pith. sign in

arxiv: 2607.01673 · v1 · pith:CERYI6BHnew · submitted 2026-07-02 · ❄️ cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Intrinsically low thermal conductivity of stoichiometric lithium niobate:Experimental measurement and microscopic origin

Wenjiang Zhou , Fuwei Yang , Yuxi Wang , Weiheng Li , Wujuan Yan , Kexin Zhang , Bai Song This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-07-03 10:23 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords lithium niobatethermal conductivityphonon anharmonicitystoichiometric LiNbO3frequency-domain thermoreflectancephonon lifetimesmean free pathsize effects
0
0 comments X

The pith

Stoichiometric lithium niobate conducts heat poorly because its phonons scatter far more strongly than in high-conductivity materials.

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

The paper measures the thermal conductivity of stoichiometric lithium niobate with frequency-domain thermoreflectance and obtains values orders of magnitude below those of silicon and other semiconductors. Atomistic simulations reproduce the measurements and show that phonon heat capacity and group velocities are comparable to or higher than in ultrahigh-conductivity cubic boron arsenide. The decisive difference is stronger anharmonicity together with a larger scattering phase space, which shorten phonon lifetimes by one to two orders of magnitude. This produces a maximum mean free path near 140 nm and makes conductivity in thin films fall to half the bulk value already at 10 nm thickness.

Core claim

The low thermal conductivity of stoichiometric LiNbO3 originates from substantially stronger anharmonicity and larger scattering phase space, which suppress phonon lifetimes by 1-2 orders of magnitude, leading to a maximum phonon mean free path of approximately 140 nm. Harmonic properties such as heat capacity and group velocities are not responsible, as they are either higher than or comparable to those in cubic boron arsenide. The temperature dependence follows a T to the minus one scaling, confirming intrinsic phonon-phonon scattering dominance, and size effects appear in films below 1 micrometer.

What carries the argument

stronger anharmonicity and larger scattering phase space that suppress phonon lifetimes relative to cubic boron arsenide

Load-bearing premise

The machine-learned interatomic potential accurately reproduces the anharmonic phonon interactions of stoichiometric lithium niobate.

What would settle it

A direct measurement of phonon lifetimes in stoichiometric lithium niobate that are not one to two orders of magnitude shorter than those in cubic boron arsenide would falsify the proposed microscopic origin.

read the original abstract

With the rapid development of integrated electro-optic and nonlinear optical devices based on lithium niobate (LiNbO$_3$, LN), thermal management is becoming a critical area of focus. However, experimental measurement of thermal transport in stoichiometric LiNbO$_3$ (sLN) remains scarce, and the intrinsic microscopic mechanisms remain to be established. Here, we combine the laser pump-probe technique of frequency-domain thermoreflectance (FDTR) with state-of-the-art machine-learned atomistic simulations to comprehensively investigate thermal transport in sLN. The measured and simulated room-temperature thermal conductivity ($\kappa$) values of sLN agree well, which are orders-of-magnitude lower than that of many classic and emerging semiconductors such as silicon. Furthermore, the temperature-dependent $\kappa$ exhibits a $T^{-\alpha}$ scaling with $\alpha$ near unity, suggesting that thermal transport is dominated by intrinsic phonon-phonon scattering. By comparing sLN with cubic boron arsenide (cBAs) which serves as an ultrahigh-$\kappa$ benchmark, we reveal that harmonic properties are not responsible for the low $\kappa$ of sLN, which feature phonon heat capacity and group velocities that are either higher than or comparable to those in cBAs. Instead, the low $\kappa$ originates from substantially stronger anharmonicity and larger scattering phase space. These two factors collectively suppress phonon lifetimes by 1-2 orders of magnitude, leading to a maximum phonon mean free path of approximately 140 nm. As a result, notable size effects emerge in thin-film sLN below 1 $\mu$m, with $\kappa$ dropping to half the bulk value at 10 nm. Altogether, our findings establish a fundamental understanding of thermal transport in sLN and provide atomistic insights for thermal management in advanced lithium niobate technologies.

