200
9 Hybridized Bonding
Table 9.1 (continued)
Refs.
Guest Host (X)
Anti-bond
M p dipole
> E F
Lone
pair < E F
M + (hole)
< R F
X-M bond
E F
[104]
−0.8
−4.4
[105]
1.5
−4
−5.5, −7.8
[106]
1.7
−3.0
−5.8
[69]
O
Ru(1010)
2.5
−2 ~ −
3.0
−5.0
[107]
MgO/Ag(001)
−3.0 ±
1.0
[108]
O
Co(Poly)
−2.0
−0.7
−5.0
[109]
O
C(diamond)
−3.0
[110]
O
CNT
0.8
[111]
O, S
Cu(001)P
−1.3
−6.0
[112]
O, S,
N
Ag(111)
−3.4
−8.0
[97, 111]
N
Cu(001)
3.0
−1.2
−5.6
−1.0
−4.0
−5.5
[67]
N
Ru(0001)
3.0
−3.0
−6.0
[111]
N
Ag(111)
−3.4
−8.0
[113]
TiCN
0.0 ± 1.0
−5.7
[114]
a-CN
−4.5
−7.1
[115]
CN
−2.3
Reprinted with permission from [46]
References
1. F.M. Chua, Y. Kuk, P.J. Silverman, Oxygen chemisorption on Cu(110): an atomic view by
scanning tunneling microscopy. Phys. Rev. Lett. 63(4), 386–389 (1989)
2. J. Tersoff, D. Hamann, Theory of the scanning tunneling microscope, in Scanning Tunneling
Microscopy (Springer, Heidelberg, 1985), pp. 59–67
3. J. Wintterlin, R.J. Behm, In the Scanning Tunnelling Microscopy I, ed. H.J. Günthert, R.
Wiesendanger (Springer, Berlin, 1992)
4. W. Jacob, V. Dose, A. Goldmann, Atomic adsorption of oxygen on Cu (111) and Cu (110).
Appl. Phys. A 41(2), 145–150 (1986)
5. W. Sesselmann et al., Probing the local density of states of metal-surfaces by deexcitation of
metastable noble-gas atoms. Phys. Rev. Lett. 50(6), 446–450 (1983)
6. C.Q. Sun, O-Cu(001): II. VLEED quantification of the four-stage Cu 3 O 2 bonding kinetics.
Surf. Rev. Lett. 8(6), 703–734 (2001)
7. C.Q. Sun, O-Cu(001): I. Binding the signatures of LEED, STM and PES in a bond-forming
way. Surf. Rev. Lett. 8(3–4), 367–402 (2001)
8. R. DiDio, D. Zehner, E. Plummer, An angle-resolved UPS study of the oxygen-induced
reconstruction of Cu (110). J. Vac. Sci. Technol., A 2(2), 852–855 (1984)
9. V.P. Belash et al., Transformation of the electronic structure of Cu into Cu 2 O in the adsorption
of oxygen. Surf. Rev. Lett. 6(3–4), 383–388 (1999)
9 Hybridized Bonding
Table 9.1 (continued)
Refs.
Guest Host (X)
Anti-bond
M p dipole
> E F
Lone
pair < E F
M + (hole)
< R F
X-M bond
E F
[104]
−0.8
−4.4
[105]
1.5
−4
−5.5, −7.8
[106]
1.7
−3.0
−5.8
[69]
O
Ru(1010)
2.5
−2 ~ −
3.0
−5.0
[107]
MgO/Ag(001)
−3.0 ±
1.0
[108]
O
Co(Poly)
−2.0
−0.7
−5.0
[109]
O
C(diamond)
−3.0
[110]
O
CNT
0.8
[111]
O, S
Cu(001)P
−1.3
−6.0
[112]
O, S,
N
Ag(111)
−3.4
−8.0
[97, 111]
N
Cu(001)
3.0
−1.2
−5.6
−1.0
−4.0
−5.5
[67]
N
Ru(0001)
3.0
−3.0
−6.0
[111]
N
Ag(111)
−3.4
−8.0
[113]
TiCN
0.0 ± 1.0
−5.7
[114]
a-CN
−4.5
−7.1
[115]
CN
−2.3
Reprinted with permission from [46]
References
1. F.M. Chua, Y. Kuk, P.J. Silverman, Oxygen chemisorption on Cu(110): an atomic view by
scanning tunneling microscopy. Phys. Rev. Lett. 63(4), 386–389 (1989)
2. J. Tersoff, D. Hamann, Theory of the scanning tunneling microscope, in Scanning Tunneling
Microscopy (Springer, Heidelberg, 1985), pp. 59–67
3. J. Wintterlin, R.J. Behm, In the Scanning Tunnelling Microscopy I, ed. H.J. Günthert, R.
Wiesendanger (Springer, Berlin, 1992)
4. W. Jacob, V. Dose, A. Goldmann, Atomic adsorption of oxygen on Cu (111) and Cu (110).
Appl. Phys. A 41(2), 145–150 (1986)
5. W. Sesselmann et al., Probing the local density of states of metal-surfaces by deexcitation of
metastable noble-gas atoms. Phys. Rev. Lett. 50(6), 446–450 (1983)
6. C.Q. Sun, O-Cu(001): II. VLEED quantification of the four-stage Cu 3 O 2 bonding kinetics.
Surf. Rev. Lett. 8(6), 703–734 (2001)
7. C.Q. Sun, O-Cu(001): I. Binding the signatures of LEED, STM and PES in a bond-forming
way. Surf. Rev. Lett. 8(3–4), 367–402 (2001)
8. R. DiDio, D. Zehner, E. Plummer, An angle-resolved UPS study of the oxygen-induced
reconstruction of Cu (110). J. Vac. Sci. Technol., A 2(2), 852–855 (1984)
9. V.P. Belash et al., Transformation of the electronic structure of Cu into Cu 2 O in the adsorption
of oxygen. Surf. Rev. Lett. 6(3–4), 383–388 (1999)