Materials Map

Discover the materials research landscape. Find experts, partners, networks.

  • About
  • Privacy Policy
  • Legal Notice
  • Contact

The Materials Map is an open tool for improving networking and interdisciplinary exchange within materials research. It enables cross-database search for cooperation and network partners and discovering of the research landscape.

The dashboard provides detailed information about the selected scientist, e.g. publications. The dashboard can be filtered and shows the relationship to co-authors in different diagrams. In addition, a link is provided to find contact information.

×

Materials Map under construction

The Materials Map is still under development. In its current state, it is only based on one single data source and, thus, incomplete and contains duplicates. We are working on incorporating new open data sources like ORCID to improve the quality and the timeliness of our data. We will update Materials Map as soon as possible and kindly ask for your patience.

To Graph

1.080 Topics available

To Map

977 Locations available

693.932 PEOPLE
693.932 People People

693.932 People

Show results for 693.932 people that are selected by your search filters.

←

Page 1 of 27758

→
←

Page 1 of 0

→
PeopleLocationsStatistics
Naji, M.
  • 2
  • 13
  • 3
  • 2025
Motta, Antonella
  • 8
  • 52
  • 159
  • 2025
Aletan, Dirar
  • 1
  • 1
  • 0
  • 2025
Mohamed, Tarek
  • 1
  • 7
  • 2
  • 2025
Ertürk, Emre
  • 2
  • 3
  • 0
  • 2025
Taccardi, Nicola
  • 9
  • 81
  • 75
  • 2025
Kononenko, Denys
  • 1
  • 8
  • 2
  • 2025
Petrov, R. H.Madrid
  • 46
  • 125
  • 1k
  • 2025
Alshaaer, MazenBrussels
  • 17
  • 31
  • 172
  • 2025
Bih, L.
  • 15
  • 44
  • 145
  • 2025
Casati, R.
  • 31
  • 86
  • 661
  • 2025
Muller, Hermance
  • 1
  • 11
  • 0
  • 2025
Kočí, JanPrague
  • 28
  • 34
  • 209
  • 2025
Šuljagić, Marija
  • 10
  • 33
  • 43
  • 2025
Kalteremidou, Kalliopi-ArtemiBrussels
  • 14
  • 22
  • 158
  • 2025
Azam, Siraj
  • 1
  • 3
  • 2
  • 2025
Ospanova, Alyiya
  • 1
  • 6
  • 0
  • 2025
Blanpain, Bart
  • 568
  • 653
  • 13k
  • 2025
Ali, M. A.
  • 7
  • 75
  • 187
  • 2025
Popa, V.
  • 5
  • 12
  • 45
  • 2025
Rančić, M.
  • 2
  • 13
  • 0
  • 2025
Ollier, Nadège
  • 28
  • 75
  • 239
  • 2025
Azevedo, Nuno Monteiro
  • 4
  • 8
  • 25
  • 2025
Landes, Michael
  • 1
  • 9
  • 2
  • 2025
Rignanese, Gian-Marco
  • 15
  • 98
  • 805
  • 2025

Ahn, Jungjoon

  • Google
  • 1
  • 4
  • 5

in Cooperation with on an Cooperation-Score of 37%

Topics

Publications (1/1 displayed)

  • 2023Watching (De)Intercalation of 2D Metals in Epitaxial Graphene: Insight into the Role of Defects5citations

Places of action

Chart of shared publication
Maniyara, Rinu Abraham
1 / 1 shared
Niefind, Falk
1 / 4 shared
Kowalik, Malgorzata
1 / 3 shared
Dong, Chengye
1 / 5 shared
Chart of publication period
2023

Co-Authors (by relevance)

  • Maniyara, Rinu Abraham
  • Niefind, Falk
  • Kowalik, Malgorzata
  • Dong, Chengye
OrganizationsLocationPeople

article

Watching (De)Intercalation of 2D Metals in Epitaxial Graphene: Insight into the Role of Defects

  • Maniyara, Rinu Abraham
  • Niefind, Falk
  • Kowalik, Malgorzata
  • Ahn, Jungjoon
  • Dong, Chengye
Abstract

<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>Intercalation forms heterostructures, and over 25 elements and compounds are intercalated into graphene, but the mechanism for this process is not well understood. Here, the de‐intercalation of 2D Ag and Ga metals sandwiched between bilayer graphene and SiC are followed using photoemission electron microscopy (PEEM) and atomistic‐scale reactive molecular dynamics simulations. By PEEM, de‐intercalation “windows” (or defects) are observed in both systems, but the processes follow distinctly different dynamics. Reversible de‐ and re‐intercalation of Ag is observed through a circular defect where the intercalation velocity front is 0.5 nm s<jats:sup>−1</jats:sup> ± 0.2 nm s.<jats:sup>−1</jats:sup> In contrast, the de‐intercalation of Ga is irreversible with faster kinetics that are influenced by the non‐circular shape of the defect. Molecular dynamics simulations support these pronounced differences and complexities between the two Ag and Ga systems. In the de‐intercalating Ga model, Ga atoms first pile up between graphene layers until ultimately moving to the graphene surface. The simulations, supported by density functional theory, indicate that the Ga atoms exhibit larger binding strength to graphene, which agrees with the faster and irreversible diffusion kinetics observed. Thus, both the thermophysical properties of the metal intercalant and its interaction with defective graphene play a key role in intercalation.</jats:p>

Topics
  • density
  • impedance spectroscopy
  • surface
  • compound
  • theory
  • simulation
  • reactive
  • molecular dynamics
  • strength
  • defect
  • density functional theory
  • electron microscopy