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.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports FDTR measurements of thermal conductivity in stoichiometric LiNbO3 (sLN) that agree with MLIP-based atomistic simulations at room temperature. The temperature scaling κ ~ T^{-α} with α ≈ 1 indicates intrinsic phonon-phonon scattering. By comparing harmonic properties (C_v, v_g) to cBAs and showing enhanced anharmonicity plus larger scattering phase space in sLN, the authors attribute the low κ to 1-2 order-of-magnitude suppression of phonon lifetimes, yielding a maximum MFP of ~140 nm and size effects in films thinner than 1 μm.

Significance. The independent experimental FDTR data confirming intrinsically low κ in sLN, together with the T^{-α} scaling, establish a useful baseline for thermal management in LN-based electro-optic devices. The decomposition separating harmonic from anharmonic contributions is a strength if the MLIP is shown to be accurate for third-order interactions; the work would then supply falsifiable microscopic predictions for size-dependent transport.

major comments (2)
  1. [Methods (MLIP training/validation) or Results (phonon lifetime comparison)] The manuscript provides no quantitative, independent DFT benchmarks of anharmonic quantities (third-order force constants, mode-resolved scattering rates, or phase-space volumes) from the MLIP. Because the central claim that low κ originates from stronger anharmonicity and larger phase space (rather than harmonic properties) rests entirely on the MLIP-derived lifetimes and MFPs, the absence of such benchmarks makes the microscopic origin attribution load-bearing and unverified.
  2. [Results (comparison to cBAs)] The statement that harmonic properties are 'not responsible' for the low κ relies on the MLIP reproducing C_v and v_g that are comparable to or higher than cBAs; however, no sensitivity analysis or error propagation from the MLIP fitting is shown to confirm that small errors in these quantities would not alter the conclusion.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract claims agreement between measured and simulated κ but does not report the numerical values or relative difference; this should be stated explicitly.
  2. [Results (MFP analysis)] The maximum MFP of approximately 140 nm is stated without reference to the specific phonon mode or cumulative MFP plot from which it is extracted.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments and for recognizing the significance of the experimental confirmation of intrinsically low thermal conductivity in stoichiometric LiNbO3. We address each major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The manuscript provides no quantitative, independent DFT benchmarks of anharmonic quantities (third-order force constants, mode-resolved scattering rates, or phase-space volumes) from the MLIP. Because the central claim that low κ originates from stronger anharmonicity and larger phase space (rather than harmonic properties) rests entirely on the MLIP-derived lifetimes and MFPs, the absence of such benchmarks makes the microscopic origin attribution load-bearing and unverified.

    Authors: We agree that direct DFT benchmarks of third-order quantities would provide additional reassurance. The MLIP was trained on DFT-derived energies, forces, and stresses from configurations that sample anharmonic behavior, and its accuracy for thermal transport—including anharmonic effects—is validated by quantitative agreement with independent FDTR measurements of both the room-temperature κ value and the T^{-α} scaling. Discrepancies in third-order interactions would have produced clear mismatches with experiment. We will expand the Methods section with further details on the training set composition and any available cross-checks for second-order properties, but full mode-resolved third-order DFT benchmarks remain computationally prohibitive for the supercell sizes required. revision: partial

  2. Referee: The statement that harmonic properties are 'not responsible' for the low κ relies on the MLIP reproducing C_v and v_g that are comparable to or higher than cBAs; however, no sensitivity analysis or error propagation from the MLIP fitting is shown to confirm that small errors in these quantities would not alter the conclusion.

    Authors: We acknowledge that an explicit sensitivity analysis would strengthen the presentation. The harmonic quantities (heat capacity and group velocities) are obtained from the dynamical matrix and are less sensitive to fitting errors than lifetimes. The factor of 10–100 suppression in lifetimes dominates the conductivity difference; even a 20% uncertainty in C_v or v_g would not change the conclusion that anharmonicity and phase space are the primary origin. In the revised manuscript we will add a short paragraph discussing the magnitude of MLIP fitting errors on second-order properties and confirming that the lifetime contrast remains decisive. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: independent FDTR experiment anchors κ; MLIP supplies explanatory phonon decomposition without fitting to target result

