Abstract
Kinetic roughening of the (001) singular surface during steady crystal growth is studied on the basis of a lattice model using the Monte Carlo method. At a sufficiently low temperature, there are known to be two kinetic roughening points as the driving force for crystal growth increases. At a low driving force , there is the Karder–Parisi–Zhang (KPZ) roughening transition point. On the KPZ rough surface, elementary steps around islands are well defined though the surface is thermodynamically rough, with a roughness exponent consistent with the KPZ universal value of 0.3869. Island-on-island structures were found to be crucial in forming the KPZ rough surface. To understand the effects of the atomical roughness of the (001) surface and the interplay of steps on long-period undulations on this surface, the dependence on the temperature T and driving force for crystal growth of surface quantities is investigated. At higher temperatures, additional Berezinskii–Kosterlitz–Thouless (BKT) rough and re-entrant KPZ regions are found for large , where the crystal surface grows adhesively. A T– kinetic roughening diagram is also presented.
Subject terms: Nonlinear phenomena; Statistical physics; Surfaces, interfaces and thin films; Computational nanotechnology
Introduction
The “smooth” surface of a complete crystal is believed to grow by a two-dimensional (2D) nucleation process1–6. In the case where the surface grows in a 2D poly-nucleation process near equilibrium, researchers have recently clarified using the Monte Carlo method that the surface is thermodynamically rough even though it is atomically smooth7 and the step edges are well defined8. Here, thermodynamic roughness9–11 can be defined on the basis of the criteria at equilibrium
| 1 |
where L is the linear size of the system and , in which is the height of the surface at site , and represents the ensemble average. This thermodynamically rough but atomically smooth surface is a newly discovered kinetically roughened surface8 with the Kardar–Parisi–Zang (KPZ) roughness exponent12–14 (KPZ rough surface). This surface also maintains a strongly anisotropic surface growth rate8. This fact provides guidance toward explaining strongly anisotropic growth such as that for snow15 in the Mullins–Sekerka instability16. Whether this fact is unique to the surface at sufficiently low temperatures or is universally true at various temperatures is not yet clear.
In the crystal-growth research field, a kinetically roughened surface refers to a surface that grows via an adhesive growth process1,6,17,18. The kinetic roughening point is designated as , where is the driving force for crystal growth defined by . Here, is the chemical potential of the ambient phase and is the chemical potential of the crystal phase. The kinetic roughening point can be defined in several ways. One definition is 4,5, where is the nucleation barrier for the critical nucleus, is the Boltzmann constant, T is the temperature, a is the lattice constant of a cubic lattice, and is the step free energy per length. Cuppen et al.19 have proposed an alternative definition based on the observation of n-C22H44 crystal growth from n-hexane solutions17 and a Monte Carlo calculation reported by van Veenendaal et al.20. They defined as the zero point of the non-equilibrium step free energy, similar to the thermal roughening that belongs to the Brezinskii–Kosterliz–Thouless21–23 universality class (BKT rough surface).
In the BKT rough surface at equilibrium, is expressed by the wavenumber q for slope fluctuations caused by a capillary wave as 24–26, where g is a geometrical factor, is the determinant of the surface stiffness tensor, and m is a constant. When m is not zero, converges to a constant value (smooth surface); by contrast, when , diverges logarithmically because of the lower cut-off of the integral (the rough surface). At , , where is the thermal roughening temperature. The amplitude is specific to the BKT universal class25,27–29. The amplitude of the height–height correlation function on the rough surface is twice the amplitude of .
In statistical mechanics and non-linear physics, kinetic roughening refers to KPZ roughening30–32. When surface width W(L) is extended to a time-dependent surface width W(L, t) with , the fluctuating interface often obeys the Family–Vicsek scaling function30,31
| 2 |
where , , and z are the roughness, growth, and dynamical exponents, respectively. In the non-equilibrium steady state, the surface width is characterised by the roughness exponent . On the basis of the symmetry principle, we derive a surface-growth KPZ equation that includes a non-linear term12 as
| 3 |
where is the constant surface velocity, is a coefficient related to surface tension, is a coefficient for the non-linear term, and is white noise in space and time. In the case of a 2D surface in a three-dimensional (3D) system, the values of these exponents are predicted to be , , and 13.
