Correlated interface electron gas in infinite-layer nickelate versus cuprate films on SrTiO$_3$(001)
Benjamin Geisler, Rossitza Pentcheva

TL;DR
This study uses first-principles calculations to compare electronic reconstructions in nickelate and cuprate films on SrTiO3, revealing differences in interfacial electron gas density and doping effects that influence their electronic structures.
Contribution
It provides a comparative analysis of nickelate and cuprate interfaces, highlighting how polarity mismatch and rare-earth ions affect electron gas formation and doping.
Findings
Higher q2DEG carrier density in nickelates due to polarity mismatch.
Electrostatic doping is stronger in cuprates despite expectations.
NdNiO2 films on polar substrates suppress q2DEG and self-doping.
Abstract
Based on first-principles calculations including a Coulomb repulsion term, we identify trends in the electronic reconstruction of NiO/SrTiO(001) ( Pr, La) and CuO/SrTiO(001) ( Ca, Sr). Common to all cases is the emergence of a quasi-two-dimensional electron gas (q2DEG) in SrTiO(001), albeit the higher polarity mismatch at the interface of nickelates vs. cuprates to the nonpolar SrTiO substrate ( vs. ) results in an enhanced q2DEG carrier density. The simulations reveal a significant dependence of the interfacial Ti band bending on the rare-earth ion in the nickelate films, being - larger for PrNiO and NdNiO than for LaNiO. Contrary to expectations from the formal polarity mismatch, the electrostatic doping in the films is twice as strong in cuprates as in nickelates. We demonstrate that the…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
