Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Ab initio theory of the non-resonant Raman effect in crystals at finite temperature in comparison to experiment: The examples of GaN and BaZrS3

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A first-principles Raman theory that retains the photon momentum reproduces measured spectra of GaN and BaZrS3.

desk verdict A clean finite-q, finite-temperature Raman theory with a strong GaN test; the BaZrS3 orientation is chosen by best fit, so treat 'excellent agreement' there as qualified. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.17711 v1 pith:PW3BQ7GB submitted 2024-12-23 cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Florian Knoop , Nimrod Benshalom , Matan Menahem , Paul Gartner , Tommaso Salzillo , Omer Yaffe , Olle Hellman This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mtrl-sci PACS 78.30.-j63.20.-e71.15.Mb
keywords RamanscatteringanharmonicphononsfinitetemperatureLO/TOsplittingpolarization-resolveddensityfunctionalperturbationtheoryGaNBaZrS3
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

This paper derives the non-resonant Raman scattering signal of a crystal from classical electrodynamics while keeping the small but finite momentum of the probed phonon, and links that signal to anharmonic phonon spectra computed from density functional theory. The authors claim this combination reproduces measured polarization-resolved Raman maps, mode assignments, and the temperature evolution of frequencies and linewidths for wurtzite GaN and the perovskite BaZrS3. The main discrepancy is a systematic 7 percent underestimate of phonon frequencies, plus two effects the authors state they neglect: temperature renormalization of the mode activity and the electro-optic contribution to LO modes. If correct, the theory makes Raman spectra of optically anisotropic crystals, including direction-dependent LO/TO splitting, predictable from first principles at finite temperature.

What carries the argument

The central object is the spectral Raman tensor $I^{\alpha\alpha',\beta\beta'}(\Omega,q;T)=\langle \chi^{\alpha\alpha'}(\Omega,q)\chi^{*,\beta\beta'}(\Omega,q)\rangle_T$, written as a lattice sum of susceptibility autocorrelations with phase $e^{-iq\cdot (R_L-R_K)}$. In first order it reduces to $\sum_s |e_i\cdot R_{qs} e_s|^2 J_{qs}(\Omega;T)$, where $R_{qs}$ is the mode-space susceptibility derivative (the Raman tensor) and $J_{qs}(\Omega;T)$ is the Bose-weighted phonon spectral function from temperature-dependent effective-potential lattice dynamics. Keeping $q$ finite is what lets LO/TO splitting enter with the correct direction dependence through the non-analytical dynamical matrix.

What would settle it

Measure the temperature dependence of the relative integrated intensities of two Raman modes with different symmetries in BaZrS3, after correcting for the Bose factor and linewidth changes. The theory predicts that ratio is set by the zero-temperature Raman tensor and therefore stays constant; a systematic change with temperature beyond experimental uncertainty would falsify the central assumption of temperature-independent mode activities.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the Raman cross section of a crystal is the autocorrelation of its light-induced electronic polarization (the susceptibility) sampled in real space and real time with a phase factor $e^{-iq\cdot (R_L-R_K)}$ that keeps the photon momentum; in optically anisotropic crystals this phase factor cannot be dropped without losing the direction-dependent LO/TO splitting. Expanding the susceptibility linearly in atomic displacements turns the cross section into a sum over phonon modes of the squared Raman tensor $R_{qs}$ times the Bose-weighted phonon spectral function $J_{qs}(\Omega;T)$, so temperature enters through the spectral function rather than through the mode activities. For GaN in the (0001) and (10-10) orientations and for BaZrS3 in the (101) orientation, the computed polarization-orientation patterns, mode assignments, linewidths, and temperature shifts match experiment, with a systematic 7 percent underestimate of frequencies and with the E1(LO) intensity in GaN missing because the electro-optic effect is neglected. The paper also shows that the two-phonon density of states and the plain convolution of the one-phonon density of states give nearly identical second-order estimates in BaZrS3, so the cheaper density-of-states convolution can be used to estimate the second-order background.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption, which the paper states in its methods sections, is that the Raman mode activities (the susceptibility derivatives setting each mode's intensity) are frozen at their zero-temperature values, so all temperature dependence in the predicted spectra flows through the phonon spectral functions; if these derivatives shift noticeably with temperature in BaZrS3, the predicted intensities and polarization patterns would drift away from experiment.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For anisotropic polar crystals, backscattering Raman spectra can be predicted from first principles in a chosen scattering geometry, including which LO modes are visible, with a fixed frequency rescaling as the only empirical input.
  • Temperature-dependent Raman linewidths and frequency shifts are obtainable from perturbative phonon theory for mildly anharmonic materials with up to about 20 atoms per unit cell.
  • Single-crystal polarization-orientation maps contain only the tensor components perpendicular to the scattering directions, so comparing them to isotropic gas-phase averages can misassign mode intensities.
  • Where the two-phonon density of states and the phonon-density-of-states autoconvolution coincide, the second-order Raman background can be estimated cheaply from the autoconvolution alone, as demonstrated for BaZrS3.
  • A fixed 7 percent frequency scaling turns the computed spectra into a reliable assignment and fingerprinting tool across the studied temperature range.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • An immediate testable extension is to measure absolute intensity ratios between modes of different symmetry as a function of temperature in BaZrS3; if they deviate from the temperature-independent ratio predicted here, the zero-temperature Raman tensor approximation needs revision.
  • The same finite-$q$ formalism should apply to forward-scattering geometries near the polariton region, where the electrostatic LO/TO model breaks down; the paper identifies this as future work rather than implementing it.
  • The near-equality of the two-phonon density of states and the density-of-states convolution in BaZrS3 is likely tied to its many phonon branches and complex unit cell, so the shortcut should be tested per material before being used elsewhere.
  • Extending the approach to resonant Raman would require combining anharmonic spectral functions with electronic excitation response, a direction the authors explicitly leave open.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents a derivation of the non-resonant Raman scattering cross section that retains the finite photon momentum transfer q and the full scattering geometry, connects this expression to phonon spectral functions obtained from the stochastic temperature-dependent effective potential (sTDEP) method, and implements it for first-order Raman scattering. The approach is demonstrated on wurtzite GaN and orthorhombic BaZrS3 by comparing computed polarization-oriented (PO) maps, mode frequencies, linewidths, and temperature trends with new experiments. The paper also discusses three simplified estimates of second-order Raman scattering (2PDOS, 2ω-DOS, and DOS convolution) and compares them against the measured BaZrS3 background spectrum.