The KPZ universality class is known to explain many non-equilibrium systems such as directed polymers and quantum systems14,33,34. However, in the case of crystal growth, the observed roughness exponents differ from those predicted by the KPZ model14,31,35, with the exception of several special surface systems36–38. Numerous studies have been conducted to determine why crystal surfaces do not become KPZ rough31. One of the reasons why KPZ behaviour cannot be observed in crystal growth is that surface diffusion occurs during growth using methods such as molecular beam epitaxy (MBE)31,33,39–42. In the case of epitaxial growth from the vapor phase, the Villain–Lai–Das Sarma (VLDS) class is known41,43,44. The exponents are , and . When , we know that , , and . Notably, far from equilibrium, the Mullins–Sekerka16 interface instability is caused by surface or volume diffusion2,4. This instability leads to dendritic growth4,45–47 and formation of other spatiotemporal patterns4,48–51. These patterns are self-similar rather than self-affine.
Another reason is step bunching or macrostep formation at equilibrium and near equilibrium52. Because of microscopic step–step attraction, macrosteps are formed at sufficiently low temperatures at equilibrium53–59. For , the terraces and side surfaces are atomically and thermodynamically smooth, where is a crossover point between 2D single and poly-nucleation processes at the lower edge of the macrostep59. The mean height of the macrosteps decreases as increases until disassembly occurs at 60–62. For , though both terraces and side surfaces are atomically smooth, W calculated by the Monte Carlo method diverges as . The provisional roughness exponent changes as following the shift of , and converges to in the limit of 52.
In this article, focusing on the (001) singular surface, we will clarify whether the KPZ roughening point and the “separate” crossover point to a BKT rough surface is a universal phenomenon or a phenomenon specific to the special temperature for nucleation-limited steady growth. To this end, the surface growth velocity V and surface width are calculated for several temperatures using the Monte Carlo method as a non-conserved system.
The microscopic model based on the Monte Carlo simulation is a restricted solid-on-solid (RSOS) model. Here, “restricted” means that the nearest-neighbour (nn) height difference is restricted to 0 and 63–65. The RSOS model is equivalent to the 19-vertex model66,67. The model can be mapped to a 2D XY spin model68, the 1D quantum spin 1 chain model69, and the 1D delta function Bose gas model70 at equilibrium. Unfortunately, the model cannot be solved exactly using the Bethe ansatz71. Therefore, the Monte Carlo method is adopted so that the entropy effect is precisely taken into account. The model is more microscopic than the phase field model on a mesoscopic scale15 or the continuous model for crystal growth1,2,72–74, whereas it is a more coarse-grained model than the atomic model used in first-principles quantum calculations75.
Results
Model and calculation method
RSOS model
The energy of a surface with an orientation close to (001) and exhibiting (001) terrace roughness can be expressed by the discrete Hamiltonian76
| 4 |
where h(n, m) is the surface height at site (n, m) on a square lattice, is the total number of lattice points, is the surface energy per unit cell on the planar (001) surface, and is the microscopic ledge energy associated with nn interactions. The summation with respect to (n, m) is over all sites on the square lattice. The RSOS condition, meaning that the height difference between nn sites is restricted to , is required implicitly. In this equation, is the driving force for crystal growth. To exclude diffusion effects, we assumed that the ambient phase is uniform. This assumption can be realised at the nanometre length scale near equilibrium. In the case where the ambient phase is an ideal solution, 77, where is the Boltzmann constant, T is the temperature, C is the concentration of the solute, and is the concentration of the solute at saturation.
If the ambient phase is an ideal gas, 78, where P is the gas pressure and is the gas pressure at equilibrium. Parameters and in the present model correspond to and in van Veenendaal et al.’s work20. The RSOS model is a more restricted model than the Kossel model used by van Veenendaal et al.20.
