Solid State Communications 336 (2021) 114421

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Solid State Communications

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ssc

First-principles investigation of the electronic and optical properties of

As2GeTe nanotubes
P. Behzadi a, S.A. Ketabi a, **, P. Amiri b, *
a
School of Physics, Damghan University, Damghan, Iran
b
Department of Physics, Faculty of Science, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Communicated by Oguz Gulseren In this paper, the electronic and optical properties of the armchair and zigzag As2GeTe nanotubes are investi­
gated. Calculations have been performed using QUANTUM-ESPRESSO computational package, which is based on
Keywords: the density functional theory and pseudopotential technique. The strain and formation energies computed for the
Density functional theory equal diameter of the two armchair and zigzag systems are almost the same and converge to the reference
Strain energy
As2GeTe monolayer by increasing the diameter of the nanotubes. For each diameter, the calculated strain en­
Electronic properties
ergies are lower than the corresponding armchair and zigzag carbon nanotubes. The electronic calculations
Optical properties
Armchair and zigzag systems indicate that for both armchair and zigzag systems, As2GeTe nanotubes have a semiconductor characteristic with
As2GeTe nanotubes a direct band gap of approximately 1.0 eV within the generalized gradient approximation. Based on the phonon
dispersion curve at ambient pressure, nanotube structures are dynamically stable. The optical band gap derived
from the imaginary part of the dielectric function also verifies the electronic results. All types of nanotubes,
except the armchair (4.4) nanotube, have an equal and very low optical reflectivity (~0.05) in the far-ultraviolet
frequencies, which is an interesting problem for the reflectivity application. Apart from the first diameter of the
armchair structure, the values of Plasmon energies calculated for both armchair and zigzag As2GeTe nanotubes
are almost identical. The nearly identical electronic and optical properties of different diameters of the As2GeTe
nanotubes make them attractive from an application point of view.

1. Introduction to their suitable mechanical, thermal, and electronic properties [11]. In

2015, Yirpan Iirken examined the blue phosphorene nanotubes and
In recent years, two-dimensional materials are of interest due to their show that the blue phosphorene nanotubes are more stable than the
adjustable electronic properties. Indeed, converting a two-dimensional black phosphorene nanotubes. The small bending stresses in the wrin­
nano-sheet to a one-dimensional nanotube can be used to adjusting kled nanotubes lead to a decrease in the energy of formation of blue
electron properties [1–7]. Nanotubes (NTs) are a kind of phosphorene nanotubes compared to the black phosphorene nanotubes
one-dimensional (1D) materials, which in comparison to their related [12]. In 2016, a two-dimensional monolayer of Si2BN in the hexagonal
bulk structures, due to the quantum confinement effects present special structure was predicted [13]. In 2017, King Zing predicted new com­
properties. These unique properties provide a new basis for a wide range positions by analyzing the crystal structure of the Si2BN monolayer [14].
of applications of nanotubes covering microelectronics, photovoltaics, These compounds, with a chemical formula similar to Si2BN and a
gas sensing, electrochemical sensing, infrared photodetection, photo­ similar structure to phosphorene, are quasi-two-dimensional with a
catalyst, and biomedical [8]. 1D materials are ideal components for buckling surface [14].
nanoscale optoelectronic and electronic components. Following the The constituent elements of these compounds belong to groups IV, V,
discovery of carbon nanotubes, other non-carbonic and inorganic and VI of the periodic table so that the unit cell contains 8 atoms, in
nanotubes such as MoS2, GaN, AlN were successfully synthesized and which 4 atoms belong to group 5, two atoms from group 4, and 2 atoms
studied both theoretically and experimentally [9,10]. The phosphorus from group 6. The dynamic stability of these compounds, which includes
nanotubes, such as carbon nanotubes, have received much attention due P2SiS, As2SiS, As2GeSe, Sb2GeSe, Sb2SnTe, and Bi2SnTe, was