Significance. If the results hold, this is a valuable unified framework: it gives a parameter-free route from DFPT susceptibility derivatives and TDEP phonon spectral functions to finite-temperature Raman spectra in anisotropic crystals, including direction-dependent LO/TO splitting, and it ships reproducible code and data (TDEP, tdeptools, Zenodo, NOMAD). The GaN benchmark is the strongest part of the paper and supports the central derivation. The BaZrS3 demonstration is more limited in evidentiary weight because the crystal orientation is selected by best fit to the data, and several effects (electro-optic coupling, temperature dependence of mode activities) are neglected. The second-order estimates are explicitly intensity-scaled to experiment and are therefore shape comparisons rather than absolute ab initio predictions.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. III C, Fig. 5] The BaZrS3 PO comparison is not an independent validation because the computed maps are compared in the (101) orientation "determined by computing PO maps for different crystal orientations and choosing the best available match." For an orthorhombic Pnma crystal the PO angular pattern depends strongly on the scattering plane and crystal orientation; this post hoc freedom can compensate for errors in the Raman tensor, birefringence, or other neglected effects. Please fix the orientation by independent structural characterization (e.g., X-ray diffraction or Laue), or report the full orientation landscape and show that the best match sits at a unique, sharp minimum. Without this, the claim of "excellent agreement" for BaZrS3 overstates the evidential weight.
  2. [Sec. II C and Sec. III D] The susceptibility derivatives χ_i^γ are computed at zero temperature and assumed independent of temperature and of thermal reference positions, as stated in Sec. II C ("temperature renormalization of the mode activity ... is not accounted for") and Sec. II E. This assumption is load-bearing for the finite-temperature intensity comparisons, especially the ambient-temperature BaZrS3 first-order spectrum in Fig. 6(a), where all temperature dependence is carried by the phonon spectral functions. The manuscript should provide at least an estimate of the expected variation of the Raman activities between 0 and 300 K, or explicitly restrict the temperature-dependent claims to frequencies and linewidths rather than intensities.
  3. [Sec. III B, Figs. 3-4] The comparison after applying a uniform 7% frequency rescaling is reasonable as a post-hoc account of the well-known GGA underestimation, and the paper discloses it. However, the raw theoretical frequencies are not shown in a way that makes the scaling transparent: the figures show "Theory" and "Theory + 7%" without stating that the "Theory" curve is the raw, unscaled result. Please state explicitly which curves are raw and which are rescaled, and comment on whether a mode- and temperature-dependent scaling would affect the reported agreement of temperature shifts and linewidths.
  4. [Sec. I D and Sec. III E, Figs. 6-8] The second-order estimates are normalized to the experimental intensity ("The intensity of the computed estimates is scaled to match the intensity in the region around 300 cm−1"), and the cDOS correction in Fig. 6(b) inherits this normalization. The comparison is therefore shape-only and cannot verify the absolute second-order cross section. This limitation should be stated prominently wherever the second-order background is described as reproducing the experiment.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Eqs. (22)-(24), Table II] The isotropic average formula with terms such as √σxxσyy does not appear to match the standard invariant expansion 45α²+7β² with α=(1/3)Tr(R) and β² built from the traceless symmetric part of the Raman tensor. Please verify the expression and state its assumptions; Table II should be checked against the standard formula.
  2. [Sec. III C] Please state whether the BaZrS3 crystal orientation was determined by any independent technique (e.g., X-ray Laue or XRD) in addition to the PO-map matching, and define the (101) scattering plane relative to the crystallographic axes and the angle θ convention used in Fig. 5.
  3. [Sec. I D] There is a typo in the sentence "Estimates based on the 2ω-DOS have been used for a range of systems inlcuding Si...": "inlcuding" should be "including".
  4. [Fig. 4 caption] The caption says "the theoretical frequencies are systematically underestimates by about 7%" and should read "underestimated".
  5. [Eq. (13)] The cross section is given up to non-essential prefactors. For future reproducibility of intensity comparisons, please state the normalization convention used when comparing computed and measured spectra.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

BaZrS3 PO-map comparison uses a crystal orientation chosen to best fit the data; the GaN test remains an independent, parameter-free benchmark.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Sec. III C (PO Raman for BZS)]
    "PO Raman maps from experiments at low temperature (10 K) are presented in Fig. 5, compared to computed PO maps in (101) orientation. The orientation was determined by computing PO maps for different crystal orientations and choosing the best available match. Overall, the match is very good, besides the typical redshift of GGA DFT frequencies already observed in GaN. However, the angular dependence of the PO pattern for each mode matches very well."

    For an orthorhombic Pnma crystal the computed polarization-oriented map depends on the crystal orientation (scattering plane and crystallographic axes) relative to the laboratory frame, and that orientation is not fixed a priori in the calculation. By computing maps for many orientations and 'choosing the best available match,' the angular pattern agreement becomes an in-sample fit to the measured map rather than an independent ab initio prediction. The subsequent claim of excellent agreement and matching angular dependence for BaZrS3 is therefore partly a statement about the quality of that orientation search, and it could also compensate for errors in the Raman tensors or neglected effects (electro-optic coupling, birefringence).