full rationale

The paper's central result (low κ of sLN) is established by direct FDTR measurement, an external experimental observable independent of any simulation. The MLIP-based calculations are then used to decompose the origin by comparing harmonic quantities (C_v, v_g) to cBAs and extracting anharmonic lifetimes/phase space; the paper explicitly states the potential is not tuned to reproduce κ, and the measured κ serves as an a-posteriori check rather than an input. No equation reduces a claimed prediction to a fitted parameter by construction, no self-citation supplies a load-bearing uniqueness theorem, and no ansatz is smuggled via prior work. The derivation chain therefore remains self-contained against an external benchmark.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim depends on the fidelity of the machine-learned potential for anharmonic forces and on the assumption that the measured crystals are truly stoichiometric with negligible defects affecting transport.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The machine-learned interatomic potential accurately captures anharmonic phonon interactions in sLN.
    Required for the simulated lifetimes and mean free paths to be trusted as explanatory of the experimental result.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5894 in / 1201 out tokens · 31043 ms · 2026-07-03T10:23:04.136116+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

81 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    This was sup- plemented by perturbed configurations including random atomic displacements and cell deformations with tensile and compressive strains up to±3%

    Dataset and training for machine-learned potentials To enable large-scale molecular dynamics (MD) simu- lations of high accuracy, we first constructed a training dataset for the neuroevolution potential (NEP) [39] from ab initiomolecular dynamics (AIMD) calculations cov- ering a temperature range of 100–1200 K. This was sup- plemented by perturbed configu...

  2. [2]

    HNEMD simulations Although the BTE approach can be employed to com- pute and analyze the lattice thermal conductivity of sLN, our calculations primarily rely on ML-assisted HNEMD, which non-perturbatively captures phonon scattering to all orders and offers high robustness across different sys- tem configurations [56]. In the HNEMD approach, an external dr...

  3. [3]

    NEMD simulations To investigate the size-dependent thermal transport in thin-film sLN, we performed ML-assisted NEMD simula- tions [43, 63]. In this approach, a pair of heat source and sink was implemented using Langevin thermostats [64], with fixed boundary conditions applied along the trans- port direction and periodic boundary conditions in the transve...

  4. [4]

    Spectral energy density simulations Spectral energy density (SED) analysis [65, 66] was employed to extract the phonon lifetimes. The SED ap- proach was based on the conventional cell of sLN, while MD trajectory sampling was performed on 20×20×10 and 6×6×100 supercells for modes with atomic vi- brations within theab–plane and along thec-direction, respect...

  5. [5]

    B. T. Matthias and J. P. Remeika, Physical Review76, 1886 (1949)

    1949

  6. [6]

    R. S. Weis and T. K. Gaylord, Applied Physics A37, 191 (1985)

    1985

  7. [7]

    L. E. Myers, R. C. Eckardt, M. M. Fejer, R. L. Byer, W. R. Bosenberg, and J. W. Pierce, Journal of the Op- tical Society of America B12, 2102 (1995)

    1995

  8. [8]

    Y. Hu, D. Zhu, S. Lu, X. Zhu, Y. Song, D. Renaud, D. Assumpcao, R. Cheng, C. Xin, M. Yeh, H. Warner, X. Guo, A. Shams-Ansari, D. Barton, N. Sinclair, and M. Lonˇ car, Nature Reviews Physics7, 237 (2025)

    2025

  9. [9]

    C. Wang, M. Zhang, X. Chen, M. Bertrand, A. Shams- Ansari, S. Chandrasekhar, P. Winzer, and M. Lonˇ car, Nature562, 101 (2018)

    2018

  10. [10]

    Zhang, B

    M. Zhang, B. Buscaino, C. Wang, A. Shams-Ansari, C. Reimer, R. Zhu, J. M. Kahn, and M. Lonˇ car, Nature 568, 373 (2019)

    2019

  11. [11]

    M. Li, J. Ling, Y. He, U. A. Javid, S. Xue, and Q. Lin, Nature Communications11, 4123 (2020)

    2020

  12. [12]

    C. Wang, C. Langrock, A. Marandi, M. Jankowski, M. Zhang, B. Desiatov, M. J. Burek, M. M. Fejer, and M. Lonˇ car, Optica5, 1438 (2018)

    2018

  13. [13]

    J. Lin, N. Yao, Z. Hao, J. Zhang, W. Mao, M. Wang, W. Chu, R. Wu, Z. Fang, L. Qiao,et al., Physical review letters122, 173903 (2019)

    2019

  14. [14]

    D. Zhu, L. Shao, M. Yu, R. Cheng, B. Desiatov, C. J. Xin, Y. Hu, J. Holzgrafe, S. Ghosh, A. Shams-Ansari, et al., Advances in Optics and Photonics13, 242 (2021)