* Corresponding author.
** Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (S.A. Ketabi), [email protected] (P. Amiri).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssc.2021.114421
Received 11 May 2021; Received in revised form 6 June 2021; Accepted 14 June 2021
Available online 18 June 2021
0038-1098/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
P. Behzadi et al. Solid State Communications 336 (2021) 114421

investigated by Xie et al. [14]. The Ab-initio calculation indicates that provided to prevent interaction with the adjacent structures. The
these compounds are semiconductor materials and can be a good random phase approximation (RPA) was used for the optical
candidate for electronic and optical applications [14]. In 2019, the calculations.
structural, electric, and phonon properties of P2GeS and As2GeS single
layers were studied by Zhu et al. According to the Ab-initio HSE0 cal­ 3. Results and discussion
culations, a single layer of As2GeS has a direct band gap of 1.89 eV while
the single layer of P2GeS is an indirect band gap semiconductor that can 3.1. Electronic properties
be transformed into a direct band gap by applying a 3% compression
deformation. They also found that the P2GeS and As2GeS single layers Fig. 1 displays the zigzag (8, 0) and armchair (8, 8) structures of the
have a high potential for photocatalytic water splitting [15]. As2GeTe nanotube. The structural parameters for each nanotube, in the
In most two-dimensional materials such as carbon sheets, nanotubes ground state, have been presented in Table 1. The tube structure has two
can be purposefully formed by rolling up two-dimensional sheets [16]. different diameters; Inner and outer diameters. In both the armchair and
Due to the importance and potential of nanotubes, in the present work, zigzag tubes, the difference between the inner and outer diameters is
we try to investigate the electronic and optical properties of the As2GeTe almost 3.73 Å.
nanotubes in two armchair and zigzag geometries by rolling up corre­ The lattice parameters (L) along the tube axis are about 7.37 Å and
sponding nanosheets. 12.64 Å for armchair and zigzag tubes, respectively. The armchair tubes
To the best of our knowledge, the electronic and optical properties of have a ridged surface and look like a gear from the cross-section direc­
the As2GeTe nanotubes have not been discussed before. Structural sta­ tion. To investigate the energetic stability of nanotube structures with
bility and electronic properties of As2GeTe nanosheets have been respect to the 2D As2GeTe monolayer we calculate the strain energies for
investigated in our previous work [17]. both armchair and zigzag systems. The strain energy is defined as the
energy difference between the energy per atom of the nanotube and the
2. Method of calculations As2GeTe monolayer. The calculated strain energies for both armchair
and zigzag systems are reported in Table 1.
Calculations have been performed based on the density functional In principle, the As2GeTe nanotubes will gradually transform into a
theory (DFT) using the plane wave method as implemented within the two-dimensional layer as the diameter of the tube increases. Thus, the
QUANTUM-ESPRESSO computational package [18]. The strain energy will decrease when the diameter increases in both cases,
norm-conserving pseudo-potentials have been applied for the Ge, As, Te, and we can find this trend in Table 1.
and P atoms so that for the [Ge]: 4s2 4p2 orbitals, [As]: 4s2 4p3 orbitals, For the various diameters of both armchair and zigzag systems, the
and [Te] 5s2 5p4 orbitals have been considered as the valence electrons, calculated strain energies are almost the same and these amounts
respectively. The generalized gradient approximation (GGA) was converge to zero (i.e. reference As2GeTe monolayer) by increasing the
selected for the exchange-correlation term. The Monkhorst-Pack meshes diameter. For different diameters, the obtained results are very close to
of 1 × 1 × 8 were considered for the first Brillouin zone integration [19]. the related strain energies of the α-phosphorene nanotubes [20].
The plane-wave kinetic energy cutoff was set at 70 Ry. All structures Moreover, for each diameter, the calculated strain energies are lower
have been optimized to achieve the minimum energy by accurate than that of the corresponding armchair and zigzag carbon nanotubes
relaxation of the atomic positions down to forces less than 1 mRy/Bohr. [21]. When the diameter is approximately larger than 18 Å, the strain
The energy convergence criterion was set to be 10− 6 eV. A energies of the armchair system are very close to zero.
two-dimensional vacuum layer of 13 Å along the x- and y-direction was Another most important property that reveals the thermodynamic

Fig. 1. Transversal (left) and longitudinal (right) view of (a) (8,0) zigzag and (b) (8,8) armchair, As2GeTe nanotube.