full rationale

The theoretical derivation itself is not circular: the first-order Raman cross section follows from classical electrodynamics and a phonon expansion of the susceptibility, Eqs. (13)-(35), with Raman tensors from DFPT and phonon spectral functions from sTDEP perturbation theory; no intensity parameter is fitted to the measured spectra. The 7% frequency rescaling is a post hoc comparison, and the second-order estimates are explicitly intensity-scaled and presented as estimates. Self-citations to the authors' earlier q=0 framework and TDEP methods support the implementation but are not load-bearing: the central quantity, the q-dependent spectral Raman tensor, is re-derived here and benchmarked on GaN with known orientation, where the PO maps, mode assignments, and temperature trends are reproduced without fitting. The only defensible circularity concern is the BaZrS3 polarization-oriented comparison, where the crystal orientation is selected by best agreement with the same data being compared; this weakens that specific validation but does not invalidate the derivation or the GaN demonstration. Accordingly the paper is mostly self-contained, with one fitted-input called prediction in the BaZrS3 PO section.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard electrodynamics, DFT, and phonon perturbation theory plus four stated domain assumptions (non-resonant local response, unit-cell averaging, temperature-independent Raman tensors, electrostatic LO model). No new physical entities, forces, or particles are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • frequency scaling factor = 1.07 (7%)
    Applied to all computed GaN and BaZrS3 frequencies to correct the systematic GGA-level DFT underestimation before comparing to experiment (Sec. III B).
  • second-order intensity scale = not specified (normalized to match near 300 cm^-1)
    The 2PDOS, 2omega-DOS, and cDOS spectra are scaled to match the experimental background around 300 cm^-1 (Sec. III E, Fig. 7).
  • BaZrS3 crystal orientation = chosen by best match (angles not reported in text)
    The sample orientation was determined by computing PO maps for different crystal orientations and selecting the best match to experiment (Sec. III C).
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The electronic susceptibility response is local, instantaneous, and independent of the incident laser frequency (non-resonant regime below the band gap).
    Stated in Sec. I A after Eq. (3); required for the Wiener-Khinchin spectral density derivation. Valid for the 488 nm, 532 nm, and 785 nm lasers used, which are below the gaps of GaN and BaZrS3.
  • domain assumption The susceptibility can be averaged over one or a few unit cells (dipole approximation), independent of the averaging scheme.
    Introduced in Sec. I A and defended in Sec. II C by a GaN supercell check; not verified for BaZrS3.
  • domain assumption Raman mode activities do not depend on temperature or on the thermal reference positions; the 0 K force constants are sufficient.
    Sec. II C lists two neglected effects, including temperature renormalization of mode activity; Sec. II E states temperature-independent 0 K force constants are sufficient. This is load-bearing for temperature-dependent intensity predictions.
  • domain assumption The non-analytical dynamical matrix in the q to 0 limit (electrostatic approximation) is valid for the backscattering geometries used.
    Sec. II B notes the validity condition qc/omega >> 1, satisfied for |q| about 2ki in backscattering.
  • domain assumption Harmonic phonon perturbation theory (sTDEP with third-order force constants) captures the anharmonic linewidths and frequency shifts of GaN and BaZrS3.
    Adopted throughout Secs. II A and III B; stated to work for mildly anharmonic materials, which the authors argue GaN and BaZrS3 are.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Ab initio theory of the non-resonant Raman effect in crystals at finite temperature in comparison to experiment: The examples of GaN and BaZrS3." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/PW3BQ7GB

@misc{pith2026241217711,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Ab initio theory of the non-resonant Raman effect in crystals at finite temperature in comparison to experiment: The examples of GaN and BaZrS3},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/PW3BQ7GB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.17711}
}
read the original abstract

We present an ab initio theory of the non-resonant Raman scattering process in crystals at finite temperature in direct comparison with experiments. The theory incorporates the scattering geometry and polarization dependence of the Raman process and the small but finite wave vectors of the phonons for correctly describing the scattering with longitudinal optical (LO) modes in optically anisotropic solids. We implement the theory for first-order Raman scattering and showcase the approach for wurtzite Gallium Nitride and the complex chalcogenide perovskite BaZrS3 in comparison to experiment. We subsequently discuss several common estimates for second-order Raman scattering in complex materials, and highlight similarities and differences to established theoretical approaches and simulation protocols both from phonon theory and molecular dynamics.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.17711 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. PO Raman results for GaN in (0001) orientation at ambient conditions. (a,b): Unpolarized spectra from experiment [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. PO Raman results for GaN in (10 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. FIG. 4. Phonon frequencies and linewidths for Raman ac [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Phonon frequencies and linewidths for Raman ac [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_3.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. PO Raman results for BZS in (101) orientation at 10 K. (a,b): Unpolarized spectra from experiment (upper black [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Raman spectrum for BZS at ambient conditions. Up [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Experimental Raman spectrum for BaZrS [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. 2PDOS according to Eq ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_8.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Machine Learning Accelerates Raman Computations from Molecular Dynamics for Materials Science

    cond-mat.mtrl-sci 2025-06 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

    Machine learning models can compute the polarizability time series needed for MD-Raman spectra at a small fraction of DFT cost, making finite-temperature Raman prediction for anharmonic materials practical.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

146 extracted references · 71 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    2PDOS By setting χ′′ q,ss′ = 1 in Eq. (36), we get S 2PDOS 2 (Ω; T ) ∝ X q,ss′ Jqs(Ω; T ) ∗ Jqs′(Ω; T ) (40) = g(1) 2 (Ω; T ) + g(2) 2 (Ω; T ) (41) with the Bose-weighted joint density of states (JDOS) functions [52, 65, 66] g(1) 2 (Ω; T ) = [n(Ω) + 1] X q,ss′ (1 + nqs + nqs′) [δ(Ω + ωqs + ωqs′) − δ(Ω − ωqs − ωqs′)] (42) g(2) 2 (Ω; T ) = [n(Ω) + 1] X q,ss...

  2. [2]

    phonon recombination and decay. These two functions together give the Bose-weighted two-phonon density of states (2PDOS), g2(Ω; T ) = g(1) 2 (Ω; T ) + g(2) 2 (Ω; T ) , (44) which is sometimes used to estimate second-order Raman scattering [52, 67, 68]

  3. [3]

    2ω-DOS An even simpler estimate can be obtained by setting χ′′ q,ss′ = δss′ in Eq. (36), which yields the Bose-weighted 6 overtone density of states (2 ω-DOS) [19, 52, 69–72], S 2ω−DOS 2 (Ω; T ) (45) ∝ X qs Jqs(Ω; T ) ∗ Jqs(Ω; T ) (46) = X qs n2 qsδ(Ω + 2ωqs) + (nqs + 1)2δ(Ω − 2ωqs) (47) ≡ g2ω(Ω; T ) . (48) Estimates based on the 2 ω-DOS have been used fo...

