Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 74 references

Nanoconfined superionic water is a molecular superionic

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Nanoconfined water is shown to be a molecular superionic that conducts protons via chain-like Grotthuss hopping, enabled by short oxygen contacts and dangling hydrogen bonds.

desk verdict Solid mechanistic paper on nanoconfined superionic water; the 'superionic' label needs a conductivity number it never produces. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.14171 v1 pith:ECMO46LB submitted 2025-05-20 physics.chem-ph cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Samuel W. Coles , Amir Hajibabaei , Venkat Kapil , Xavier R. Advincula , Christoph Schran , Stephen J. Cox , Angelos Michaelides This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.chem-phcond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords superionicwatermolecularnanoconfinedmaterialsotherapplicationsbulk
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

Water normally conducts electricity very poorly, because its molecules rarely split into charged pieces and protons do not travel far. When squeezed into a slit just a few atoms wide between sheets like graphene, simulations show water becomes superionic: it conducts protons almost like a liquid electrolyte, even though it stays solid.

The authors used machine-learned molecular dynamics and density functional theory to find out how this can happen while the water molecules stay intact. In this confined state, water molecules occasionally swap protons, creating hydroxide and hydronium ions. These defects move through the material in chains: a proton hops from one molecule to the next, and the molecule rotates so the next hop can go in a new direction. This is the same Grotthuss mechanism that makes acids conductive, but the confined geometry makes it work in pure water.

Two ingredients make the mechanism fast. First, oxygen atoms in neighboring water molecules sit closer together than in normal ice, so the barrier for a proton to jump is low. Second, some hydrogen atoms have no partner to bond with, so the hydrogen-bond network is flexible enough for molecules to rotate and for the chain to propagate. The authors compare this material to bulk superionic ice and to ice VII, and argue that both ingredients are the general recipe for a class of materials they call molecular superionics.

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper concludes that "nanoconfined superionic water is a molecular superionic" whose "unique conductivity is characterized by the presence of both proton transfer and a constantly rearranging hydrogen bond network" (Discussion and Conclusions). If correct, this means a phase of pure water made of intact molecules conducts protons fast enough to be classed superionic, through a Grotthuss chain mechanism enabled by short oxygen-oxygen distances and dangling hydrogen bonds, and that these two features are the general criteria for molecular superionicity.

Load-bearing premise

The central mechanism rests on the accuracy of the machine-learned potentials and the implicit Morse-wall model of graphene confinement. All nanoconfined results come from a neural network trained on revPBE0-D3 DFT (Kapil et al.) with a uniform Morse potential fitted to QMC water-graphene interactions (Methods: Nanoconfined superionic water). If this potential misrepresents proton-transfer barriers or hydrogen-bond flexibility at 400-550 K and 12 GPa, the two-step Grotthuss mechanism and the proposed design rules lose support. In particular, real graphene corrugation, electronic confinement effects, and finite-size effects are not tested here.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper combines machine-learned molecular dynamics, DFT/ICOBI bonding analysis, and trajectory-based correlation functions to argue that nanoconfined water at ~12 GPa and 400–550 K is both molecular and superionic. It contrasts this phase with bulk superionic water, ice VII, pressurized liquid water, and superionic AgI. The authors find that nanoconfined water retains intact molecules (narrow H-O-H angle distribution, molecular ICOBI signature), hosts diffusive hydroxide and hydronium defects, and exhibits geometric (chain-like) rather than Poisson hop statistics. They propose a two-step Grotthuss mechanism—proton transfer followed by hydrogen-bond network rearrangement—and identify low proton-transfer barriers and dangling-hydrogen-bond flexibility as the two key characteristics of molecular superionicity. The paper concludes that nanoconfined superionic water is a molecular superionic and that these criteria can guide discovery of other molecular superionic materials.

Significance. If fully established, the claim would be significant: it would identify a phase of pure water composed of intact molecules that conducts protons via a Grotthuss-like chain mechanism at conditions far milder than bulk superionic ice, and it would propose transferable design rules for molecular superionics. The paper has clear strengths: the nanoconfined simulations use a revPBE0-D3 neural network potential from prior work; the chain-length analysis is tested against several spatial and temporal cutoffs in the SI; a hybrid-functional cross-check for bulk superionic water is provided; and the comparison with AgI grounds the mechanism in the broader superionic literature. The structural, bonding, and dynamical analyses are internally consistent. The principal weakness is quantitative: the paper invokes the conventional 0.1 S/cm conductivity threshold but never computes or quotes a conductivity for nanoconfined water, leaving the central classification and the generality of the proposed design rules under-supported.