Because the RSOS model is a coarse-grained model used for first-principles quantum mechanical calculations, and are related to the surface free energy in the atomic model that includes the entropy for lattice vibrations and distortions75. Thus, these variables are affected by temperature. However, the present work assumes constant values for and in all of the calculations. On the other hand, the RSOS model is a microscopic model for continuous models or the mesoscopic phase field model. The step stiffness and surface stiffness in the RSOS model provide the values of the coefficient in the continuous1,2,72–74 or phase field model15.
Monte Carlo calculations
Crystal growth proceeds by the attachment or detachment of “atoms” at randomly chosen sites, where in this work “atom” means a specific unit or cube. The surface configuration was updated using the Metropolis algorithm. The transition probability was 1 for and was for , where is the surface energy of the initial configuration and is the surface energy of the proposed configuration. The surface energy was calculated on the basis of Eq. (4). The number of atoms in the crystal does not have to be conserved during the process, making the system a non-conserved system. The present work did not include atom exchange on the surface, i.e., surface diffusion was neglected. Note that the exponents for a fluctuating surface in a conserved system have different values than for non-conserved surfaces79.
The first Monte Carlo steps per site (MCS/site) were ignored, and each quantity was averaged over the subsequent MCS/site. After MCS/site, the calculated values were almost constant. For several parameter sets, we averaged over the next MCS/site ( MCS/site) and confirmed that the latter values agree with the former values within an error of 0.2%.
The surface slope p and the surface growth velocity V were calculated as macroscopic variables, such as
| 5 |
where is the number of steps, which was fixed during the simulation, is a lattice constant, and is set to MCS/site. Since the present study investigates the (001) surface of a simple cubic lattice, and p are zero.
Periodic boundary conditions were adopted in the vertical () and horizontal ([110]) directions at a rotation angle of 45 degrees around the axis. This is to allow a comparison of the present results with the figures in Ref.8. In Ref.8, surfaces tilted towards the (111) direction were also studied, where steps run in the direction. Figure 1 shows an example of the simulated surfaces for several temperatures and driving forces for crystal growth.
Fig. 1.
Examples of KPZ (panels (a) and (b)) and BKT (panels (c) and (d)) rough surfaces at MCS/site. Upper figures show overhead views where the surface height is indicated by brightness. Lower figures show side views. In the side views, the lines indicate the surface height at the bottom line of the overhead views. .
The squared surface width was calculated as
| 6 |
where W is the surface width normal to the surface, and are the [110] and directions, respectively, and and are the averages over the and directions, respectively. The calculated W scaled by or as a function of is shown in Fig. 2 for several temperatures.
Fig. 2.
Scaled surface widths as functions of . Upper figures: squared surface width scaled by where L is the size of the system. Lower figures: surface width W scaled by where is assumed to be a roughness exponent with the KPZ value (0.386913). Panel (a) is taken from Ref.8 licensed under CC BY 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0). Panels (b)–(d) show the present numerical results. Point A: . Point C: . Point D: . Point E: .
Though the RSOS model is simple, there are several external parameters: L, T, , and p (). In Ref.8, at the fixed temperature , L, , and p were systematically changed for a (001) singular surface, for which the KPZ roughening transition point was identified. For larger , a KPZ rough to BKT rough crossover point was also found. For , the surface fluctuation width W is divergent as L increases to with the KPZ roughness exponent. An analysis of the surface growth velocity V on the (001) surface, showed that agrees with the crossover point between 2D single nucleation to 2D poly-nucleation growth processes. However, whether can be regarded as the kinetic roughening point is not clear.
This article examines the and temperature dependence for a fixed surface slope (the (001) surface). For , islands are formed on (001) terraces by 2D nucleation. At higher temperatures, more thermally excited islands on (001) terraces are formed and the free energy of the steps decreases. The study systematically applies various driving forces for several typical temperatures, , 0.83, and 1.4, compared with the surface of .