  4. [4]

    (52) We denote the DOS autoconvolution in Eq

    DOS convolution As a third estimate, we relax the requirement of crystal-momentum conservation and estimate [26] S cDOS 2 (Ω; T ) ∝ X q,ss′ Jqs(Ω; T ) ∗ Jqs′(Ω; T ) (49) ≈ X qq′,ss′ Jqs(Ω; T ) ∗ Jq′s′(Ω; T ) (50) = g(Ω; T ) ∗ g(Ω; T ) , (51) where g(Ω; T ) is the ordinary Bose-weighted one-phonon density of states (DOS), g(Ω; T ) = X qs nqsδ(ω + ωqs) + (n...

    2020

  5. [5]

    Smekal, Naturwissenschaften 11, 873 (1923)

    A. Smekal, Naturwissenschaften 11, 873 (1923)

    1923

  6. [6]

    C. V. RAMAN and K. S. KRISHNAN, Nature 121, 501 (1928)

    1928

  7. [7]

    P. Y. Yu and M. Cardona, Graduate Texts in Physics (2010), 10.1007/978-3-642-00710-1

    doi:10.1007/978-3-642-00710-1 2010

  8. [8]

    R. S. Das and Y. Agrawal, Vibrational Spectroscopy 57, 163 (2011)

    2011

Show all 146 references
  1. [9]

    R. R. Jones, D. C. Hooper, L. Zhang, D. Wolverson, and V. K. Valev, Nanoscale Research Letters 14, 231 (2019)

    2019

  2. [10]

    Hartman, C

    T. Hartman, C. S. Wondergem, N. Kumar, A. v. d. Berg, and B. M. Weckhuysen, The Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters 7, 1570 (2016)

    2016

  3. [11]

    Hess, Chemical Society Reviews 50, 3519 (2021)

    C. Hess, Chemical Society Reviews 50, 3519 (2021)

    2021

  4. [12]

    Loridant, Catalysis Today 373, 98 (2021)

    S. Loridant, Catalysis Today 373, 98 (2021)

    2021

  5. [13]

    Putrino and M

    A. Putrino and M. Parrinello, Physical Review Letters 88, 176401 (2002)

    2002

  6. [14]

    Pagliai, C

    M. Pagliai, C. Cavazzoni, G. Cardini, G. Erbacci, M. Parrinello, and V. Schettino, The Journal of Chem- ical Physics 128, 224514 (2008)

    2008

  7. [15]

    Raimbault, V

    N. Raimbault, V. Athavale, and M. Rossi, Physical Review Materials 3, 053605 (2019), 1901.10587

    2019 arXiv

  8. [16]

    C. M. Julien and A. Mauger, AIMS Materials Science 5, 650 (2018)

    2018

  9. [17]

    T. M. Brenner, C. Gehrmann, R. Korobko, T. Livneh, D. A. Egger, and O. Yaffe, Physical Review Materials 4, 115402 (2020), 1911.07492

    2020 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Famprikis, H

    T. Famprikis, H. Bouyanfif, P. Canepa, M. Zbiri, J. A. Dawson, E. Suard, F. Fauth, H. Y. Play- ford, D. Dambournet, O. J. Borkiewicz, M. Courty, O. Clemens, J.-N. Chotard, M. S. Islam, and C. Masquelier, Chemistry of Materials 33, 5652 (2021)

    2021

  11. [19]

    Ibaceta-Ja˜ na, R

    J. Ibaceta-Ja˜ na, R. Muydinov, P. Rosado, H. Mirhos- seini, M. Chugh, O. Nazarenko, D. N. Dirin, D. Hein- rich, M. R. Wagner, T. D. K¨ uhne, B. Szyszka, M. V. Ko- valenko, and A. Hoffmann, Physical Chemistry Chem- ical Physics 22, 5604 (2020)

    2020

  12. [20]

    Cohen, T

    A. Cohen, T. M. Brenner, J. Klarbring, R. Sharma, D. H. Fabini, R. Korobko, P. K. Nayak, O. Hellman, and O. Yaffe, Advanced Materials , 2107932 (2022)

    2022

  13. [21]

    Huang, X

    X. Huang, X. Li, Y. Tao, S. Guo, J. Gu, H. Hong, Y. Yao, Y. Guan, Y. Gao, C. Li, X. L¨ u, and Y. Fu, Journal of the American Chemical Society 144, 12247 (2022)

    2022

  14. [22]

    Baroni and R

    S. Baroni and R. Resta, Physical Review B 33, 5969 (1986)

    1986

  15. [23]

    Baroni, S

    S. Baroni, S. d. Gironcoli, A. D. Corso, and P. Gian- nozzi, Reviews of Modern Physics 73, 515 (2001), ref. to B¨ ottger, cond-mat/0012092

    2001 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Born and K

    M. Born and K. Huang, Dynamical theory of crystal lattices (Clarendon Press, 1954) grilnoisc11,E., 21, 49, 50, 52, 60, 187, 188

    1954

  17. [25]

    Porezag and M

    D. Porezag and M. R. Pederson, Physical Review B 54, 7830 (1996)

    1996

  18. [26]

    Neugebauer, M

    J. Neugebauer, M. Reiher, C. Kind, and B. A. Hess, Journal of Computational Chemistry 23, 895 (2002)

    2002

  19. [27]

    Lazzeri and F

    M. Lazzeri and F. Mauri, Physical Review Letters 90, 036401 (2003), cond-mat/0207039

    2003 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Veithen, X

    M. Veithen, X. Gonze, and P. Ghosez, Physical Review B 71, 125107 (2005)

    2005

  21. [29]

    J. M. Skelton, L. A. Burton, A. J. Jackson, F. Oba, S. C. Parker, and A. Walsh, Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics 19, 12452 (2017)

    2017

  22. [30]

    Menahem, N

    M. Menahem, N. Benshalom, M. Asher, S. Aharon, R. Korobko, S. Safran, O. Hellman, and O. Yaffe, Phys- ical Review Materials 7, 044602 (2023), 2208.05563