major comments (3)
  1. [Results and Discussion, paragraph beginning 'Materials have conventionally been considered superionic...'] The paper sets the conventional superionic threshold as conductivity exceeding 0.1 S/cm, but nowhere in the main text or SI is a conductivity reported for nanoconfined water. The defect MSDs (Fig. 2b) and chain-length distributions (Fig. 2c) show mobile defects and correlated hops, but neither metric establishes that the conductivity exceeds 0.1 S/cm. This matters because the title, abstract, and Discussion depend on the classification 'superionic'. The later statement that 'all three' definitions of superionicity apply is therefore not supported for the conductivity definition. Please add an explicit conductivity estimate for the nanoconfined phase (e.g., a Nernst-Einstein estimate from defect mobility with a stated Haven-ratio assumption, or a Green-Kubo calculation), or alternatively cite and clearly use a previously computed value from Kapil et al. and state that present evidence concerns the mechanism rather than the conductivity number.
  2. [Discussion and Conclusions, final paragraph] The paper proposes that 'low charge-carrier barrier' and 'a hydrogen bonding network that actively rearranges' are the two key characteristics of molecular superionicity, and then states that high conductivity, chain-like diffusion, and highly diffusive defects are 'transferable criteria of superionicity'. The evidence presented establishes these features for one nanoconfined water system and draws a qualitative analogy with ammonia. It does not test whether the two proposed characteristics are sufficient or necessary across a family of materials, nor does it show that the mechanism-specific criteria are equivalent to the conductivity threshold. The design-principle claims should be framed as hypotheses for future testing, backed by the ammonia comparison, rather than as established transferable criteria. This is a load-bearing framing issue because the paper's broader significance rests on the generality of these rules.
  3. [Methods: Potentials and dynamics; SI Section S7] The central mechanism depends on the accuracy of the revPBE0-D3 neural network potential and the implicit Morse-wall confinement model for nanoconfined water. The SI provides a hybrid-functional cross-check for bulk superionic water, but there is no equivalent validation of proton-transfer free-energy barriers or hydrogen-bond rearrangement dynamics for the nanoconfined system at 400–550 K and 12 GPa. Since the two-step Grotthuss mechanism rests precisely on these quantities, I ask the authors to either provide such a validation (e.g., selected DFT or alternative-potential checks of the free-energy surfaces in Fig. 3e) or explicitly discuss the expected sensitivity of the conclusions to these potential choices. This is a correctness-risk concern rather than a demonstrated error, but it is central to the mechanistic claim.
minor comments (6)
  1. [SI Section S8, Eq. (S2)] Equation (S2) appears to contain a typo: the second term inside 'min' should be ||r_i(t+Δt) − r_j(t)||, not ||r_j(t+Δt) − r_j(t)||.
  2. [SI Table S1] The table lists 'Ice VII (50000 GPa)' and 'Pressurised water (500 GPa)', which are inconsistent with the main text values of 50 GPa and 0.5 GPa; the units or values should be corrected.
  3. [Methods, Eq. (4)] The definition of δ uses square-root notation without explicit vector norms; please rewrite it with |r_H − r_O1| and |r_H − r_O2| to avoid ambiguity.
  4. [Figure 3 caption] The caption uses the symbol ∂ for the proton-transfer coordinate in the free-energy panels, while Methods defines this coordinate as δ; please unify the notation.
  5. [References] The reference list contains duplicate and misnumbered entries (e.g., two entries labelled '9', two labelled '1', two labelled '5', and similar issues for '10', '11', and '12'); the bibliography should be regenerated with unique numbers.
  6. [SI Section S1C] The text says simulations are performed 'with an anisotropic thermostat' for an NPT ensemble; this should presumably read 'anisotropic barostat'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation: mechanism analysis is computed from simulation and benchmarked externally; the absence of a reported conductivity is an evidence gap, not a circular step.

full rationale

I find no circular steps. The manuscript's central mechanism analysis is derived from machine-learned molecular dynamics and DFT calculations: defect MSDs, chain-length statistics, proton-transfer free energy surfaces, and the correlation functions CPT(t) and CHB(t) are defined by explicit equations (Eqs. 1-6) and evaluated from trajectories of nanoconfined water, bulk superionic water, ice VII, and pressurized water, with AgI and superionic ammonia as external comparisons. The machine-learned potential and Morse-wall confinement model are adopted from prior work by overlapping authors (Kapil et al.), but those are simulation inputs with stated training data (revPBE0-D3 and QMC water-graphene interactions), not quantities fitted to the paper's conclusions; the bulk potential is additionally cross-checked against hybrid DFT in SI Sec. S7. The proposed 'two key characteristics' (low proton-transfer barrier and flexible hydrogen-bond network) are an inductive generalization drawn from the simulated system and prior ammonia studies, not a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction. The paper does invoke the conventional 0.1 S/cm conductivity threshold for superionicity and asserts that all three definitions apply, yet it does not report a conductivity value for nanoconfined water; this is a real evidentiary gap in supporting the strong superionic classification, but it is a missing measurement, not a circular reduction by construction. No equation or fitted quantity in the paper is equivalent to the claim being derived.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on two neural-network potentials inherited from prior work, an implicit Morse-wall model of confinement, and a set of standard analysis approximations. The two NN potentials are fitted to DFT data at different levels (revPBE0-D3 for confined water, PBE-D3 for bulk ices), and the paper only partially checks the consistency of the bulk PBE-based potential against hybrid DFT (SI S7). The confinement potential is fitted once to QMC water-graphene interactions, and real graphene corrugation is ignored. Chain analysis and defect assignment introduce methodological choices, though the chain-length conclusions are shown to be robust to cutoff and time-window changes in SI S8.