2
P. Behzadi et al. Solid State Communications 336 (2021) 114421

Table 1
Total number (N) of atoms in a unit cell, calculated diameters (D), lattice constants, band gaps, strain energy, and the formation energy for both armchair and zigzag
As2GeTe systems.
Structure N Diameter (Å) L(Å) Egap (eV) Estrain (meV/atom) Eformation(meV/atom)

Inner(Å) Outer(Å)

armchair(4,4) 32 6.40 10.18 7.37 1.07 65.8 35

armchair(6,6) 48 11.00 14.60 7.37 1.03 23.6 31
armchair(8,8) 64 14.37 18.12 7.37 1.01 9.5 30
armchair(10,10) 80 18.76 22.44 7.37 0.99 3.08 29
zigzag(8,0) 64 7.84 11.54 12.64 1.01 55.6 34
zigzag(10,0) 80 10.02 13.80 12.64 1.06 29.5 32
As2GeTe monolayer 8a – – 7.34a 1.08a 0.0 29a
a
Ref. [17].

stability of the structure is Formation energy, ΔEF . The relative forma­ predominately originated from the hybridization of p-orbitals of As, Ge,
tion energy is given by the following relation: and Te atoms with a low mixture of s states of As, Ge, and Te atoms.
In the (4,4) armchair nanotube, the singularity at the top of the
E1D E3D
ΔEF = − (1a) valence region mainly originated from the p orbital of the Ge atom. For
N1D N3D
higher diameters of the armchair nanotubes, the height of this singu­
where E1D and E3D are the total energies of the 1D and 3D structures, larity is increased. Also, in the (4,4) armchair nanotube the singularity at
respectively, and N1D and N3D are the numbers of atoms in the 1D and 3D the top of the conduction region mainly arises from the Ge p-orbital. The
unit cells [14]. height of this singularity decreases with the increasing diameter of the
To determine the total energy of the bulk As2GeTe compound, E3D , nanotube structures.
the most stable combination of phases made by the constituent elements
of the compound was considered. For this reason, we used the Open 3.2. Dynamical stability
Quantum Material Database (OQMD) [22]. According to the database,
the As2GeTe compound is decomposed into As and GeTe. The calculated To investigate the dynamical stability of the studied structures, we
relative formation energies at various diameters of the armchair and studied the phonon dispersion curve along the growth direction of the
zigzag systems are reported in Table 1. nanotube. Due to the computational limitations, phonon calculations
For both armchair and zigzag 1D systems, the amount of relative were carried out only for the smallest nanotube structure, i.e. armchair
formation energy decreases as the diameter increases and converges (4.4) nanotube. In the phonon dispersion curve, there are 96 branches
toward the corresponding value of the As2GeTe monolayer, 29 meV/ which are related to the presence of 32 atoms in the cell. The top 93
atom. When the diameter is approximately larger than 18 Å, the for­ branches are optical modes, and the other three lower branches are
mation energy of the armchair system is equal to the reference value of acoustic modes. As seen from Fig. 4, we did not find any imaginary
the As2GeTe monolayer. phonon frequency in the whole Brillouin zone. Therefore, the armchair
Since the stability of IV-V-VI monolayer semiconductors has been (4.4) nanotube is dynamically stable and it is possible to be synthesized
completely verified previously [14,17], the results of the strain energy in practice. The armchair (4.4) nanotube has an optical band gap in the
and formation energy can emphasize that the 1D examined systems are frequency range of 100 cm− 1 to 148 cm− 1. Therefore, vibrations cannot
stable and can be synthesized in practice. be propagated in this frequency range, and light (heat) cannot transmit
In the following, we present the band structure and the density of through the structure, which means the nanotube is fully reflected
states (DOS) for both armchair and zigzag systems. Fig. 2 shows the band (insulated) in this range of energy.
structure along with the high symmetry points in the first Brillion zone Because in both armchair and zigzag nanotubes, strain energy and
and the total density of states for both systems. The Fermi energy is set to formation energy are reduced by increasing the radius of the nanotubes
zero. The presented results confirm that both studied systems have the towards the monolayer reference value (see Table 1), we predict that the
characteristics of semiconductors. higher radii of the nanotubes also maintain the dynamic stability.
Various diameters of the armchair and zigzag nanotubes have iden­
tical band structures near the Fermi level, resulting in an almost iden­ 3.3. Optical properties
tical amount of the electronic bandgap of approximately 1.02 eV for the
studied structures. For both systems, the bandgap is direct and observed The response of matter to electromagnetic waves is described by the
in the Г-point. dielectric function. The dielectric function is a complex function that is
The amounts of energy band gap are listed in Table 1. The computed defined as ε(ω) = ε1 (ω) + iε2 (ω) which the ε1 (ω) and ε2 (ω) are the real
band gaps for different armchair and zigzag systems are much close to and imaginary parts of the dielectric function, respectively. The imagi­
the referenced As2GeTe monolayer band gap, which may imply that the nary part of the dielectric function ϵ2(ω) is related to the electronic band
structural geometry does not considerably affect the band gap. The structure. The ϵ2(ω) is given by the following relation [23,24].
nearly identical electronic properties of different diameters of the ∫
As2GeTe nanotubes make them appropriate for use in nanoscale near- 4π 2 e2 ∑
ε2 (ω) = 2 2 〈i|M|j〉2 fi (1 − fi ) δ(Ef − Ei − ω) d3 k (1b)
infrared photodetectors. mω
The partial density of states for both armchair and zigzag systems is
where M denotes the dipole matrix k is the wave vector, Ei, and fi are the
shown in Fig. 3. The plotted energy range is from − 8 to 2 eV. Fig. 3
energy of the electron and the Fermi distribution function of the ith
presents that the lowest states from 7 to 8 eV below the Fermi level
state, respectively. To extract the real part of the dielectric function from
predominately originate from Ge-s states and partially from the As-p and
the imaginary part the Kramers–Kronig [25,26] relation is used.
Te-p states. Between the highest state of the core region and the most
extreme state of the valence region, there is a 2 eV energy distance. This ∫∞ ′ ′
2 ω ε2 (ω )
energy distance in both systems is almost identical. The top and bottom (2)
′
ε1 (ω) = 1 + P{ ′2
dω }
π ω − ω2
parts of the valence region and conduction region, respectively are 0