    2023 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Thomas, M

    M. Thomas, M. Brehm, R. Fligg, P. V¨ ohringer, and B. Kirchner, Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics 15, 6608 (2013)

    2013

  24. [32]

    Ditler and S

    E. Ditler and S. Luber, Wiley Interdisciplinary Re- views: Computational Molecular Science 12 (2022), 10.1002/wcms.1605

    2022 doi

  25. [33]

    F. S. Hegner, A. Cohen, S. S. Rudel, S. M. Kronawitter, M. Grumet, X. Zhu, R. Korobko, L. Houben, C. Jiang, W. Schnick, G. Kieslich, O. Yaffe, I. D. Sharp, and D. A. Egger, Advanced Energy Materials 14 (2024), 10.1002/aenm.202303059

    2024 doi

  26. [34]

    Knoll and C

    P. Knoll and C. Ambrosch-Draxl, in Proceedings of the International Workshop on Anharmonic Properties of High-Tc Cuprates, Anharmonic Properties of High–Tc Cuprates (1995) p. 220

    1995

  27. [35]

    Monacelli and F

    L. Monacelli and F. Mauri, Physical Review B 103, 104305 (2021), 2011.14986

    2021 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Benshalom, G

    N. Benshalom, G. Reuveni, R. Korobko, O. Yaffe, and O. Hellman, Physical Review Materials 6, 033607 (2022)

    2022

  29. [37]

    Miotto and L

    M. Miotto and L. Monacelli, npj Computational Mate- rials 10, 240 (2024)

    2024

  30. [38]

    Hellman, I

    O. Hellman, I. A. Abrikosov, and S. I. Simak, Physical Review B 84, 180301 (2011), 1103.5590

    2011 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Errea, M

    I. Errea, M. Calandra, and F. Mauri, Physical Review Letters 111, 177002 (2013), 1305.7123

    2013 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Tadano and S

    T. Tadano and S. Tsuneyuki, Physical Review B 92, 054301 (2015), 1506.01781

    2015 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Born and M

    M. Born and M. Bradburn, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences 188, 161 (1947)

    1947

  34. [42]

    M. N. Popov, J. Spitaler, V. K. Veerapandiyan, E. Bous- quet, J. Hlinka, and M. Deluca, npj Computational Materials 6, 121 (2020), 2104.03738

    2020 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Knoop, N

    F. Knoop, N. Shulumba, A. Castellano, J. P. A. Batista, R. Farris, M. J. Verstraete, M. Heine, D. Broido, D. S. Kim, J. Klarbring, I. A. Abrikosov, S. I. Simak, and O. Hellman, Journal of Open Source Software 9, 6150 (2024). 14

    2024

  36. [44]

    Z. Yuan, D. Dahliah, R. Claes, A. Pike, D. P. Fen- ning, G.-M. Rignanese, and G. Hautier, PRX Energy 3, 033008 (2024), 2405.09793

    2024 arXiv

  37. [45]

    K. Ye, M. Menahem, T. Salzillo, F. Knoop, B. Zhao, S. Niu, O. Hellman, J. Ravichandran, R. Jaramillo, and O. Yaffe, Physical Review Materials 8, 085402 (2024)

    2024

  38. [46]

    K. V. Sopiha, C. Comparotto, J. A. M´ arquez, and J. J. S. Scragg, Advanced Optical Materials 10 (2022), 10.1002/adom.202101704

    2022 doi

  39. [47]

    J. W. Choi, B. Shin, P. Gorai, R. L. Z. Hoye, and R. Palgrave, ACS Energy Letters 7, 1553 (2022)

    2022

  40. [48]

    Nishigaki, T

    Y. Nishigaki, T. Nagai, M. Nishiwaki, T. Aizawa, M. Kozawa, K. Hanzawa, Y. Kato, H. Sai, H. Hira- matsu, H. Hosono, and H. Fujiwara, Solar RRL 4 (2020), 10.1002/solr.201900555

    2020 doi

  41. [49]

    Jaramillo and J

    R. Jaramillo and J. Ravichandran, APL Materials 7, 100902 (2019)

    2019

  42. [50]

    Gross, Y.-Y

    N. Gross, Y.-Y. Sun, S. Perera, H. Hui, X. Wei, S. Zhang, H. Zeng, and B. A. Weinstein, Physical Re- view Applied 8, 044014 (2017)

    2017

  43. [51]

    X. Wei, H. Hui, C. Zhao, C. Deng, M. Han, Z. Yu, A. Sheng, P. Roy, A. Chen, J. Lin, D. F. Watson, Y.- Y. Sun, T. Thomay, S. Yang, Q. Jia, S. Zhang, and H. Zeng, Nano Energy 68, 104317 (2020), 1910.04978

    2020 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Kayastha, D

    P. Kayastha, D. Tiwari, A. Holland, O. S. Hutter, K. Durose, L. D. Whalley, and G. Longo, Solar RRL 7 (2023), 10.1002/solr.202201078

    2023 doi

  45. [54]

    GRIFFIN, Reviews of Modern Physics 40, 167 (1968)

    A. GRIFFIN, Reviews of Modern Physics 40, 167 (1968)

    1968

  46. [55]

    J. D. Jackson, Classical Electrodynamics (John Wiley and Sons, 1998)

    1998

  47. [56]

    Cardona and G

    M. Cardona and G. G¨ untherodt, Light Scattering in Solids II, Vol. 39 (Springer-Verlag, 1982)

    1982

  48. [57]

    R. A. Cowley, Proceedings of the Physical Society 84, 281 (1964)

    1964

  49. [58]

    Berger and H.-P

    E. Berger and H.-P. Komsa, Physical Review Materials 8, 043802 (2024)

    2024

  50. [59]

    N. Xu, P. Rosander, C. Sch¨ afer, E. Lindgren, N. ¨Osterbacka, M. Fang, W. Chen, Y. He, Z. Fan, and P. Erhart, Journal of Chemical Theory and Computa- tion 20, 3273 (2024)