free parameters (4)
  • Neural network potential for nanoconfined water (revPBE0-D3) = trained weights from Kapil et al., Nature 609, 512 (2022)
    All nanoconfined MD results depend on this ML potential; it was fit to revPBE0-D3 DFT data in prior work and is assumed to be accurate for proton transfer and H-bond dynamics.
  • Neural network potential for bulk ices (PBE-D3) = trained weights from Cheng et al., Nature Physics 17, 1228 (2021)
    Used for bulk superionic water, ice VII, and pressurized water; hybrid-functional check in SI S7 only partially validates energetic ordering.
  • Morse confinement potential parameters = fitted to QMC water-graphene interactions, Kapil et al. 2022
    Models graphene slit confinement; central to the nanoconfined geometry and dangling H-bond picture.
  • Chain analysis time window and cutoff = delta_t = 100 ps, delta = 1.75 A for nanoconfined water
    Chosen for chain-length analysis in Methods; SI S8 confirms qualitative robustness to cutoffs of 1, 1.5, 2 A and multiple time windows.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption revPBE0-D3 DFT is an accurate reference for nanoconfined water energetics and proton transfer barriers
    Invoked via NN potential training in Methods; the free-energy barriers in Fig. 3e depend on this.
  • domain assumption PBE-D3 DFT is adequate for bulk superionic water, ice VII and pressurized water
    Bulk NN potential is trained at PBE-D3; SI S7 argues qualitative agreement with revPBE0-D3 on selected frames only.
  • domain assumption Voronoi tessellation assigns protons to the covalently bonded oxygen in the molecular nanoconfined phase
    Used for defect identification and pKw; fails for bulk superionic water (SI S6), so validity rests on the molecularity of the phase.
  • standard math Geometric chain-length distribution is diagnostic of correlated chain-like diffusion, Poisson of independent hops
    Standard method from Morgan et al., Chem. Mater. 33, 2004 (2021) and prior glass/solid-electrolyte studies.
  • domain assumption 500 ps to 2 ns NVT/NPT trajectories provide ergodic sampling at 400-550 K and 12 GPa
    All FES, MSD and correlation function data come from single trajectories; no block-averaging or replica statistics are reported.
  • domain assumption Implicit Morse wall captures the chemistry of graphene slit pores
    Confinement is modeled as a uniform potential in the xy plane, fitted to QMC water-graphene interactions; real graphene corrugation and electronic effects are neglected.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Nanoconfined superionic water is a molecular superionic." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ECMO46LB

@misc{pith2026250514171,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Nanoconfined superionic water is a molecular superionic},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ECMO46LB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.14171}
}
read the original abstract

Superionic ice, where water molecules dissociate into a lattice of oxygen ions and a rapidly diffusing 'gas' of protons, represents an exotic state of matter with broad implications for planetary interiors and energy applications. Recently, a nanoconfined superionic state of water has been predicted which, in sharp contrast to bulk ice, is comprised of intact water molecules. Here, we apply machine learning and electronic structure simulations to establish how nanoconfined water can be both molecular and superionic. We also explore what insights this material offers for superionic materials and behavior more generally. Similar to bulk ice and other superionic materials, nanoconfined water conducts via concerted chain-like proton migrations which cause the rapid propagation of defects. However, unlike other molecular phases of water, its exceptional conductivity arises from the activation of the Grotthuss mechanism by (i) low barriers to proton transfer and (ii) a flexible hydrogen-bonded network. We propose that these are two key characteristics of fast ionic conduction in molecular superionics. The insights obtained here establish design principles for the discovery of other molecular superionic materials, with potential applications in energy storage and beyond.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.14171 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Bulk superionic water (panel A) is not molecular but nanoconfined superionic water (panel B) is. (A)–(B) Represen [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Both nanoconfined superionic water and bulk superionic water undergo chain-like defect-based diffusion. (A) Snapshot [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Closer separation of oxygen atoms and hydrogen bond network flexibility enables a two-step proton diffusion mechanism [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