3
P. Behzadi et al. Solid State Communications 336 (2021) 114421

Fig. 2. The total density of states and bands structure along with the high symmetric points in the first Brillion zone of the As2GeTe, (a) (4,4) armchair, (b) (6,6)
armchair, (c) (8,8) armchair, (d) (10,10) armchair, (e) (8,0) zigzag, and (f) (10,0) zigzag nanotubes.

Fig. 4 displays the real and imaginary parts of the dielectric function functions are located about 1.5 eV and with increasing the incident
of the As2GeTe nanotubes in parallel to the nanotube axis (electric filed photon energy the dielectric function drops rapidly and reaches zero and
E ||z). negative values.
The amount of static dielectric function for both armchair and zigzag The roots of ϵ1(ω) have a physical meaning. Indeed, in the energy
systems is reported in Table 2. We see that with increasing the diameter between the roots of the real part of the dielectric function, where ϵ1(ω)
of the nanotube, for zigzag and armchair configurations, the static value is negative or too close to zero, the electromagnetic wave is not
dielectric function is decreased so that the largest static dielectric propagated and the absorption and reflection processes are dominated.
function is related to the armchair (4,4) nanotube and with changing the The roots of the real part of the As2GeTe nanotube dielectric function
structure from (4,4) to (6,6) a significant drop is seen in the static ϵ1(ω) are summarized in Table 2. Our results show that the largest en­
dielectric function. The maximum of the real part of the dielectric ergy width for the damping of the electromagnetic waves is seen for the

4
P. Behzadi et al. Solid State Communications 336 (2021) 114421

Fig. 3. The partial density of states of the As2GeTe (a) (4,4) armchair, (b) (6,6) armchair, (c) (8,8) armchair, (d) (10,10) armchair, (e) (8,0) zigzag nanotube, and (f)
(10,0) zigzag nanotubes.

armchair (4,4) nanotube which the energy width is several times greater Our results show that the greatest optical gap is related to (10,10)
than other nanotubes. This feature can be important for optical armchair is equal to 1.15 eV. For other structures, the optical band gap is
applications. reported in Table 2. For armchair nanotubes, apart from the first radius,
The imaginary part of the dielectric function of the As2GeTe nano­ the optical band gap is almost identical and equal to ~1.12 eV. This
tubes in terms of the incident photon energy in the z-direction is shown value for the studied zigzag structures is equal to 1.0 eV. The nearly
in Fig. 4(b). As seen in Fig. 4(b), the imaginary part of the dielectric identical optical band gap of different diameters of the As2GeTe nano­
functions has a small value until the energy range of about 1.0–1.5 eV. tubes can make them attractive for use in optoelectronic devices.

