First-principles investigation of the structural phases and enhanced response properties of the BiFeO 3-LaFeO 3 multiferroic solid solution

Physical Review B - Condensed Matter and Materials Physics

Volumn 85, Issue 6, 2012, Pages

  Gonzalez Vazquez O E ^a   Wojdeł, Jacek C ^a   Diéguez, Oswaldo ^a   Añiguez, Jorge ^a  

^a UNIVERSITAT AUTÒNOMA DE BARCELONA   (Spain)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84857767587     PISSN: 10980121     EISSN: 1550235X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.85.064119     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. M. Fiebig, J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. JPAPBE 0022-3727 10.1088/0022-3727/38/ 8/R01 38, R123 (2005). (Pubitemid 41244606)
2. G. Catalan and J. F. Scott, Adv. Mater. ADVMEW 0935-9648 10.1002/adma.200802849 21, 2463 (2009).
3. A. V. Zalesskii, A. A. Frolov, T. A. Khimich, and A. A. Bush, Phys. Sol. St. PSOSED 1063-7834 10.1134/1.1537425 45, 141 (2003). (Pubitemid 36211041)
4. H. Béa, M. Bibes, S. Petit, J. Kreisel, and A. Barthélémy, Phil. Mag. Lett. PMLEEG 0950-0839 10.1080/ 09500830701235802 87, 165 (2007). (Pubitemid 46493730)
5. W. Ratcliff III, D. Kan, W. Chen, S. Watson, S. Chi, R. Erwin, C. J. McIntyre, S. C. Capelli, and I. Takeuchi, Adv. Funct. Mater. 1616-301X 10.1002/adfm.201002125 21, 1567 (2011).
6. Y. F. Popov, A. K. Zvezdin, G. P. Vorobev, A. M. Kadomtseva, V. A. Murashev, and D. N. Rakov, J. Exp. Theo. Phys. Lett. 57, 65 (1993).
7. A. K. Zvezdin, A. M. Kadomtseva, S. S. Krotov, A. P. Pyatakov, Yu.F. Popov, and G. P. Vorobev, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. JMMMDC 0304-8853 10.1016/j.jmmm.2005.10.068 300, 224 (2006). (Pubitemid 43326472)
8. J. C. Wojdeł and J. Añiguez, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.103.267205 103, 267205 (2009).
9. M. Mostovoy, A. Scaramucci, N. A. Spaldin, and K. T. Delaney, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.105.087202 105, 087202 (2010).
10. J. Añiguez, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett. 101.117201 101, 117201 (2008).
11. J. C. Wojdeł and J. Añiguez, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.105.037208 105, 037208 (2010).
12. S. Prosandeev, I. A. Kornev, and L. Bellaiche, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 1098-0121 10.1103/PhysRevB.83.020102 83, 020102 (2011).
13. M. D. Glinchuk, A. N. Morozovska, E. A. Eliseev, and R. Blinc, J. Appl. Phys. JAPIAU 0021-8979 10.1063/1.3108483 105, 084108 (2009).
14. C. W. Huang, Y. H. Chu, Z. H. Chen, J. Wang, T. Sritharan, Q. He, R. Ramesh, and L. Chen, Appl. Phys. Lett. APPLAB 0003-6951 10.1063/1.3499658 97, 152901 (2010).
15. Y. Zheng, M. Q. Cai, and C. H. Woo, Acta Mater. ACMAFD 1359-6454 10.1016/j.actamat.2010.01.039 58, 3050 (2010).
16. D. V. Karpinsky, I. O. Troyanchuk, J. V. Vidal, N. A. Sobolev, and A. L. Kholkin, Solid State Commun. SSCOA4 0038-1098 10.1016/j.ssc.2011.01.018 151, 536 (2011).
17. D. Kan, L. Pálová, V. Anbusathaiah, C. J. Cheng, S. Fujino, N. Valanoor, K. M. Rabe, and I. Takeuchi, Adv. Funct. Mater. 1616-301X 10.1002/adfm.200902017 20, 1108 (2010).
18. D. A. Rusakov, A. M. Abakumov, K. Yamaura, A. A. Belik, G. Van Tendeloo, and E. Takayama-Muromachi, Chem. Mater. CMATEX 0897-4756 10.1021/cm1030975 23, 285 (2011).
19. I. O. Troyanchuk, D. V. Karpinsky, M. V. Bushinsky, V. A. Khomchenko, G. N. Kakazei, J. P. Araujo, M. Tovar, V. Sikolenko, V. Efimov, and A. L. Kholkin, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 1098-0121 10.1103/PhysRevB.83.054109 83, 054109 (2011).
20. J. P. Perdew, K. Burke, and M. Ernzerhof, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.77.3865 77, 3865 (1996).
21. G. Kresse and J. Furthmuller, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 1098-0121 10.1103/PhysRevB.54.11169 54, 11169 (1996);
22. G. Kresse and D. Joubert, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 1098-0121 10.1103/PhysRevB.59.1758 59, 1758 (1999).
23. O. Diéguez, O. E. González-Vázquez, J. C. Wojdeł, and J. Añiguez, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 1098-0121 10.1103/PhysRevB.83.094105 83, 094105 (2011).
24. S. L. Dudarev, G. A. Botton, S. Y. Savrasov, C. J. Humphreys, and A. P. Sutton, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 1098-0121 10.1103/PhysRevB.57.1505 57, 1505 (1998).
25. We determined the value of U = 4 eV by requesting the computed magnetic interactions to be in quantitative agreement with those obtained from calculations with hybrid functionals. Note that U 4 eV has become a frequent choice in first-principles studies of BFO, as it leads to qualitatively and semiquantitatively correct results for all the properties investigated so far.