74 extracted references · 36 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Funke ,\ https://doi.org/10.1088/1468-6996/14/4/043502 journal journal Science and Technology of Advanced Materials \ volume 14 ,\ pages 043502 ( year 2013 ) NoStop

    author author K. Funke ,\ https://doi.org/10.1088/1468-6996/14/4/043502 journal journal Science and Technology of Advanced Materials \ volume 14 ,\ pages 043502 ( year 2013 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1088/1468-6996/14/4/043502 2013

  2. [2]

    author author M. Faraday ,\ https://doi.org/10.1098/rspl.1837.0015 journal journal Abstracts of the Papers Printed in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London \ volume 4 ,\ pages 49 ( year 1843 ) NoStop

    work page arXiv

  3. [3]

    Rice \ and\ author W

    author author M. Rice \ and\ author W. Roth ,\ https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-4596(72)90121-1 journal journal Journal of Solid State Chemistry \ volume 4 ,\ pages 294 ( year 1972 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1016/0022-4596(72)90121-1 1972

  4. [4]

    Thangadurai , author H

    author author V. Thangadurai , author H. Kaack ,\ and\ author W. J. F. \ Weppner ,\ https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1151-2916.2003.tb03318.x journal journal Journal of the American Ceramic Society \ volume 86 ,\ pages 437–440 ( year 2003 ) NoStop

    arXiv 2003

  5. [5]

    Murugan , author V

    author author R. Murugan , author V. Thangadurai ,\ and\ author W. Weppner ,\ https://doi.org/10.1002/anie.200701144 journal journal Angewandte Chemie International Edition \ volume 46 ,\ pages 7778–7781 ( year 2007 ) NoStop

    doi:10.1002/anie.200701144 2007

  6. [6]

    Kamaya , author K

    author author N. Kamaya , author K. Homma , author Y. Yamakawa , author M. Hirayama , author R. Kanno , author M. Yonemura , author T. Kamiyama , author Y. Kato , author S. Hama , author K. Kawamoto ,\ and\ author A. Mitsui ,\ https://doi.org/10.1038/nmat3066 journal journal Nature Materials \ volume 10 ,\ pages 682–686 ( year 2011 ) NoStop

    doi:10.1038/nmat3066

  7. [7]

    author author B. A. \ Paren , author N. Nguyen , author V. Ballance , author D. T. \ Hallinan , author J. G. \ Kennemur ,\ and\ author K. I. \ Winey ,\ https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.macromol.2c00459 journal journal Macromolecules \ volume 55 ,\ pages 4692–4702 ( year 2022 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.macromol.2c00459

  8. [8]

    Wang \ and\ author A

    author author Y. Wang \ and\ author A. P. \ Sokolov ,\ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coche.2014.09.002 journal journal Current Opinion in Chemical Engineering \ volume 7 ,\ pages 113–119 ( year 2015 ) NoStop

    work page doi:10.1016/j.coche.2014.09.002 2014

Show all 74 references
  1. [9]

    Millot , author S

    author author M. Millot , author S. Hamel , author J. R. \ Rygg , author P. M. \ Celliers , author G. W. \ Collins , author F. Coppari , author D. E. \ Fratanduono , author R. Jeanloz , author D. C. \ Swift ,\ and\ author J. H. \ Eggert ,\ https://doi.org/10.1038/s41567-017-00...

    doi

  2. [10]

    Demontis , author R

    author author P. Demontis , author R. LeSar ,\ and\ author M. L. \ Klein ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.60.2284 journal journal Physical Review Letters \ volume 60 ,\ pages 2284–2287 ( year 1988 ) NoStop

    1988 doi

  3. [11]

    author author V. B. \ Prakapenka , author N. Holtgrewe , author S. S. \ Lobanov ,\ and\ author A. F. \ Goncharov ,\ https://doi.org/10.1038/s41567-021-01351-8 journal journal Nature Physics \ volume 17 ,\ pages 1233–1238 ( year 2021 ) NoStop

    doi

  4. [12]

    Cheng , author M

    author author B. Cheng , author M. Bethkenhagen , author C. J. \ Pickard ,\ and\ author S. Hamel ,\ https://doi.org/10.1038/s41567-021-01334-9 journal journal Nature Physics \ volume 17 ,\ pages 1228–1232 ( year 2021 ) NoStop

    2021 doi

  5. [13]

    Goldman , author L

    author author N. Goldman , author L. E. \ Fried , author I.-F. W. \ Kuo ,\ and\ author C. J. \ Mundy ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.94.217801 journal journal Physical Review Letters \ volume 94 ,\ pages 217801 ( year 2005 ) NoStop

    doi

  6. [14]