KPZ rough surface
The driving-force dependence of the squared surface widths scaled by are shown in the upper figures in Fig. 2 for several temperatures. The lower figures show the surface widths scaled by with KPZ roughness exponent assumed to be 0.3869. Panels (b)–(d) show the present numerical results. The surface with (point A in Fig. 2a–c, lower figures) has a small surface width and a constant value as the system size increases. Hence, the surface is atomically and thermodynamically smooth in addition to being at equilibrium.
For , the surface width increases with increasing system size. Hence, the surfaces are thermodynamically rough according to the definition in Eq. (1). In particular, for (between points A and C in Fig. 2 (lower)), the surface width increases as , where . From the Monte Carlo results, the values of are determined to be the largest for the KPZ rough region. The values of and are listed in Table 1. The KPZ roughening transition point decreases with increasing temperature because the step tension decreases as the temperature increases. This KPZ roughening point agrees with the crossover point between the 2D single and poly-nucleation growth modes (refer to the “Surface growth rate” subsection).
Table 1.
Characteristic driving forces.
| A | A′ | C | D | E | F | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.4 | 2.00 | >2.6 | – | – | ||
| 0.63 | 1.30 | 2.10 | 2.50 | – | ||
| 0.83 | 0.6 | 1.30 | 2.30 | – | ||
| 1.0 | – | 0.07 | 1.00 | 2.10 | 2.70 | |
| 1.2 | – | – | – | >0 | 2.00 | |
| 1.4 | – | – | – | >0 | 1.90 | >2.6 |
For a temperature (Fig. 2d), it is higher than the phase transition point of the 2D nn Ising model , whereas the temperature is lower than the thermal roughening transition temperature 56,57,66, where is the thermal roughening temperature for the (001) surface. Clear and cannot be obtained.
In Fig. 1a and b, the overhead and side views of the simulated surfaces for KPZ roughened surfaces are shown at and 0.83, respectively. 2D island-on-island (multilayered island) structures are clearly observed. Islands smaller than the critical nucleus are also observed and are formed more frequently than the KPZ roughened surface at 8. These small islands are generated by thermal fluctuations. It is clear that the step edges around the islands are well defined. These observations indicate that the surfaces in panels (a) and (b) are atomically smooth even though they are thermodynamically rough. The surface grows via a 2D poly-nucleation process based on the well-defined surface steps. Notably, the growing surfaces are not always thermodynamically rough. For , surfaces are atomically and thermodynamically smooth (Fig. 2).
BKT rough surface
In the present work, a BKT rough region has been newly found for a large at low temperatures. In Fig. 2 (upper figures), a BKT rough region is observed between (points D in Fig. 2 (upper figures)) and (points E in Fig. 2 (upper figures)) for and 0.83. For , the is logarithmically divergent with L, similar to the thermal roughening of the BKT universality class. The values of and are listed in Table 1.
In the region from point D to point E (Fig. 2 (upper figure)), the values of (amplitude) are larger than the universal value of , which is the amplitude at 25,28. The surface structures in the regions are shown in Fig. 1c and d. Small islands and negative islands (clusters of holes) are so abundant that surface steps are not discernible. Therefore, the surfaces are not only thermodynamically rough but also atomically rough except for the ramified-step region near equilibrium. The ramified-step region is the region with , where is the smallest in the region with a linear surface growth rate. We will discuss in the next subsection “Surface growth rate”.
decreases as the temperature increases because the population of islands and negative islands generated by thermal fluctuations increases as the temperature increases. At temperatures higher than about for the 2D nn Ising model, the region (point E) is BKT rough. The KPZ rough region and the adjacent crossover region disappear.
At thermal equilibrium at , Fig. 2d shows that at is smaller than the universal value at . Consequently, the surface is thermodynamically smooth at . However, in the non-equilibrium steady state, W for is logarithmically divergent for a wide range of (Fig. 2d (upper figure)). To show the details around , a figure similar to Fig. 2d but with a scale magnified near is presented in Fig. 3. At equilibrium (), the data in both Fig. 3a and b are scattered. As the system size increases, converges to a constant value. Then, decreases as L increases (Fig. 3a). This is consistent with a thermodynamically smooth surface.
Fig. 3.