5
P. Behzadi et al. Solid State Communications 336 (2021) 114421

diameter independent value makes them a potential candidate for use in

optical devices.
Fig. 6 (a) displays the optical reflectivity given by,

Table 2
Static dielectric function Ɛ1(0), the roots of the real part of dielectric function
(eV), the width of forbidden energy intervals Δ (eV), the optical band gap Egap
(eV), static n0 and maximum nmax refractive index, the static R0 and maximum
Rmax reflection coefficient, the peak of the optical absorption coefficient αmax
(105cm− 1) with corresponding photon energy Eph (eV) for both armchair and
zigzag structures of As2GeTe nanotubes in the z-direction.
index armchair armchair armchair armchair zigzag zigzag
(4,4) (6,6) (8,8) (10،10) (8,0) (10,0)

Ɛ1(0) 3.46 2.24 2.31 2.1 2.50 2.2

roots 2.58, 2.88, 2.88, 2.94, 3.30 2.52, 2.88,
4.86 3.33 3.42 3.21 3.0
Δ 2.28 0.45 0.54 0.36 0.69 0.12
Fig. 4. Phonon dispersion curve for the armchair (4,4) nanotube. Egap 1.00 1.12 1.12 1.15 0.98 1.01
n0 1.86 1.50 1.52 1.45 1.58 1.48
nmax 2.38 1.87 1.91 1.76 1.96 1.75
The peaks of the imaginary part of the dielectric function are related R0% 9 4 4.3 3 5 3.5
to the absorption and optical transitions. For all nanotubes, two prom­ Rmax 32 20 25 19.7 27 17
inent peaks are located in the energy range of about 1.9–2.5 eV. These %
peaks are related to optical transitions from the p and s-orbitals for Si, αmax; 2.34; 1.69; 1.96; 1.72; 2.91 1.97; 1.44;
Eph 2.70 2.85 3.00 2.50 2.85
As, Te atoms below the Fermi level and to the p and s-orbitals of As, Te
atoms above the Fermi level. The important energy range for optical
transitions is between 1 eV and 6 eV.
The Refractive index is one of the important optical parameters of
matter. The refractive index n(ω) and the extinction coefficient k(ω) is
determined from ε1 (ω) and ε2 (ω) using
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
1
n(ω) = √̅̅̅ ε1 (ω) + ε21 (ω) + ε22 (ω). (3)
2
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
1
k(ω) = √̅̅̅ − ε1 (ω) + ε21 (ω) + ε22 (ω). (4)
2
The refractive index of the As2GeTe nanotubes in parallel to the
nanotube axis is shown in Fig. 5. The static refractive index of the
As2GeTe nanotubes for both armchair and zigzag systems is reported in
Table 2.
Our results reveal that the highest static refractive index with a value
of 1.86 corresponds to the (4,4) armchair nanotube. The refractive index
of the (6,6) and (8,8) armchair nanotubes are almost identical.
Except for the armchair (4.4) nanotube, both types of nanotubes for
each diameter have the maximum refractive index close to 1.7 in the Fig. 6. Variations of the refractive index of the As2GeTe nanotubes in terms of
near-infrared range of the electromagnetic spectrum. This large and the incident photon energy in the z-direction.

Fig. 5. (a) real part of the dielectric function and (b) imaginary part of dielectric function for both armchair and zigzag systems in the z-direction.

6
P. Behzadi et al. Solid State Communications 336 (2021) 114421

Fig. 7. (a) the reflection coefficient, (b) optical absorption coefficient for both armchair and zigzag systems in the z-direction.