    2024

  51. [60]

    Rosander, E

    P. Rosander, E. Fransson, N. ¨Osterbacka, P. Er- hart, and G. Wahnstr¨ om, arXiv (2024), 10.48550/arxiv.2409.16161, 2409.16161

    2024 doi arXiv

  52. [61]

    Berger, J

    E. Berger, J. Niemel¨ a, O. Lampela, A. H. Juffer, and H.-P. Komsa, Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 64, 4601 (2024)

    2024

  53. [62]

    Grumet, C

    M. Grumet, C. v. Scarpatetti, T. Buˇ cko, and D. A. Egger, The Journal of Physical Chemistry C 128, 6464 (2024)

    2024

  54. [63]

    C. H. Henry and J. J. Hopfield, Physical Review Letters 15, 964 (1965)

    1965

  55. [64]

    Kranert, C

    C. Kranert, C. Sturm, R. Schmidt-Grund, and M. Grundmann, Physical Review Letters 116, 127401 (2015)

    2015

  56. [65]

    Hildebrandt, C

    R. Hildebrandt, C. Sturm, M. Wieneke, A. Dadgar, and M. Grundmann, Applied Physics Letters 119, 121109 (2021)

    2021

  57. [66]

    A. A. Clerk, M. H. Devoret, S. M. Girvin, F. Marquardt, and R. J. Schoelkopf, Reviews of Modern Physics 82, 1155 (2010), 0810.4729

    2010 arXiv

  58. [67]

    Baym, Annals of Physics 14, 1 (1961)

    G. Baym, Annals of Physics 14, 1 (1961)

    1961

  59. [68]

    Benshalom, M

    N. Benshalom, M. Asher, R. Jouclas, R. Korobko, G. Schweicher, J. Liu, Y. Geerts, O. Hellman, and O. Yaffe, The Journal of Physical Chemistry C 127, 18099 (2023)

    2023

  60. [69]

    Okubo and S.-i

    K. Okubo and S.-i. Tamura, Physical Review B28, 4847 (1983)

    1983

  61. [70]

    A. Togo, H. Hayashi, T. Tadano, S. Tsutsui, and I. Tanaka, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 34, 365401 (2022), 2204.07687

    2022 arXiv

  62. [71]

    Strauch, W

    D. Strauch, W. Windl, H. Sterner, P. Pavone, and K. Karch, Physica B: Condensed Matter 219, 442 (1996)

    1996

  63. [72]

    Hildebrandt, M

    R. Hildebrandt, M. Seifert, J. George, S. Blaurock, S. Botti, H. Krautscheid, M. Grundmann, and C. Sturm, New Journal of Physics 25, 123022 (2023)

    2023

  64. [73]

    B. A. Weinstein and M. Cardona, Physical Review B 7, 2545 (1972)

    1972

  65. [74]

    Weber, Physical Review B 15, 4789 (1976)

    W. Weber, Physical Review B 15, 4789 (1976)

    1976

  66. [75]

    Topics in Applied Physics (1975), 10.1007/978-3-540- 37568-5

    1975 doi

  67. [76]

    Merlin, A

    R. Merlin, A. Pinczuk, and W. H. Weber, Springer Series in Materials Science , 1 (2000)

    2000

  68. [77]

    P. A. Temple and C. E. Hathaway, Physical Review B 7, 3685 (1973)

    1973

  69. [78]

    C. Wang, J. Chen, R. Becker, and A. Zdetsis, Physics Letters A 44, 517 (1973)

    1973

  70. [79]

    Windl, P

    W. Windl, P. Pavone, K. Karch, O. Sch¨ utt, D. Strauch, P. Giannozzi, and S. Baroni, Physical Review B 48, 3164 (1993)

    1993

  71. [80]

    Sekine, K

    T. Sekine, K. Uchinokura, and E. Matsuura, Solid State Communications 18, 1337 (1976)

    1976

  72. [81]

    Windl, K

    W. Windl, K. Karch, P. Pavone, O. Sch¨ utt, D. Strauch, W. H. Weber, K. C. Hass, and L. Rimai, Physical Re- view B 49, 8764 (1994)

    1994

  73. [82]

    B. M. Janzen, R. Gillen, Z. Galazka, J. Maultzsch, and M. R. Wagner, Physical Review Materials 6, 054601 (2022)

    2022

  74. [83]

    Hellman, P

    O. Hellman, P. Steneteg, I. A. Abrikosov, and S. I. Simak, Physical Review B87, 104111 (2013), 1303.1145

    2013 arXiv

  75. [84]

    Shulumba, O

    N. Shulumba, O. Hellman, and A. J. Minnich, Physical Review B 95, 014302 (2017), 1609.08254

    2017 arXiv

  76. [85]

    A. v. Roekeghem, J. Carrete, and N. Mingo, Com- puter Physics Communications 263, 107945 (2021), 2006.12867

    2021 arXiv

  77. [86]

    Bianco, I

    R. Bianco, I. Errea, L. Paulatto, M. Calandra, and F. Mauri, Physical Review B 96, 014111 (2017), 1703.03212

    2017 arXiv

  78. [87]

    Monacelli, R

    L. Monacelli, R. Bianco, M. Cherubini, M. Calandra, I. Errea, and F. Mauri, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 33, 363001 (2021), 2103.03973

    2021 arXiv

  79. [88]

    Castellano, J

    A. Castellano, J. P. A. Batista, and M. J. Verstraete, The Journal of Chemical Physics 159, 234501 (2023), 2303.10621

    2023 arXiv

  80. [89]

    Hellman and I

    O. Hellman and I. A. Abrikosov, Physical Review B 88, 144301 (2013), 1308.5436

    2013 arXiv

  81. [90]

    C. W. Li, O. Hellman, J. Ma, A. F. May, H. B. Cao, X. Chen, A. D. Christianson, G. Ehlers, D. J. Singh, B. C. Sales, and O. Delaire, Physical Review Letters 112, 175501 (2014), 1312.7467

    2014 arXiv

  82. [91]

    A. H. Romero, E. K. U. Gross, M. J. Verstraete, and O. Hellman, Physical Review B 91, 214310 (2015), 1402.5535. 15

    2015 arXiv

  83. [92]