Magnified figures of scaled surface widths and surface velocity as functions of at . (a) scaled by . (b) W scaled by with . (c) Surface growth velocity V. Line: where and . C′ at indicates the smallest within the linear growth region.
For non-equilibrium steady growth, increases steeply up to and then increases gradually. with different L agrees well for all the data in Fig. 3a except for . It should be noted that decreases for . This feature is the same as that for the surface growth rate with a slightly lower temperature than shown by Gilmer and Bennema3. The model of Gilmer and Bennema adopted a more realistic transition probability than the present model, and surface diffusion was taken into consideration. However, the features of surface growth velocity are the same as in the present study. Since the different models show the same behaviour, this phenomenon is universal and independent of the details of the system. Therefore, we conclude that the surface is BKT rough for non-equilibrium though the surface is thermodynamically smooth at equilibrium at .
Surface growth rate
The dependence of the surface growth rate V on the driving force for the crystal growth, , is shown for several temperatures in Fig. 4a. A plot of is shown in Fig. 4b. The system size dependence of at A′ in Fig. 4b is shown in Fig. 4c.
Fig. 4.
Surface growth rates for several temperatures at the (001) surface () as functions of . The unit of surface growth rate is , where a () is the unit height and is the time interval for 1 MCS/site. . (a) V vs. . C′ at indicates the smallest within the linear growth region. Lines: . Values of k and C′ are listed in Table 2. (b) vs. Lines: . Lines with lighter colour: . Values of and are listed in Table 2. A′ at indicates the crossover point from single to poly-nucleation. (c) System size dependence of at . Line: , where . The converged values are listed in Table 1.
Near equilibrium, the surfaces grow in a 2D single nucleation process except for the surface at temperatures . On the basis of the 2D nucleation theory4,5,80, the nucleation barrier for a critical nucleus is expressed by as for a single nucleation process. The values of obtained by the Monte Carlo method , which are the slopes of the lines in Fig. 4b, are listed in Table 2. In Table 2, the values of calculated using the 2D nn Ising model are also listed. The Monte Carlo values for refer to Ref.8. The Ising model values agree well with the Monte Carlo results obtained using the values in the single nucleation region.
Table 2.
Formation free energy of the 2D critical nucleus and the adhesive growth point.
Here, the sizes of the critical nucleus at are about 4, 6, and 10 for , 0.63, and 0.83, respectively, based on the step free energy calculated by the 2D nn Ising model. Since becomes small as temperature rises, at increases as the temperature increases. is estimated from 1/4 of the total perimeter length of a nucleus because the shape of the nucleus is a rounded square due to the anisotropy of the step free energy.
For larger , the nucleation mode shifts to the poly-nucleation mode4,80. The points designated by A′ and are the crossover points between 2D single and 2D poly-nucleation. The lines for the poly-nucleation mode are shown with a lighter colour in Fig. 4b. The values of are listed in Table 2. In Fig. 4b, the slope clearly changes at point A′ except for the data at . Point A′ shifts to smaller with increasing temperature because the step tension for 2D nucleation decreases. According to the nucleation theory4,5,80, the slope should be 1/3 of ; however the Monte Carlo results are approximately 1/2 of .
The point A′ corresponds to the dynamic spinodal (DSP)81–83 for the 2D nn Ising model or 2D lattice gas model in the metastable state under an external field H or if the nucleation layer of the RSOS model is limited to one layer. and correspond to and , respectively, in the RSOS model. The single nucleation region4,80 in crystal growth corresponds to the single droplet (SD) regime81–83 for small The poly-nucleation region in the RSOS model approximately corresponds to the multidroplet (MD) regime. Since the crossover between single and poly-nucleation4,80 and the crossover between SD and MD are based on the Kolmogorov–Johnson–Mehl–Avrami (KJMA) picture, the area for nucleation shrinks as nucleation and growth proceeds. The surface growth rate decreases as time evolves. However, in the RSOS model, 2D nucleation is possible on 2D islands developed from 2D nuclei (Fig. 1a and b), which leads to steady surface growth with island-on-island structures. In the case of the 2D nn Ising model or 2D lattice gas model in the metastable state, is known to agree with 81,82. Therefore, the discrepancies between and originate from the island-on-island structures shown in Fig. 1a and b).