    2021

  15. [15]

    A. Boes, B. Corcoran, L. Chang, J. E. Bowers, and A. Mitchell, Science379, eabj4396 (2023)

    2023

  16. [16]

    H. Feng, T. Ge, X. Guo, B. Wang, Y. Zhang, Z. Chen, S. Zhu, K. Zhang, W. Sun, C. Huang,et al., Nature627, 80 (2024)

    2024

  17. [17]

    H. S. Stokowski, D. J. Dean, A. Y. Hwang, T. Park, O. T. Celik, T. P. McKenna, M. Jankowski, C. Langrock, V. Ansari, M. M. Fejer,et al., Nature627, 95 (2024)

    2024

  18. [18]

    X. Zhu, S. Ren, Y. Cao, and X. Su, Advanced Photonics 7, 064005 (2025)

    2025

  19. [19]

    Zheng, S

    P. Zheng, S. Zhang, J. Wu, L. Zhang, H. Yao, X. Fang, Y. Chen, K. Huang, and X. Ou, IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques72, 1480 (2023)

    2023

  20. [20]

    Z. Yao, S. Liu, Y. Wang, X. Yuan, and L. Fang, Nature 646, 567 (2025)

    2025

  21. [21]

    M. Levy, R. M. Osgood Jr., R. Liu, L. E. Cross, G. S. Cargill III, A. Kumar, and H. Bakhru, Applied Physics Letters73, 2293 (1998)

    1998

  22. [22]

    Rabiei and P

    P. Rabiei and P. Gunter, Applied Physics Letters85, 4603 (2004)

    2004

  23. [23]

    G. Chen, N. Li, J. D. Ng, H.-L. Lin, Y. Zhou, Y. H. Fu, L. Y. T. Lee, Y. Yu, A.-Q. Liu, and A. J. Danner, Advanced Photonics4, 034003 (2022)

    2022

  24. [24]

    Fujiwara, M

    T. Fujiwara, M. Takahashi, M. Ohama, A. Ikushima, Y. Furukawa, and K. Kitamura, Electronics Letters35, 499 (1999)

    1999

  25. [25]

    Klein, G

    R. Klein, G. Kugel, A. Maillard, K. Polg´ ar, and A. P´ eter, Optical Materials22, 171 (2003)

    2003

  26. [26]

    Nakamura, S

    M. Nakamura, S. Takekawa, S. Kumaragurubaran, and K. Kitamura, Japanese Journal of Applied Physics47, 3476 (2008), published 16 May 2008

    2008

  27. [27]

    S. Yao, J. Wang, H. Liu, X. Hu, H. Zhang, X. Cheng, and Z. Ling, Journal of Alloys and Compounds455, 501 (2008)

    2008

  28. [28]

    Ziade, Review of Scientific Instruments91, 124901 (2020)

    E. Ziade, Review of Scientific Instruments91, 124901 (2020)

    2020

  29. [29]

    Bashir, M

    U. Bashir, M. R¨ using, D. Klimm, R. Blukis, B. Koppitz, L. M. Eng, M. Bickermann, and S. Ganschow, Journal of Alloys and Compounds1008, 176549 (2024)

    2024

  30. [30]

    Y. Bao, T. Chen, Z. Miao, W. Zheng, P. Jiang, K. Chen, R. Guo, and D. Xue, Advanced Electronic Materials11, 2400944 (2025)

    2025

  31. [31]

    Y. Fu, H. Wei, L. Wei, H. Zhang, X. Wang, B. Liu, Y. Zhang, X. Lv, J. Zhou, and H. Yu, CrystEngComm 23, 8572 (2021)

    2021

  32. [32]

    Z. Ju, Z. Chang, N. Xiao, X. Qian, Y. Zhou, and D. Ma, Physical Review Applied24, 024035 (2025)

    2025

  33. [33]

    F. Tian, B. Song, X. Chen, N. K. Ravichandran, Y. Lv, K. Chen, S. Sullivan, J. Kim, Y. Zhou, T.-H. Liu,et al., Science361, 582 (2018)

    2018

  34. [34]

    S. Li, Q. Zheng, Y. Lv, X. Liu, X. Wang, P. Y. Huang, D. G. Cahill, and B. Lv, Science361, 579 (2018)

    2018

  35. [35]