26. P. E. Blochl, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 1098-0121 10.1103/PhysRevB.50.17953 50, 17953 (1994);
27. G. Kresse and D. Joubert, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 1098-0121 10.1103/PhysRevB.59.1758 59, 1758 (1999).
28. A. M. Glazer, Acta Crystallogr., Sect. B: Struct. Crystallogr. Cryst. Chem. ACBCAR 0567-7408 10.1107/S0567740872007976 28, 3384 (1972).
29. See for example X. Wu, D. Vanderbilt, and D. R. Hamann, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 1098-0121 10.1103/PhysRevB.72.035105 72, 035105 (2005). (Pubitemid 41506678)
30. Y. E. Roginskaya, Y. N. Venevtsev, S. A. Fedulov, and G. S. Zhdanov, Kristallografiya 8, 610 (1963);
31. Y. E. Roginskaya, Y. N. Venevtsev, and G. S. Zhdanov, J. Exp. Theo. Phys. 44, 1418 (1963).
32. Z. V. Gabbasova, M. D. Kuzmin, A. K. Zvezdin, I. S. Dubenko, V. A. Murashov, D. N. Rakov, and I. B. Krynetsky, Phys. Lett. A PYLAAG 0375-9601 10.1016/0375-9601(91)90467-M 158, 491 (1991).
33. J. R. Chena, W. L. Wang, J. B. Lia, and G. H. Rao, J. Alloys Compd. JALCEU 0925-8388 10.1016/j.jallcom.2007.05.034 459, 66 (2008). (Pubitemid 351680637)
34. I. O. Troyanchuk, M. V. Bushinsky, D. V. Karpinsky, O. S. Mantytskaya, V. V. Fedotova, and O. I. Prochnenko, Phys. Status Solidi B PSSBBD 0370-1972 10.1002/pssb.200945030 246, 1901 (2009).
35. We found that, for some Bi/La arrangements at compositions x 5/8, the relaxations starting from the O 2 structure ended up in the O 1 phase. Analogously, for x < 1 / 2, we found cases in which relaxations starting from the O 1 structure ended up in the O 2 phase. These observations indicate that there are composition ranges in which the orthorhombic phases are barely stable, and in such conditions the specific Bi/La ordering becomes relevant.
36. The quantitative values in such a hysteresis loop are not to be taken very seriously, as (i) the Landau limit for polarization switching is clearly a crude approximation to reality and (ii) the parameters of the Landau potential in Eq. may vary significantly depending on the specific composition and Bi/La arrangement considered.
37. 3. From the series of papers published in Vol. 99 of Ferroelectrics;
38. see, e.g., M. J. Haun, E. Furman, S. J. Jang, and L. E. Cross, Ferroelectrics FEROA8 0015-0193 10.1080/00150198908221436 99, 13 (1989);
39. M. J. Haun, E. Furman, H. A. McKinstry, and L. E. Cross, Ferroelectrics FEROA8 0015-0193 10.1080/00150198908221437 99, 27 (1989).
40. ′ = A / λ = 2.85 or, equivalently, x = - 1.85; this negative (nonphysical) x is compatible with the fact that the O 1 phase remains stable even in the limit of pure BFO.
41. J. Añiguez and L. Bellaiche, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.87.095503 87, 095503 (2001);
42. A. M. George, J. Añiguez, and L. Bellaiche, Nature (London) 0028-0836 10.1038/35092530 413, 54 (2001). (Pubitemid 32843484)
43. W. Zhong and D. Vanderbilt, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.74.2587 74, 2587 (1995).
44. 3 at the classical (regular ferroelectric) and quantum-mechanical (incipient ferroelectric) levels can be found in A. R. Akbarzadeh, L. Bellaiche, K. Leung, J. Añiguez, and D. Vanderbilt, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 1098-0121 10.1103/PhysRevB.70.054103 70, 054103 (2004).
45. Our fitted Landau potential underestimates the strength of BFO's FE instability. For example, our potential gives an energy difference of about 150 meV/f.u. between BFO's ground state and the P = 0 structure, while we know from first principles that BFO's cubic PE phase lies more than 900 meV/f.u. above the R phase (Ref.). Such a large deviation is not totally unexpected, given that we fitted our potential to reproduce the equilibrium polarization and response properties of the FE phases, not the energy difference with respect to the cubic structure. Another consequence of this reduced stability of the FE phase is that our fitted potential renders a relatively small critical composition x = - A / λ = 0.77 at which P is predicted to disappear (see Fig.).
46. E. K. H. Salje, B. Wruck, and H. Thomas, Z. Phys. B ZPCMDN 0722-3277 10.1007/BF01357186 82, 399 (1991).
47. I. H. Ismailzade, R. M. Ismailov, A. I. Alekberov, and F. M. Salaev, Phys. Status Solidi A PSSABA 0031-8965 10.1002/pssa.2210660112 66, 119 (1981).
48. We have not checked the structural stability of the P b a m phases and, in principle, they might be saddle points of the energy. Hence, their "metastability" is not confirmed.
49. O. Diéguez and J. Añiguez, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.107.057601 107, 057601 (2011).
50. J. Añiguez, D. Vanderbilt, and L. Bellaiche, Phys. Rev. B PRBMDO 1098-0121 10.1103/PhysRevB.67.224107 67, 224107 (2003).