    Matusalem , author J

    author author F. Matusalem , author J. Santos Rego ,\ and\ author M. de Koning ,\ https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2203397119 journal journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences \ volume 119 ,\ pages e2203397119 ( year 2022 ) NoStop

    doi

  7. [15]

    Kapil , author C

    author author V. Kapil , author C. Schran , author A. Zen , author J. Chen , author C. J. \ Pickard ,\ and\ author A. Michaelides ,\ https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-05036-x journal journal Nature \ volume 609 ,\ pages 512–516 ( year 2022 ) NoStop

    doi

  8. [16]

    Algara-Siller , author O

    author author G. Algara-Siller , author O. Lehtinen , author F. C. \ Wang , author R. R. \ Nair , author U. Kaiser , author H. A. \ Wu , author A. K. \ Geim ,\ and\ author I. V. \ Grigorieva ,\ https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14295 journal journal Nature \ volume 519 ,\ pages 44...

    doi

  9. [17]

    Wang , author M

    author author R. Wang , author M. Souilamas , author A. Esfandiar , author R. Fabregas , author S. Benaglia , author H. Nevison-Andrews , author Q. Yang , author J. Normansell , author P. Ares , author G. Ferrari , author A. Principi , author A. K. \ Geim ,\ and\ author L. Fum...

    2025

  10. [18]

    Jiang , author Y

    author author J. Jiang , author Y. Gao , author L. Li , author Y. Liu , author W. Zhu , author C. Zhu , author J. S. \ Francisco ,\ and\ author X. C. \ Zeng ,\ https://doi.org/10.1038/s41567-023-02341-8 journal journal Nature Physics \ volume 20 ,\ pages 456–464 ( year 2024 ) NoStop

    doi

  11. [20]

    Laage \ and\ author J

    author author D. Laage \ and\ author J. T. \ Hynes ,\ https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1122154 journal journal Science \ volume 311 ,\ pages 832–835 ( year 2006 ) NoStop

    2006 doi

  12. [21]

    Hassanali , author F

    author author A. Hassanali , author F. Giberti , author J. Cuny , author T. D. \ Kühne ,\ and\ author M. Parrinello ,\ https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1306642110 journal journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences \ volume 110 ,\ pages 13723–13728 ( year 2013 ) NoStop

    doi

  13. [22]

    author author J. D. \ Bernal \ and\ author R. H. \ Fowler ,\ https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1749327 journal journal J. Chem. Phys. \ volume 1 ,\ pages 515 ( year 1933 ) NoStop

    1933 doi

  14. [23]

    Das , author S

    author author B. Das , author S. Ruiz-Barragan , author B. Bagchi ,\ and\ author D. Marx ,\ https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.nanolett.4c04077 journal journal Nano Letters \ volume 24 ,\ pages 15623–15628 ( year 2024 ) NoStop

    2024 doi

  15. [24]

    Sun , author B

    author author J. Sun , author B. K. \ Clark , author S. Torquato ,\ and\ author R. Car ,\ https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms9156 journal journal Nat. Commun. \ volume 6 ,\ pages 8156 ( year 2015 ) NoStop

    2015 doi

  16. [25]

    Morgan \ and\ author P

    author author B. Morgan \ and\ author P. A. \ Madden ,\ https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1629076 journal journal J. Chem. Phys. \ volume 120 ,\ pages 1402 ( year 2004 ) NoStop

    2004 doi

  17. [26]

    Simoes Santos , author M

    author author M. Simoes Santos , author M. Salanne , author T. Kooyman ,\ and\ author D. Lambertin ,\ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnucmat.2024.155125 journal journal Journal of Nuclear Materials \ volume 597 ,\ pages 155125 ( year 2024 ) NoStop

    2024

  18. [27]

    Hull ,\ https://doi.org/10.1088/0034-4885/67/7/r05 journal journal Reports on Progress in Physics \ volume 67 ,\ pages 1233–1314 ( year 2004 ) NoStop

    author author S. Hull ,\ https://doi.org/10.1088/0034-4885/67/7/r05 journal journal Reports on Progress in Physics \ volume 67 ,\ pages 1233–1314 ( year 2004 ) NoStop

    2004 doi

  19. [28]

    author author P. C. \ Müller , author C. Ertural , author J. Hempelmann ,\ and\ author R. Dronskowski ,\ https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpcc.1c00718 journal journal J. Phys. Chem. C \ volume 125 ,\ pages 7959 ( year 2021 ) NoStop

    2021 doi

  20. [29]

    Ninet , author F

    author author S. Ninet , author F. Datchi ,\ and\ author A. M. \ Saitta ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.165702 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 108 ,\ pages 165702 ( year 2012 ) NoStop

