Elucidating the Structural, Electronic, Elastic, and Optical Properties of Bulk and Monolayer MoS<sub>2</sub> Transition-Metal Dichalcogenides: A DFT Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High Resolution Image Download MS PowerPoint Slide Due to their outstanding properties for optoelectronic and versatile electronic applications, the atomically thin layers of transition-metal dichalcogenide (TMDC) materials have demonstrated a potential candidacy to succeed its analog silicon-based technology. Hence, the elucidation of the most important features of these materials is indispensable. In this study, we provide a theoretical elucidation of the structural, electronic, elastic, and optical characteristics of TMDCs. The study has been carried out by elucidating the material in its two particular forms, namely, bulk and two-dimensional (2D) layered (monolayer). The theoretical investigation was carried out within the framework of the density functional theory (DFT) method using first-principles calculations. The Perdew–Burke–Ernzerhof (PBE) variant of the generalized gradient approximation (GGA) scheme, as performed in the Quantum Espresso package, is used. Van der Waals density functional effects, involving the nonlocal correlation part from the rVV10 and vdW-DF2 methods, were treated to remedy the lack of the long-range vdW interaction. An illustration of the performance of both rVV10 and vdW-DF2 functionalities, with the popular PBE correlations, is elucidated. The Born stability criterion is employed to assess structural stability. The obtained results reveal an excellent stability of both systems. Furthermore, the theoretical results show that band-gap energy is in excellent agreement with experimental and theoretical data. Pugh’s rule suggested that both the bulk and MoS 2 -2D layered systems are ductile materials. The refractive indices obtained herein are in good agreement with the available theoretical data. Moreover, the theoretical results obtained with the present approach demonstrate the ductility of both systems, namely, the bulk and the MoS 2 -2D layered. The results obtained herein hold promise for structural, elastic, and optical properties and pave the way for potential applications in electronic and optoelectronic devices.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".