    Shulumba, O

    N. Shulumba, O. Hellman, and A. J. Minnich, Physical Review Letters 119, 185901 (2017)

    2017

  84. [93]

    Klarbring, O

    J. Klarbring, O. Hellman, I. A. Abrikosov, and S. I. Simak, Physical Review Letters 125, 045701 (2020), 1912.05351

    2020 arXiv

  85. [94]

    Y. Wang, Q. Gan, M. Hu, J. Li, L. Xie, and J. He, Physical Review B 107, 064308 (2023)

    2023

  86. [95]

    Castellano, J

    A. Castellano, J. P. A. Batista, O. Hellman, and Verstraete, and Matthieu J, arXiv (2024), 10.48550/arxiv.2411.14949, 2411.14949

    2024 doi arXiv

  87. [96]

    Gonze, J.-C

    X. Gonze, J.-C. Charlier, D. Allan, and M. Teter, Phys- ical Review B 50, 13035 (1994)

    1994

  88. [97]

    Gonze and C

    X. Gonze and C. Lee, Physical Review B 55, 10355 (1997), born eff. charge: Ref. 38 -¿ Maradudin: Ref. 33

    1997

  89. [98]

    L. D. Landau, J. Bell, M. Kearsley, L. Pitaevskii, E. Lif- shitz, and J. Sykes, Landau L.D. & Lifschitz E.M.- Vol. 8 - Electrodynamics.pdf, Vol. 8 (Elsevier, 2013)

    2013

  90. [99]

    Cochran and R

    W. Cochran and R. Cowley, Journal of Physics and Chemistry of Solids 23, 447 (1962)

    1962

  91. [100]

    R. H. Lyddane, R. G. Sachs, and E. Teller, Physical Review 59, 673 (1941)

    1941

  92. [101]

    F. Zhou, B. Sadigh, D. ˚Aberg, Y. Xia, and V. Ozoli¸ nˇ s, Physical Review B 100, 184309 (2019), 1805.08903

    2019 arXiv

  93. [102]

    R. M. Pick, M. H. Cohen, and R. M. Martin, Physical Review B 1, 910 (1969)

    1969

  94. [103]

    C. Lin, S. Ponc´ e, and N. Marzari, npj Computational Materials 8, 236 (2022), 2209.09520

    2022 arXiv

  95. [104]

    Venkataraman, L

    G. Venkataraman, L. Feldkamp, and V. Sahni (MIT Press, 1975)

    1975

  96. [105]

    Fano, Physical Review 103, 1202 (1956)

    U. Fano, Physical Review 103, 1202 (1956)

    1956

  97. [106]

    J. J. Hopfield, Physical Review 112, 1555 (1958)

    1958

  98. [107]

    https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14514884,

    F. Knoop, “https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14514884,” (2024)

    2024 doi

  99. [108]

    W. D. Johnston, Physical Review B 1, 3494 (1970)

    1970

  100. [109]

    S. Niu, H. Huyan, Y. Liu, M. Yeung, K. Ye, L. Blanke- meier, T. Orvis, D. Sarkar, D. J. Singh, R. Kapadia, and J. Ravichandran, Advanced Materials 29 (2017), 10.1002/adma.201604733, 1804.09362

    2017 arXiv

  101. [110]

    J. P. Perdew, K. Burke, and M. Ernzerhof, Physical Review Letters 77, 3865 (1996), pBE

    1996

  102. [111]

    V. Blum, R. Gehrke, F. Hanke, P. Havu, V. Havu, X. Ren, K. Reuter, and M. Scheffler, Computer Physics Communications 180, 2175 (2009)

    2009

  103. [112]

    V. Havu, V. Blum, P. Havu, and M. Scheffler, Journal of Computational Physics 228, 8367 (2009)

    2009

  104. [113]

    Knuth, C

    F. Knuth, C. Carbogno, V. Atalla, V. Blum, and M. Scheffler, Computer Physics Communications 190, 33 (2015)

    2015

  105. [114]

    Armiento and A

    R. Armiento and A. E. Mattsson, Physical Review B 72, 085108 (2005)

    2005

  106. [115]

    J. T. Frank, O. T. Unke, and K.-R. M¨ uller, in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, Vol. 35 (Curran Associates, Inc., 2022) pp. 29400–29413

    2022

  107. [116]

    M. F. Langer, J. T. Frank, and F. Knoop, The Journal of Chemical Physics 159, 174105 (2023), 2305.01401

    2023 arXiv

  108. [117]

    J. T. Frank, O. T. Unke, K.-R. M¨ uller, and S. Chmiela, Nature Communications 15, 6539 (2024)

    2024

  109. [118]

    Shang, N

    H. Shang, N. Raimbault, P. Rinke, M. Scheffler, M. Rossi, and C. Carbogno, New Journal of Physics 20, 073040 (2018), 1803.00924

    2018 arXiv

  110. [119]

    Giannozzi, S

    P. Giannozzi, S. Baroni, N. Bonini, M. Calandra, R. Car, C. Cavazzoni, D. Ceresoli, G. L. Chiarotti, M. Cococcioni, I. Dabo, A. D. Corso, S. d. Giron- coli, S. Fabris, G. Fratesi, R. Gebauer, U. Gerst- mann, C. Gougoussis, A. Kokalj, M. Lazzeri, L. Martin- Samos, N. Marzari, F...

    2009 arXiv

  111. [120]

    Giannozzi, O

    P. Giannozzi, O. Andreussi, T. Brumme, O. Bunau, M. B. Nardelli, M. Calandra, R. Car, C. Cavazzoni, D. Ceresoli, M. Cococcioni, N. Colonna, I. Carn- imeo, A. D. Corso, S. d. Gironcoli, P. Delugas, R. A. D. Jr, A. Ferretti, A. Floris, G. Fratesi, G. Fugallo, R. Gebauer, U. Gers...