    J. S. Kang, M. Li, H. Wu, H. Nguyen, and Y. Hu, Science 361, 575 (2018)

    2018

  36. [36]

    F. W. Yang, W. J. Zhou, Z. B. Zhang, X. Y. Huang, J. W. Zhang, N. J. Liang, W. J. Yan, Y. X. Wang, M. C. Ding, Q. L. Guo, Y. Han, T. H. Liu, K. H. Liu, Q. S. Zheng, and B. Song, Physical Review Letters134, 146302 (2025). 10

    2025

  37. [37]

    F. Yang, W. Zhou, T. Gu, Z. Zhang, K. Zhang, W. Yan, Y. Wang, K. Liu, and B. Song, Physical Review B112, 115422 (2025)

    2025

  38. [38]

    W. Yan, Y. Xue, W. Zhou, Y. Wang, H. Guo, H. Yang, H. Yang, Z. Jiang, L. Ding, W. Chen, B. Shen, X. Yang, and B. Song, Applied Physics Letters125, 032202 (2024)

    2024

  39. [39]

    W. Yan, Y. Xue, W. Zhou, H. Yang, H. Guo, Y. Wang, K. Zhang, L. Ding, Z. Chen, X. Yang,et al., Journal of Applied Physics138, 145705 (2025)

    2025

  40. [40]

    D. G. Cahillet al., Review of scientific instruments75, 5119 (2004)

    2004

  41. [41]

    A. J. Schmidt, R. Cheaito, and M. Chiesa, Review of scientific instruments80, 094901 (2009)

    2009

  42. [42]

    See Supplemental Material for FDTR sensitivity analy- sis, machine-learned potential, MD simulations, FDTR measured data, and anharmonic factors

  43. [43]

    Z. Fan, Z. Zeng, C. Zhang, Y. Wang, K. Song, H. Dong, Y. Chen, and T. Ala-Nissila, Physical Review B104, 104309 (2021)

    2021

  44. [44]

    Kresse and J

    G. Kresse and J. Furthm¨ uller, Physical review B54, 11169 (1996)

    1996

  45. [45]

    P. E. Bl¨ ochl, Physical review B50, 17953 (1994)

    1994

  46. [46]

    J. P. Perdew, K. Burke, and M. Ernzerhof, Physical re- view letters77, 3865 (1996)

    1996

  47. [47]

    H. Dong, Y. Shi, P. Ying, K. Xu, T. Liang, Y. Wang, Z. Zeng, X. Wu, W. Zhou, S. Xiong,et al., Journal of Applied Physics135, 161101 (2024)

    2024

  48. [48]

    K. Xu, H. Bu, S. Pan, E. Lindgren, Y. Wu, Y. Wang, J. Liu, K. Song, B. Xu, Y. Li,et al., Materials Genome Engineering Advances3, e70028 (2025)

    2025

  49. [49]

    Z. Fan, W. Chen, V. Vierimaa, and A. Harju, Computer Physics Communications218, 10 (2017)

    2017

  50. [50]

    Schaul, T

    T. Schaul, T. Glasmachers, and J. Schmidhuber, inPro- ceedings of the 13th Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation, GECCO ’11 (ACM Press, New York, 2011) pp. 845–852

    2011

  51. [51]

    Y. S. Kim and R. T. Smith, Journal of Applied Physics 40, 4637 (1969)

    1969

  52. [52]

    P. Ying, W. Zhou, L. Svensson, E. Berger, E. Fransson, F. Eriksson, K. Xu, T. Liang, J. Xu, B. Song,et al., The Journal of Chemical Physics162, 064109 (2025)

    2025

  53. [53]

    Hellman, I

    O. Hellman, I. A. Abrikosov, and S. I. Simak, Physical Review B84, 180301 (2011)

    2011

  54. [54]

    Knoop, N

    F. Knoop, N. Shulumba, A. Castellano, and O. Hellman, Journal of Open Source Software9, 6150 (2024)

    2024

  55. [55]

    Baroni, S

    S. Baroni, S. de Gironcoli, A. Dal Corso, and P. Gian- nozzi, Reviews of Modern Physics73, 515 (2001)

    2001

  56. [56]

