Understanding the competing growth of 2D and 3D transition metal dichalcogenides in a chemical vapor deposition (CVD) reactor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The competing growth of two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) crystals of layered transition metal dichalcogenides (TMDCs) has been reproducibly observed in a large variety of chemical vapor deposition (CVD) reactors and demands a comprehensive understanding in terms of involved energetics. 2D and 3D growth is fundamentally different due to the large difference in the in-plane and out-of-plane binding energies in TMDC materials. Here, an analytical model describing TMDC growth via CVD is developed. The two most common TMDC structures produced via CVD growth (2D triangular flakes and 3D tetrahedra) are considered, and their formation energies are determined as a function of their growth parameters. By calculating the associated energies of 2D triangular or 3D tetrahedral flakes, we predict the minimum sizes of the critical nuclei of 2D triangular and 3D morphologies, and thereby determine the minimum realizable dimensions of TMDC, in the form of quantum dots. Analysis of growth rates shows that CVD favors 2D growth of MoS 2 between 820 K and 900 K and 3D growth over 900 K. Our model also suggests that the flow rates of TMDC precursors (metal oxide and sulfur) in a long, cylindrical CVD reactor are important parameters for attaining uniform growth. Our model provides a compressive analysis of TMDC growth via CVD. Therefore, it is a critical tool for helping to achieve reproducible growth of 2D and 3D TMDCs for a variety of applications.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".