    2017 arXiv

  112. [121]

    Giannozzi, O

    P. Giannozzi, O. Baseggio, P. Bonf` a, D. Brunato, R. Car, I. Carnimeo, C. Cavazzoni, S. d. Gironcoli, P. Delugas, F. F. Ruffino, A. Ferretti, N. Marzari, I. Timrov, A. Urru, and S. Baroni, The Journal of Chemical Physics 152, 154105 (2020), 2104.10502

    2020 arXiv

  113. [122]

    D. R. Hamann, Physical Review B 88, 085117 (2013), 1306.4707

    2013 arXiv

  114. [123]

    Schlipf and F

    M. Schlipf and F. Gygi, Computer Physics Communi- cations 196, 36 (2015), 1502.00995

    2015 arXiv

  115. [124]

    D. M. Ceperley and B. J. Alder, Physical Review Letters 45, 566 (1980)

    1980

  116. [125]

    J. P. Perdew and A. Zunger, Physical Review B 23, 5048 (1981)

    1981

  117. [126]

    Laniel, F

    D. Laniel, F. Trybel, B. Winkler, F. Knoop, T. Fe- dotenko, S. Khandarkhaeva, A. Aslandukova, T. Meier, S. Chariton, K. Glazyrin, V. Milman, V. Prakapenka, I. A. Abrikosov, L. Dubrovinsky, and N. Dubrovinskaia, Nature Communications 13, 6987 (2022), 2208.10418

    2022 arXiv

  118. [127]

    Siegle, L

    H. Siegle, L. Eckey, A. Hoffmann, C. Thomsen, B. Meyer, D. Schikora, M. Hankeln, and K. Lischka, Solid State Communications 96, 943 (1995)

    1995

  119. [128]

    V. Y. Davydov, Y. E. Kitaev, I. N. Goncharuk, A. N. Smirnov, J. Graul, O. Semchinova, D. Uffmann, M. B. Smirnov, A. P. Mirgorodsky, and R. A. Evarestov, Physical Review B 58, 12899 (1998)

    1998

  120. [129]

    Azuhata, T

    T. Azuhata, T. Sota, K. Suzuki, and S. Nakamura, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 7, L129 (1995)

    1995

  121. [130]

    I. M. Alecu, J. Zheng, Y. Zhao, and D. G. Truhlar, Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 6, 2872 (2010)

    2010

  122. [131]

    Veithen, X

    M. Veithen, X. Gonze, and P. Ghosez, Physical Review Letters 93, 187401 (2003), cond-mat/0311240

    2003 arXiv

  123. [132]

    Lindsay and D

    L. Lindsay and D. A. Broido, Journal of Physics: Con- densed Matter 20, 165209 (2008)

    2008

  124. [133]

    Kapil, D

    V. Kapil, D. P. Kov´ acs, G. Cs´ anyi, and A. Michaelides, Faraday Discussions 249, 50 (2023)

    2023

  125. [134]

    Marsalek and T

    O. Marsalek and T. E. Markland, The Journal of Phys- ical Chemistry Letters 8, 1545 (2017)

    2017

  126. [135]

    Raimbault, A

    N. Raimbault, A. Grisafi, M. Ceriotti, and M. Rossi, New Journal of Physics 21, 105001 (2019), 1906.07485

    2019 arXiv

  127. [136]

    Gigli, M

    L. Gigli, M. Veit, M. Kotiuga, G. Pizzi, N. Marzari, and M. Ceriotti, npj Computational Materials 8, 209 (2022), 2111.05129. 16

    2022 arXiv

  128. [137]

    Knoop, T

    F. Knoop, T. A. R. Purcell, M. Scheffler, and C. Car- bogno, Physical Review Materials 4, 083809 (2020), 2006.14672

    2020 arXiv

  129. [138]

    Knoop, T

    F. Knoop, T. A. R. Purcell, M. Scheffler, and C. Car- bogno, Physical Review Letters 130, 236301 (2023)

    2023

  130. [139]

    E. T. Heyen, S. N. Rashkeev, I. I. Mazin, O. K. An- dersen, R. Liu, M. Cardona, and O. Jepsen, Physical Review Letters 65, 3048 (1990)

    1990

  131. [140]

    E. Y. Sherman, C. Ambrosch-Draxl, and O. V. Mis- ochko, Physical Review B 65, 140510 (2002)

    2002

  132. [141]

    Ambrosch-Draxl, H

    C. Ambrosch-Draxl, H. Auer, R. Kouba, E. Y. Sherman, P. Knoll, and M. Mayer, Physical Review B 65, 064501 (2002)

    2002

  133. [142]

    Gillet, M

    Y. Gillet, M. Giantomassi, and X. Gonze, Physical Re- view B 88, 094305 (2013), 1309.1850

    2013 arXiv

  134. [143]

    Gillet, S

    Y. Gillet, S. Kontur, M. Giantomassi, C. Draxl, and X. Gonze, Scientific Reports 7, 7344 (2017), 1708.05874

    2017 arXiv

  135. [144]

    A. H. Larsen, J. J. Mortensen, J. Blomqvist, I. E. Castelli, R. Christensen, M. Du lak, J. Friis, M. N. Groves, B. Hammer, C. Hargus, E. D. Hermes, P. C. Jennings, P. B. Jensen, J. Kermode, J. R. Kitchin, E. L. Kolsbjerg, J. Kubal, K. Kaasbjerg, S. Lysgaard, J. B. Maronsson, T...

    2017

  136. [145]

    tdeptools: tools for TDEP,

    F. Knoop, “tdeptools: tools for TDEP,” (2023)

    2023

  137. [146]

    https://dx.doi.org/10.17172/NOMAD/2024.12.17-1,

    “https://dx.doi.org/10.17172/NOMAD/2024.12.17-1,”

    2024 doi

  138. [147]

    Scheidgen, L

    M. Scheidgen, L. Himanen, A. N. Ladines, D. Sikter, M. Nakhaee, A. Fekete, T. Chang, A. Golparvar, J. A. M´ arquez, S. Brockhauser, S. Br¨ uckner, L. M. Ghir- inghelli, F. Dietrich, D. Lehmberg, T. Denell, A. Al- bino, H. N¨ asstr¨ om, S. Shabih, F. Dobener, M. K¨ uhbach, R. M...

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.