The surface growth rate in the single nucleation region4,80 and in the SD regime81,82 depends on the system size L. Hence, is expected to decrease to zero as the system size L increases to . The dynamic spinodal point 81,82 decreases to zero in the order of as . However, in the RSOS model, the Monte Carlo results for were found to converge to a value in the limit of . Then, we assumed has the following form:
| 7 |
where is a coefficient. In Fig. 4c, the L dependence of is shown at as an example. The converged value of at was 0.24. In this manner, the obtained converged values are listed in Table 1. The obtained values of agree with within the error.
At high temperatures of , the line slope increases as decreases, similar to the case for in Fig. 4b. Hence, we cannot determine A′ for , which is consistent with the vanishing of the KPZ rough region. The values in Table 2 for were estimated from the slope between points with the largest and next largest values. Since is around or above for the 2D nn Ising model, the values of at and 1.2 are estimated with the RSOS model using the product wave-function renormalization group (PWFRG) method84,85, which is a transfer matrix version86,87 of the density matrix renormalization group88, or tensor network methods89. These values are designated as . The values of are larger than the values of calculated by the PWFRG method.
For larger values, the surface growth rate V in Fig. 4a changes from a concave shape to a linear shape at the special driving force indicated by point C′ in Fig. 4 for , 0.63, and 0.83. The criterion used to determine point C′8 in the present work is the smallest for linear growth, which is designated as . The values of are listed in Table 2.
For and 0.63, the point C′ agrees with . However, C′ is not the same as for other temperatures. For , the surface steps are not discernible, and the surface grows adhesively. For , steps are discernible on the simulated surface though small clusters of adatoms and holes are frequently seen (Fig. 5a and b for example). On a short length scale, terraces can be seen and the local width90,91 of a step is large and islands have ramified shapes. The correlation length for the surface height at equilibrium at is 4.4a as calculated by the PWFRG method.
Fig. 5.
Examples of surfaces in the ramified-step region ((a) and (b)) and in the crossover region ((c) and (d)) at MCS/site. Upper figures show overhead views in which the surface height is indicated by brightness. The lower figures show side views. In the side views, lines show the surface height at the bottom line of the overhead views. The height–height correlation length at equilibrium is 4.4a, 2.0a, and 1.3a for , 0.83, and 0.63, respectively.
The ramified-step region also exists in the BKT rough region near equilibrium. As shown in Fig. 3c, V with small deviates from the line at .
The point C′ is regarded as the kinetic roughening point 1,4,5,19,20. The surface growth rate V for hardly depends on the system size. Thus, V is determined by a local structure on the surface, such as the kink density. According to the criterion that 5, the obtained are too large (Ref.5 in Table 2) for . Cuppen et al. estimated by considering the zeros of the non-equilibrium step free energy19,20 (Ref.19 in Table 2). Disregarding whether the non-equilibrium step free energy can be well defined, the idea is similar to thermal roughening. In our results, steps are not discernible on the surfaces for . Qualitatively, the temperature dependence of Cuppen et al.’s describes that for . Quantitatively, however, Cuppen et al.’s values are small compared with the values. The model of Cuppen et al. considered was the Kossel or absolute SOS (ASOS) model. Without the RSOS restriction, surface steps can fluctuate more easily than for the RSOS model. This leads to a lower thermal roughening temperature in the ASOS model than in the RSOS model at equilibrium.
The slope of the line, k, is expressed as . The values are listed in Table 2. Contrary to expectations, k decreases as the temperature increases. The primary reason for this behaviour is that differs from . At low temperatures, the absolute value of V is small up to relatively large . As increases further, V increases rapidly. Consequently, becomes large.
Crossover between KPZ and BKT rough surfaces
From Fig. 2, we can see that there are two crossover regions between KPZ rough and BKT rough surfaces. In the region between (points C) and (points D), the surface becomes power law rough and the roughness exponent appears to decrease to zero from the KPZ value as increases.
