Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T15:13:07.707Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

First-principles study of Oxygen deficiency in rutile Titanium Dioxide

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2011

Hsin-Yi Lee ,
Stewart J. Clark  and
John Robertson
Hsin-Yi Lee
Affiliation:
Engineering Department, Cambridge University, Cambridge, CB2 1PZ, UK
Stewart J. Clark
Affiliation:
Physics Department, Durham University, Durham, DH1 3LE, UK
John Robertson
Affiliation:
Engineering Department, Cambridge University, Cambridge, CB2 1PZ, UK
Get access

Abstract

The energy levels of the different charge states of an oxygen vacancy and titanium interstitial in rutile TiO2 were calculated using the screened exchange (sX) hybrid functional [1]. The sX method gives 3.1 eV for the band gap of rutile TiO2, which is close to the experimental value. We report the defect formation energy of the oxygen deficient structure. It is found that the defect formation energies, for the neutral charge state, of oxygen vacancy and titanium interstitial are quite similar, 2.40 eV and 2.45 eV respectively, for an oxygen chemical potential of the O-poor condition. The similar size of these two calculated energies indicates that both are a cause of oxygen deficiency, as observed experimentally [2]. The transition energy level of oxygen vacancy lies within the band gap, corresponding to the electrons located at adjacent titanium sites. The sX method gives a correct description of the localization of defect charge densities, which is not the case for GGA [3-6].

Keywords

defectselectronic structureoxide
Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 1352: Symposium GG – Titanium Dioxide Nanomaterials , 2011 , mrss11-1352-gg05-07
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Clark, S. J. and Robertson, J., Phys. Rev. B 82, 085208 (2010).Google Scholar
2. Wendt, S. et al. , Science 320, 1755 (2008).Google Scholar
3. Morgan, B. J. and Watson, G.W., Surface Sci 601, 5034 (2007).Google Scholar
4. Morgan, B. J. and Watson, G.W., Phys. Rev. B 80, 233102 (2009).Google Scholar
5. DiValentin, C., Pacchioni, G. and Selloni, A., J. Phys. Chem. C 113, 20543 (2009).Google Scholar
6. Lany, S. and Zunger, A., Phys. Rev. B 80, 085202 (2009).Google Scholar
7. Diebold, U., Surf. Sci. Rep. 48, 53 (2003).Google Scholar
8. Clark, S. J. and Robertson, J., Phys. Status Solidi B 248, 537 (2011).Google Scholar
9. Sham, L. J. and Schluter, M., Phys. Rev. Lett. 51, 1888 (1983).Google Scholar
10. Perdew, J. P. and Levy, M., Phys. Rev. Lett. 51, 1884 (1983).Google Scholar
11. Godby, R. W., Schluter, M. and Sham, L. J., Phys. Rev. Lett. 56, 2415 (1986).Google Scholar
12. Bylander, D. M. and Kleinman, L., Phys. Rev. B 41, 7868 (1990).Google Scholar
13. Robertson, J., Xiong, K. and Clark, S. J., Phys. Status Solidi B 243, 2054 (2006).Google Scholar
14. Henrich, V. E., Dresselhaus, G. and Zeiger, H. J., Phys. Rev. Lett. 36, 1335 (1976).Google Scholar