    2012 doi

  21. [30]

    author author C. J. \ Pickard \ and\ author R. J. \ Needs ,\ https://doi.org/10.1038/nmat2261 journal journal Nature Materials \ volume 7 ,\ pages 775 ( year 2008 ) NoStop

    2008 doi

  22. [31]

    \ Kreuer ,\ https://doi.org/10.1021/cm950192a journal journal Chemistry of Materials \ volume 8 ,\ pages 610–641 ( year 1996 ) NoStop

    author author K.-D. \ Kreuer ,\ https://doi.org/10.1021/cm950192a journal journal Chemistry of Materials \ volume 8 ,\ pages 610–641 ( year 1996 ) NoStop

    1996 doi

  23. [32]

    author author B. C. \ Wood , author J. B. \ Varley , author K. E. \ Kweon , author P. Shea , author A. T. \ Hall , author A. Grieder , author M. Ward , author V. P. \ Aguirre , author D. Rigling , author E. Lopez Ventura , author C. Stancill ,\ and\ author N. Adelstein ,\ jour...

  24. [33]

    author author C. R. A. \ Catlow ,\ https://doi.org/10.1039/ft9908601167 journal journal Journal of the Chemical Society, Faraday Transactions \ volume 86 ,\ pages 1167 ( year 1990 ) NoStop

    1990 doi

  25. [34]

    author author B. J. \ Morgan \ and\ author P. A. \ Madden ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.145901 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 112 ,\ pages 145901 ( year 2014 ) NoStop

    2014 doi

  26. [35]

    Joos , author X

    author author M. Joos , author X. Kang , author R. Merkle ,\ and\ author J. Maier ,\ https://doi.org/10.1038/s41563-025-02143-8 journal journal Nat. Mater. \ volume 24 ,\ pages 397 ( year 2025 ) NoStop

    2025 doi

  27. [36]

    author author C. de Grotthuss ,\ https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=ORxIjwEACAAJ title M \'e moire sur la d \'e composition de l'eau: et des corps qu' elle tient en dissolution \`a l'aide de l' \'e lectricit \'e galvanique \ ( year 1805 ) NoStop

  28. [37]

    Marx ,\ https://doi.org/10.1002/cphc.200600128 journal journal ChemPhysChem \ volume 7 ,\ pages 1848–1870 ( year 2006 ) NoStop

    author author D. Marx ,\ https://doi.org/10.1002/cphc.200600128 journal journal ChemPhysChem \ volume 7 ,\ pages 1848–1870 ( year 2006 ) NoStop

    2006 doi

  29. [38]

    Chen , author L

    author author M. Chen , author L. Zheng , author B. Santra , author H.-Y. \ Ko , author R. A. \ DiStasio Jr , author M. L. \ Klein , author R. Car ,\ and\ author X. Wu ,\ https://doi.org/10.1038/s41557-018-0010-2 journal journal Nature Chemistry \ volume 10 ,\ pages 413–419 ( ...

    doi

  30. [39]

    author author M. E. \ Tuckerman , author A. Chandra ,\ and\ author D. Marx ,\ https://doi.org/10.1021/ar040207n journal journal Accounts of Chemical Research \ volume 39 ,\ pages 151–158 ( year 2006 ) NoStop

    2006 doi

  31. [40]

    Marx , author M

    author author D. Marx , author M. E. \ Tuckerman , author J. Hutter ,\ and\ author M. Parrinello ,\ https://doi.org/10.1038/17579 journal journal Nature \ volume 397 ,\ pages 601–604 ( year 1999 ) NoStop

    1999 doi

  32. [41]

    Burbano , author D

    author author M. Burbano , author D. Carlier , author F. Boucher , author B. J. \ Morgan ,\ and\ author M. Salanne ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.135901 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 116 ,\ pages 135901 ( year 2016 ) NoStop

    doi

  33. [43]

    Annamareddy \ and\ author J

    author author A. Annamareddy \ and\ author J. Eapen ,\ https://doi.org/10.1038/srep44149 journal journal Sci. Rep. \ volume 7 ,\ pages 44149 ( year 2017 ) NoStop

    2017 doi

  34. [44]

    Futera , author J

    author author Z. Futera , author J. S. \ Tse ,\ and\ author N. J. \ English ,\ journal journal Science Advances \ volume 6 ,\ https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aaz2915 10.1126/sciadv.aaz2915 ( year 2020 ) NoStop

    2020 doi

  35. [45]

    Noguchi \ and\ author T

    author author N. Noguchi \ and\ author T. Okuchi ,\ https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4953688 journal journal J. Chem. Phys. \ volume 144 ,\ pages 234507 ( year 2016 ) NoStop

    2016 doi

  36. [46]

    \ Li , author M

    author author X.-Z. \ Li , author M. I. J. \ Probert , author A. Alavi ,\ and\ author A. Michaelides ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.104.066102 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 104 ,\ pages 066102 ( year 2010 ) NoStop