One reason for the crossover from KPZ rough to BKT rough surfaces originates in atomically roughening of the (001) surface. For , where the size of a critical nucleus becomes smaller than 2a8,61, small structures such as adatoms and clusters caused by 2D nuclei roughen the surface atomically. Eventually, the surface steps become difficult to see for (Fig. 5c and d). In addition, thermally excited structures such as adatoms, adholes, and their clusters are created frequently at high temperatures on the (001) surface by thermal fluctuations. In off-critical regions of , such as and 0.83, the population of small excited structures increases (Fig. 1a and b), which tends to roughen the surface atomically.
These small structures enhance or block the motion of steps. Islands or holes on a terrace with the same surface level enhance the step fluctuations to make the surface KPZ rough64; whereas islands or holes with a different surface level block the step fluctuations to make the surface BKT rough. For example, holes on terraces self-pin the step advancement. In this manner, the increase of atomical roughness decreases the fluctuation of steps, which tends to decrease the roughness exponent for the surface. This scenario can explain why KPZ rough surfaces cross over to BKT rough surfaces for increasing T and . The increase of atomical roughness can also explain why and become smaller as the temperature increases. It should be noted that the surface steps may not be well defined (Figs. 1c and d, and 5c and d) when the surface is sufficiently atomically rough. For such a surface, the extended step free energy19 may be zero. The intrinsic width of a one-dimensional interface in the 2D nn Ising model proposed by Bricmont et al.90,91 may be used to measure the atomical roughness for lattice systems. Evaluating the atomical roughness is a future problem to be studied.
There is another reason for crossovers from KPZ rough to BKT rough surfaces (point C and D) associated with the competition between the 2D nucleation rate and the step growth rate on the (001) surface (see the Supplementary Movie 1). Let us consider an atomically smooth (001) surface. Key parameters for the system are the mean distance between nuclei and mean time to cover one layer by the coalescence of islands or domains80,82. Here, we introduce another key quantity , the mean distance between surface steps. When a long-wavelength undulation is formed on the surface, a surface with a slope of , where and , is formed locally and is described by . For , namely a tilted surface with a sufficiently small step growth rate , islands grown from nuclei are built on the terraces between steps and a self affine island-on-island structure tends to make the surface power law or KPZ rough locally. When the local surface slope is steep, , or is sufficiently large, the islands on the terrace merge with the growing step before forming island-on-island structures. This suppresses surface undulation and tends to generate parallel step growth with a BKT rough surface locally. If we introduce as the swept time of a terrace by a step associated with the step growth rate , we have and the relationship is replaced by
We can obtain when or . 2D nuclei are assumed to appear on the terraces between steps with a step distance on the side of a multilayered island. Based on the restricted geometry picture, the 2D nucleation area is approximately . Since is described by and , where is the 2D nucleation rate per area as 80–82, and K is a kinetics dependent power, we have
| 8 |
Therefore, from the expression for , is obtained, which is close to .
The temperature and dependences of and , or and are complex. Thus, the physical competition between and , i.e., the step growth rate and 2D poly-nucleation rate on (001) terraces, drives multiple crossovers between KPZ rough and BKT rough surfaces.
There is another crossover region at even larger values of (points E in Fig. 2). Interestingly, for (points E) , the surface width approaches that for the KPZ universality class again. In contrast to the low KPZ rough surface, the surface in this KPZ region is atomically and thermodynamically rough with the surface growing in an adhesive growth process. The roughness exponent gradually increases from zero to the value for the KPZ universality class as increases. In Fig. 6, examples of the surface structures are shown for two temperatures. In addition to the small size in the up–down direction, long-period surface height fluctuations are observed.
Fig. 6.
Examples of re-entrant KPZ rough surfaces at MCS/site. Upper figures show overhead views where the heights are described by bright colours. Lower figures show side views. In the side views, lines show the surface height at the bottom line of the overhead views. .