(n − 1)2 + k2
R(ω) = (5)
(n + 1)2 + k2

where n and k are the refractive index and extinction coefficients,

respectively. The optical reflectivity and optical absorption coefficient
of the As2GeTe nanotube are given for both armchair and zigzag nano­
tubes in parallel to the nanotube axis in Fig. 6. The comparison of the
results is illustrated in Fig. 6 (a), in which (4,4) armchair structure is a
better reflector compared to other structures. The maximum reflectance
for this structure is 32%. For energy levels greater than 5.5 eV, the
reflectance has been significantly reduced and the nanotube is trans­
parent in both systems. The static R0 and maximum reflection coefficient
Rmax of the As2GeTe nanotubes for both armchair and zigzag systems are
reported in Table 2. All types of nanotubes, except armchair (4.4)
nanotube, have an equal and very low optical reflectivity (~0.05) in the
far-ultraviolet frequencies, making them an interesting candidate for
reflectivity application.
The frequency-dependent absorption coefficient α is given by:
2ω k Fig. 8. Spectrum of energy loss function for both armchair and zigzag systems
α= (6)
c in the z-direction.
The calculated absorption coefficients for both armchair and zigzag
systems are depicted in Fig. 6 (b). This figure shows that the peak of to zigzag, there is no significant difference in the Plasmon energy of the
absorption coefficients is in the visible energy range of 2.35–3.0 eV. The As2GeTe nanotubes. Besides, some of the peaks that are present in the
largest and smallest peak of the optical absorption coefficient is 2.34 and states of the chair are located near the root energy of the real part of the
1.44 corresponding to the structures of (4,4) armchair and (10,0) zigzag dielectric function.
in photon energy 2.7 eV and 2.85 eV, respectively. In contrast to carbon nanotubes whose optical properties are highly
Energy loss may result from the excitation of single valence electrons correlated with size [27], the various diameters of As2GeTe nanotubes
in a solid or from the collective excitation of electrons in a valence band have approximately the same optical properties, which makes them
of a solid material known as Plasmon. interesting from the application point of view.
Plasmons are the collective oscillations of the free electron gas
density. The plasma frequency ωp is the threshold between the diffusion 4. Conclusions
of a material and a strong reflection of the sample surface. Therefore, the
Plasmons can be seen as a sequential peak in the energy dissipation In this article, the electronic properties and optical properties of the
spectra. Using the dielectric function, the energy loss function of a As2GeTe nanotube have been investigated based on DFT. For the various
charged particle that penetrates the solid is derived from the following diameters of both armchair and zigzag systems, the calculated strain
relationship (see Fig. 8). energies are almost the same and converge to reference As2GeTe
monolayer by increasing the diameter. In comparison with the armchair
1
l(ω) = − Im( ) (7) and zigzag carbon nanotubes, for each diameter, the calculated strain
ε(ω) and formation energies predicted that the examined systems are stable
The energy loss function of the As2GeTe nanotube for the two and can be synthesized in practice. According to the phonon dispersion
armchair and zigzag systems parallel to the nanotube axis is presented in curve diagram, it can be concluded that nanotube structures satisfying
Fig. 7. The value of Plasmon energy for various (4,4) armchair, (6,6) the condition of dynamical stability at ambient pressure.
armchair, (8,8) armchair, (10,10) armchair, (8,0) zigzag, and (10,0) The calculation of the band structure of As2GeTe nanotubes confirms
zigzag structures obtained 5.1 eV, 4.41 eV, 4.5 eV, 4.38 eV, 4.41, and that both studied systems are the semiconductor with a direct gap at
4.41 eV respectively. Except for the first diameter of the armchair point Г. Moreover, the computed band gaps for different armchair and
structure, it is observed that by changing the structure from the armchair zigzag systems are much close to the referenced As2GeTe monolayer