    2010 doi

  37. [47]

    Gomez , author W

    author author A. Gomez , author W. H. \ Thompson ,\ and\ author D. Laage ,\ https://doi.org/10.1038/s41557-024-01593-y journal journal Nature Chemistry \ volume 16 ,\ pages 1838–1844 ( year 2024 ) NoStop

    2024 doi

  38. [48]

    Chandra , author M

    author author A. Chandra , author M. E. \ Tuckerman ,\ and\ author D. Marx ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.99.145901 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 99 ,\ pages 145901 ( year 2007 ) NoStop

    2007 doi

  39. [49]

    Ravindra , author X

    author author P. Ravindra , author X. R. \ Advincula , author C. Schran , author A. Michaelides ,\ and\ author V. Kapil ,\ https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-51124-z journal journal Nat. Commun. \ volume 15 ,\ pages 7301 ( year 2024 b ) NoStop

    doi

  40. [50]

    Tocci \ and\ author A

    author author G. Tocci \ and\ author A. Michaelides ,\ https://doi.org/10.1021/jz402646c journal journal The Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters \ volume 5 ,\ pages 474–480 ( year 2014 ) NoStop

    2014 doi

  41. [51]

    Schran , author F

    author author C. Schran , author F. L. \ Thiemann , author P. Rowe , author E. A. \ Müller , author O. Marsalek ,\ and\ author A. Michaelides ,\ https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2110077118 journal journal Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. \ volume 118 ,\ pages e2110077118 ( year 2021 ) NoStop

    doi

  42. [52]

    Kapil , author M

    author author V. Kapil , author M. Rossi , author O. Marsalek , author R. Petraglia , author Y. Litman , author T. Spura , author B. Cheng , author A. Cuzzocrea , author R. H. \ Meißner , author D. M. \ Wilkins , author B. A. \ Helfrecht , author P. Juda , author S. P. \ Bienv...

  43. [53]

    Singraber , author J

    author author A. Singraber , author J. Behler ,\ and\ author C. Dellago ,\ https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.8b00770 journal journal Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation \ volume 15 ,\ pages 1827–1840 ( year 2019 ) NoStop

    2019 doi

  44. [54]

    Hjorth Larsen , author J

    author author A. Hjorth Larsen , author J. Jørgen Mortensen , author J. Blomqvist , author I. E. \ Castelli , author R. Christensen , author M. Dułak , author J. Friis , author M. N. \ Groves , author B. Hammer , author C. Hargus , author E. D. \ Hermes , author P. C. \ Jennin...

  45. [55]

    Behler \ and\ author M

    author author J. Behler \ and\ author M. Parrinello ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.98.146401 journal journal Phys. Rev. Lett. \ volume 98 ,\ pages 146401 ( year 2007 ) NoStop

    2007 doi

  46. [56]

    Reinhardt , author M

    author author A. Reinhardt , author M. Bethkenhagen , author F. Coppari , author M. Millot , author S. Hamel ,\ and\ author B. Cheng ,\ https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-32374-1 journal journal Nat. Commun. \ volume 13 ,\ pages 4707 ( year 2022 ) NoStop

    doi

  47. [57]

    author author A. P. \ Thompson , author H. M. \ Aktulga , author R. Berger , author D. S. \ Bolintineanu , author W. M. \ Brown , author P. S. \ Crozier , author P. J. \ in ’t Veld , author A. Kohlmeyer , author S. G. \ Moore , author T. D. \ Nguyen , author R. Shan , author M...

  48. [58]

    Kresse \ and\ author J

    author author G. Kresse \ and\ author J. Hafner ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevb.49.14251 journal journal Physical Review B \ volume 49 ,\ pages 14251–14269 ( year 1994 ) NoStop

    1994 doi

  49. [59]

    Kresse \ and\ author J

    author author G. Kresse \ and\ author J. Furthmüller ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevb.54.11169 journal journal Physical Review B \ volume 54 ,\ pages 11169–11186 ( year 1996 a ) NoStop

    1996 doi

  50. [60]

    Kresse \ and\ author J

    author author G. Kresse \ and\ author J. Furthmüller ,\ https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0927-0256(96)00008-0 journal journal Computational Materials Science \ volume 6 ,\ pages 15 ( year 1996 b ) NoStop

    1996 doi

  51. [61]

    author author J. P. \ Perdew , author K. Burke ,\ and\ author M. Ernzerhof ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.77.3865 journal journal Physical Review Letters \ volume 77 ,\ pages 3865–3868 ( year 1996 ) NoStop

    1996 doi

  52. [62]

