaffarinejad, X

A. Ghaffarinejad, X. García-Casas, F. Núñez-Gálvez, J. Budagosky, V. Godinho, C. López-Santos, J. R. Sánchez-Valencia, Á. Barranco, A. Borrás, Device 2025, 3, 100566

work page 2025
[78]

C. Ye, D. Liu, P. Chen, L. N. Y. Cao, X. Li, T. Jiang, Z. L. Wang, Advanced Materials 2023, 35, 2209713

work page 2023
[79]

H. Ma, B. Xi, Y. Chen, H. Liu, W. Li, Z. Tang, Journal of Environmental Sciences 2025, S1001074225002943

work page 2025
[80]

(关寅) Guan, J

Y. (关寅) Guan, J. (傅经纬) Fu, S. (吴双) Wu, X. (陈喜阳) Chen, C. (周程) Zhou, Physics of Fluids 2021, 33, 072108

work page 2021

Showing first 80 references.