7
P. Behzadi et al. Solid State Communications 336 (2021) 114421

band gap. This result has also been justified by the optical result, which [3] C. Tan, H. Zhang, Chem. Soc. Rev. 44 (2015) 2713–2731.
[4] Z. Yin, H. Li, H. Li, L. Jiang, Y. Shi, Y. Sun, G. Lu, Q. Zhang, X. Chen, H. Zhang, ACS
makes As2GeTe nanotubes attractive for use in optoelectronic
Nano 6 (2012) 74–80.
applications. [5] L. Li, Y. Yu, G.J. Ye, Q. Ge, X. Ou, H. Wu, D. Feng, X.H. Chen, Y. Zhang, Nat.
The highest static refractive index is obtained for (4,4) armchair with Nanotechnol. 9 (2014) 372–377.
a value of 1.86. Therefore, the (4,4) armchair structure is a better [6] C. Tan, X. Qi, Z. Liu, F. Zhao, H. Li, X. Huang, L. Shi, B. Zheng, X. Zhang, L. Xie,
J. Am. Chem. Soc. 137 (2015) 1565–1571.
reflector than other structures. For energy levels greater than 5.5 eV, the [7] L. Tao, E. Cinquanta, D. Chiappe, C. Grazianetti, M. Fanciulli, M. Dubey, A. Molle,
reflectance and optical absorption have been significantly reduced and D. Akinwande, Nat. Nanotechnol. 10 (2015) 227–231.
the nanotube is transparent in both systems. The optical absorption peak [8] J.M. Vergara, E. Florez, M.E. Mora-Ramos, J.D. Correa, Mater. Res. Express 7
(2020), 015042.
of both armchair and zigzag nanotubes is in the visible energy range of [9] G. Seifert, H. Terrones, M. Terrones, G. Jungnickei, T. Frauenheim, Phys. Rev. Lett.
2.35–3.0 eV. Apart from the first diameter of the armchair structure, the 85 (2000) 146.
values of Plasmon energies calculated for both armchair and zigzag [10] S. Chen, Y. Pan, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 46 (2021) 21040–21049.
[11] J. Hao, Z. Wang, Q. Jin, Sci. Rep. 9 (2019) 11264.
As2GeTe nanotubes are almost identical. [12] Y. Aierken, O. Leenaerts, F. Peeters, Phys. Rev. B 92 (2015) 104104.
[13] Y. Lin, T.V. Williams, J.W. Connell, J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 1 (2010) 277–283.
Data availability [14] Q. Xie, J. Yuan, N. Yu, L. Wang, L. Wang, Comput. Mater. Sci. 135 (2017) 160–164.
[15] Y.L. Zhu, J.H. Yuan, Y.Q. Song, K.H. Xue, S. Wang, C. Lian, Z.N. Li, M. Xu, X.
M. Cheng, X.S. Miao, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 44 (2019) 21536–21545.
The data that supports the findings of this study are available within [16] C.M. Sayes, F. Liang, J.L. Hudson, J. Mendez, W. Guo, J. M Beach, V. C Moore, C.
the article. Moreover, the additional information on the As2GeTe D. Doyle, J.L. West, Toxicol. Lett. 161 (2006) 242–248.
[17] P. Behzadi, P. Amiri, S.A. Ketabi, Chem. Phys. 547 (2021) 111215.
monolayer can be found in Ref. [14].
[18] P. Giannozzi, S. Baroni, N. Bonini, M. Cococcioni, R. Car, C. Cavazzoni, Phys.
Condens. Matter 21 (2009) 395502.
Declaration of competing interest [19] H.J. Monkhorst, J.D. Pack, Phys. Rev. B 13 (1976) 5188.
[20] T. Hu, A. Hashmi, J. Hong, Nanotechnology 26 (2015) 415702.
[21] E. Hernandez, C. Goze, P. Bernier, A. Rubio, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80 (1998) 4502–4505.
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial [22] J. Saal, S. Kirklin, M. Aykol, B. Meredig, C. Wolverton, JOM 65 (2013) 1501–1509.
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence [23] N.V. Smith, Photoelectron energy spectra and the band structures of the noble
the work reported in this paper. metals, Phys. Rev. B 3 (1971) 1862.
[24] C. Ambrosch-Draxl, J.O. Sofo, Comput. Phys. Commun. 175 (2006) 1–14.
[25] F. Wooten, Optical Properties of Solids, New York Academic Press, 1972.
References [26] Y.K. Kim, M.E. Rudd, Phys. Rev. A 50 (1994) 3954.
[27] V. Barone, J.E. Peralta, M. Wert, J. Heyd, G.E. Scuseria, Nano Lett. 5 (2005)
[1] A.K. Geim, K.S. Novoselov, Nat. Mater. 6 (2007) 183–191. 1621–1624.
[2] K.S. Novoselov, V. Fal, L. Colombo, P. Gellert, M. Schwab, K. Kim, Nature 490
(2012) 192–200.