    Gonze, J.-C

    X. Gonze, J.-C. Charlier, D. C. Allan, and M. P. Teter, Physical Review B50, 13035 (1994)

    1994

  57. [57]

    Gonze and C

    X. Gonze and C. Lee, Physical Review B55, 10355 (1997)

    1997

  58. [58]

    Claus, G

    R. Claus, G. Borstel, E. Wiesendanger, and L. Steffan, Physical Review B6, 4878 (1972)

    1972

  59. [59]

    Ridah, P

    A. Ridah, P. Bourson, M. D. Fontana, and G. Mal- ovichko, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter9, 9687 (1997)

    1997

  60. [60]

    W. Zhou, B. Tang, Z. Fan, F. Grasselli, S. Baroni, and B. Song, arXiv preprint 10.48550/arXiv.2512.04718 (2025)

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2512.04718 2025

  61. [61]

    X. Wu, W. Zhou, H. Dong, P. Ying, Y. Wang, B. Song, Z. Fan, and S. Xiong, The Journal of Chemical Physics 161, 014103 (2024)

    2024

  62. [62]

    H. J. C. Berendsen, J. P. M. Postma, W. F. van Gun- steren, A. DiNola, and J. R. Haak, The Journal of Chem- ical Physics81, 3684 (1984)

    1984

  63. [63]

    G. J. Martyna, M. L. Klein, and M. Tuckerman, The Journal of Chemical Physics97, 2635 (1992)

    1992

  64. [64]

    Zhou and B

    W. Zhou and B. Song, Physical Review B110, 205202 (2024)

    2024

  65. [65]

    Zhou, T.-H

    W. Zhou, T.-H. Liu, and B. Song, Physical Review B 109, L121201 (2024)

    2024

  66. [66]

    W. Zhou, N. Liang, X. Wu, S. Xiong, Z. Fan, and B. Song, Materials Today Physics50, 101638 (2025)

    2025

  67. [67]

    W. Zhou, N. Liang, W. Xiao, Z. Tong, F. Tian, and B. Song, Physical Review Applied24, L031005 (2025)

    2025

  68. [68]

    Bussi and M

    G. Bussi and M. Parrinello, Physical Review E75, 056707 (2007)

    2007

  69. [69]

    J. A. Thomas, J. E. Turney, R. M. Iutzi, C. H. Amon, and A. J. H. McGaughey, Physical Review B81, 081411 (2010)

    2010

  70. [70]

    Liang, W

    T. Liang, W. Jiang, K. Xu, H. Bu, Z. Fan, W. Ouyang, and J. Xu, Journal of Applied Physics138, 075101 (2025)

    2025

  71. [71]

    Jiang, X

    P. Jiang, X. Qian, X. Li,et al., Applied Physics Letters 113, 232105 (2018)

    2018

  72. [72]

    H. R. Shanks, P. D. Maycock, P. H. Sidles, and G. C. Danielson, Physical Review130, 1743 (1963)

    1963

  73. [73]

    W. Li, J. Carrete, N. A. Katcho, and N. Mingo, Com- puter Physics Communications185, 1747 (2014)

    2014

  74. [74]

    Knoop, T

    F. Knoop, T. A. R. Purcell, M. Scheffler, and C. Car- bogno, Physical Review Letters130, 236301 (2023)

    2023

  75. [75]

    Z. Zeng, X. Shen, R. Cheng,et al., Nature Communica- tions15, 3007 (2024)

    2024

  76. [76]

    Alkandari, Z

    A. Alkandari, Z. Han, Z. Guo, T. E. Beechem, and X. Ruan, Physical Review B111, 094308 (2025)

    2025

  77. [77]

    Lindsay and D

    L. Lindsay and D. Broido, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter20, 165209 (2008)

    2008

  78. [78]

    Quan, S.-Y

    Y. Quan, S.-Y. Yue, and B. Liao, Applied Physics Letters 118, 162110 (2021)

    2021

  79. [79]

    Knoop, T

    F. Knoop, T. A. R. Purcell, M. Scheffler, and C. Car- bogno, Physical Review Materials4, 083809 (2020)

    2020

  80. [80]

    W. Zhou, Y. Dai, J. Zhang, B. Song, T.-H. Liu, and R. Yang, Applied Physics Letters121, 112202 (2022)

    2022

Showing first 80 references.