Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-vsgnj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T11:08:07.088Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Classical Two and Three-Body Interatomic Potentials for Silicon Simulations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 February 2011

R. Biswas  and
D. R. Hamann
R. Biswas
Affiliation:
AT&T Bell Laboratories, 600 Mountain Avenue, Murray Hill, NJ 07974
D. R. Hamann
Affiliation:
AT&T Bell Laboratories, 600 Mountain Avenue, Murray Hill, NJ 07974
Get access

Abstract

We develop two and three-body classical interatomic potentials that model structural energies for silicon. These potentials provide a global fit to a database of firstprinciples calculations of the energy for bulk and surface silicon structures which spans a wide range of atomic coordinations and bonding geometries. This is accomplished using a new “separable” form for the 3-body potential that reduces the 3-body energy to a product of 2-body sums and leads to computations of the energy and atomic forces in n2 steps as opposed to n3 for a general 3-body potential. Simulated annealing is performed to find globally minimum energy states of Si-atom clusters with these potentials using a Langevin molecular dynamics approach.

Type
Articles
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 63: Symposium R – Computer-Based Microscopic Description of the Structure and Properties of Materials , 1985 , 173
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1986

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] Yin, M. T. and Cohen, M. L., Phys. Rev. B 26 5668 (1982); Phys. Rev. Lett.45, 1004 (1980).Google Scholar
[2] For a model in which the entire cohesive energy is expressed as a sum of 2, 3, … body potentials, with no implicit or explicit “volume” term, we believe that only single-minimum, smooth 2-body potentials are physically plausible, and exclude the type of oscillatory long-ranged potentials that could be mathematically constructed to counter this assertion.Google Scholar
[3] Keating, P. N., Phys. Rev. I 45, 637 (1966).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4] Needs, R. and Martin, R. M., Phys. Rev. B 230, 5372 (1984); K. J Chang and M. L. Cohen, Phys. Rev. B 30, 5376 (1984).Google Scholar
[5] Yin, M. T. private communication, (equations of state for Si structures and Sihexagonal energies).Google Scholar
[6] Stillinger, F. and Weber, T., Phys. Rev. B 3, 5262 (1985).Google Scholar
[7] Pearson, E., Takai, T., Halicioglu, T. and Tiller, W. A., J. Cryst. Growth 70, 33 (1984); T. Takai, T. Halicioglu, and W. A. Tiller, Scripta Metal. 19 709 (1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[8] Tersoff, J., (to be published).Google Scholar
[9] Axilrod, B. M. and Teller, E., J. Chem. Phys. 11, 299 (1943).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[10] Carlsson, A. E., Gelatt, C. D. and Ehrenreich, H., Phil. Mag. A 41 241 (1980).Google Scholar
[11] Baraff, G. A. and Schluter, M., Phys. Rev. B 30, 3460 (1984).Google Scholar
[12] Biswas, R. and Hamann, D. R., Phys. Rev. Lett. 55, 2001 (1985).Google Scholar
[13] Kirkpatrick, S., Gelatt, C. D. and Vecchi, M. P., Science 20 671 (1983).Google Scholar
[14] Biswas, R. and Hamann, D. R., (to be published).Google Scholar
[15] Helfand, E., Bell Sys. Tech. J. 58, 2289 (1979).CrossRefGoogle Scholar