    Nelson , author C

    author author R. Nelson , author C. Ertural , author J. George , author V. L. \ Deringer , author G. Hautier ,\ and\ author R. Dronskowski ,\ https://doi.org/10.1002/jcc.26353 journal journal J. Comput. Chem. \ volume 41 ,\ pages 1931 ( year 2020 ) NoStop

    doi

  53. [63]

    author author S. P. \ Ong , author W. D. \ Richards , author A. Jain , author G. Hautier , author M. Kocher , author S. Cholia , author D. Gunter , author V. L. \ Chevrier , author K. A. \ Persson ,\ and\ author G. Ceder ,\ https://doi.org/10.1016/j.commatsci.2012.10.028 journ...

    doi

  54. [64]

    Morgan ,\ @noop title vasppy (version 0.7.1.0) [software] ,\ howpublished https://pypi.org/project/vasppy/0.7.1.0/ ( year 2021 b ),\ note python package NoStop

    author author B. Morgan ,\ @noop title vasppy (version 0.7.1.0) [software] ,\ howpublished https://pypi.org/project/vasppy/0.7.1.0/ ( year 2021 b ),\ note python package NoStop

    2021

  55. [65]

    author author C. R. \ Harris , author K. J. \ Millman , author S. J. \ van der Walt , author R. Gommers , author P. Virtanen , author D. Cournapeau , author E. Wieser , author J. Taylor , author S. Berg , author N. J. \ Smith , author R. Kern , author M. Picus , author S. Hoye...

  56. [66]

    author author K. D. \ Fong , author B. Sumić , author N. O’Neill , author C. Schran , author C. P. \ Grey ,\ and\ author A. Michaelides ,\ https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.nanolett.4c00890 journal journal Nano Letters \ volume 24 ,\ pages 5024 ( year 2024 ) NoStop

    doi

  57. [67]

    Donati , author J

    author author C. Donati , author J. F. \ Douglas , author W. Kob , author S. J. \ Plimpton , author P. H. \ Poole ,\ and\ author S. C. \ Glotzer ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.80.2338 journal journal Physical Review Letters \ volume 80 ,\ pages 2338–2341 ( year 1998 ) NoStop

    doi

  58. [68]

    author author B. Morgan ,\ @noop title bjmorgan/data\_argyrodite\_disorder: Manuscript resubmission release ,\ howpublished https://zenodo.org/record/4338578 ( year 2020 ),\ note version 1.0, Zenodo, 17 Dec. 2020, doi:10.5281/zenodo.4338578 NoStop

    2020

  59. [69]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry add.period write newline FUNCTION new.sentence output.state after.block = 'skip output.state before.all = 'skip after.sentence 'output.state := if if FUNCTION not #0 #1 if FUNCTION and 'skip pop #0 if FUNCTION o...

  60. [70]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry add.period write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION new.sentence output.state after.block = 'skip output.state before.all = 'skip after.sentence '...

  61. [71]

    Ravindra , author X

    author author P. Ravindra , author X. R. \ Advincula , author B. X. \ Shi , author S. W. \ Coles , author A. Michaelides ,\ and\ author V. Kapil ,\ https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.03272 journal journal arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.03272 \ ( year 2024 ) NoStop

    arXiv

  62. [72]

    Batatia , author D

    author author I. Batatia , author D. P. \ Kovacs , author G. N. C. \ Simm , author C. Ortner ,\ and\ author G. Csanyi ,\ in\ https://openreview.net/forum?id=YPpSngE-ZU booktitle Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems ,\ editor edited by\ editor A. H. \ Oh , editor A...

    2022

  63. [73]

    Hajibabaei , author W

    author author A. Hajibabaei , author W. J. \ Baldwin , author G. Csányi ,\ and\ author S. J. \ Cox ,\ journal journal Physical Review Letters \ volume 134 ,\ https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.134.026306 10.1103/physrevlett.134.026306 ( year 2025 ) NoStop

    doi

  64. [74]

    Di Pino , author Y

    author author S. Di Pino , author Y. A. \ Perez Sirkin , author U. N. \ Morzan , author V. M. \ Sánchez , author A. Hassanali ,\ and\ author D. A. \ Scherlis ,\ journal journal Angewandte Chemie International Edition \ volume 62 ,\ https://doi.org/10.1002/anie.202306526 10.100...

    doi

  65. [75]

    Muñoz-Santiburcio \ and\ author D

    author author D. Muñoz-Santiburcio \ and\ author D. Marx ,\ https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrev.0c01292 journal journal Chemical Reviews \ volume 121 ,\ pages 6293–6320 ( year 2021 ) NoStop

    2021 doi

  66. [76]

    author author B. J. \ Morgan ,\ https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemmater.0c03738 journal journal Chemistry of Materials \ volume 33 ,\ pages 2004–2018 ( year 2021 ) NoStop

    2004 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.