(a) Model assumptions for using monolayer bimetallic surfaces along with the (b) top and (c) side views for representative adsorbate slab configuration for the 0.5 ML O/Pt–Co–Pt(111) system.
Comparison of the dissociative binding energy of oxygen on Co(0001), Pt(111), Pt–Co–Pt(111), Co–Pt–Pt(111), and mixed surface Pt–Co alloys. The mixed surface alloys are labeled as , where denotes the percentage of surface Co atoms.
Correlation of the thermodynamic potential for segregation using (a) the difference in full -band center and (b) the difference in occupied -band center.
The difference in binding energy between the surface and subsurface configuration for (a) oxygen and (b) hydrogen vs the difference in -band center. The thermodynamic potential for segregation for vacuum and increasing coverages of (c) atomic oxygen and (d) atomic hydrogen vs the difference in -band center. The labels for the surface considered are on the top axis where A-B-C is defined as A is the top layer, B is the second layer, and C is the host metal.
Correlation of the thermodynamic potential for segregation for 33 bimetallic systems in vacuum, and with 0.5 ML atomic hydrogen, and 0.5 ML atomic oxygen vs the difference in -band center.
The thermodynamic potential for segregation for 0.25 ML H, S, Se, C, N, or O on vs the difference in -band center.
Article metrics loading...
Full text loading...