Physically, re-entry into the KPZ rough region is probably caused by decreased detachment of atoms from the surface. The slope for linear growth changes around (Fig. 4a). Assuming that the shape of a critical nucleus is square because of a finite size effect8, the size of the critical nucleus equals one at . The phase corresponds to the mean-field spinodal (MFSP)81,82 for the 2D nn Ising model if the nucleation layer is limited that in the RSOS model. For , the atoms attached from the ambient phase onto the surface do not detach on average because . For the temperatures , 0.83, and 1.4, the slopes of the increase of the surface growth rate V with respect to change and almost agree with each other (Fig. 4a). This result means that the growth rate reaches approximately a maximum growth rate where the atoms rarely detach. Detachment of atoms decreases to almost zero as increases. The surface kinetics becomes similar to that for the (2+1) Eden model with a KPZ roughness exponent31,92.
As a summary of the kinetic roughening on the (001) surface, the T– kinetic roughening diagram is shown in Fig. 7. The upper right area coloured pale pink is the re-entrant KPZ rough region. In the “Smooth” region, the (001) surface is atomically and thermodynamically smooth.
Fig. 7.

T– kinetic roughening diagram on the (001) surface.
Discussion
Vicinal surfaces near the (001) surface at low temperatures, such as , were subjected to multiple crossovers between KPZ rough and BKT rough surfaces for p of 8. It was clarified that the competition between the step growth velocity and the 2D poly-nucleation rate on (001) terraces causes the multiple crossovers between KPZ rough and BKT rough surfaces, similar to the cases on the (001) surface. Multilayered islands are frequently formed on a (001) terrace for , which leads to a two-fold increase in V8, similar to the case in the work of Liu et al.17 or Zhang et al.93. To understand the multiple crossovers between KPZ rough and BKT rough surfaces including the change in surface slope, a kinetic roughening diagram will be helpful. Deriving the diagram for this case will require the calculation of a large number of parameter points in parameter space and will be published in a future report.
2D nucleation growth in the RSOS model corresponds to the droplet theory of nucleation for the 2D nn Ising model if the nucleation layer is limited to one. The nucleation rate per area is described by 81,82 (see subsection “Crossover between KPZ and BKT rough surfaces” in “Results” section). Here, for the 2D Ising model81,82. While, for 2D nucleation and growth theory4, where the surface diffusion effect on steps is taken into consideration.
A new result in this work is the non-zero at low temperatures. The reason for the non-zero values is not yet clear. However, from the Monte Carlo results (Fig. 4c), the data for a large system size line up when is taken as an appropriate value, agreeing with within the error. corresponds to in the d dimensional nn Ising model with 81,82. At , which is of the RSOS model and of the 2D nn Ising model, is close to zero and also becomes small. for the nn Ising model has typically been studied at about 0.8 81–83,94. It is possible that the low temperature property may be different from that near in the d-dimensional nn Ising model. A future study is anticipated.
In the present work, surface diffusion, volume diffusion, and elastic effects were not considered. The chemical potentials in the ambient and crystal phases were assumed to be uniform. The aim of this work is not to reproduce realistic crystal growth, but to clarify the competition between the KPZ and BKT universal behaviours on the roughness on the (001) singular surface as the temperature changes in a minimal surface model.
KPZ behaviour in crystal growth has only recently been identified14,31. Our model is the first step that shows KPZ behaviour in crystal growth associated with 2D nucleation. Since both RSOS and the Metropolis algorithm95,96 are well-established models, it is easy to determine whether the results are intrinsic to the model or an artefact with errors when an unexpected result is obtained. Our results for V and the morphology of the RSOS model with the Metropolis algorithm agree well with the van Veenendaal et al. results20 obtained by the Monte Carlo method with the Kossel model with a kinetic Monte Carlo algorithm at low temperatures. This agreement is so close that we do not think the results for W are an artefact specific to the surface kinetics based on the Metropolis algorithm. The Metropolis algorithm has been used until recently to study challenging subjects such as the metastable behaviour of spin-s Ising and Blume-Capel ferromagnets94. It is expected that future studies will apply various other models to the KPZ roughness.
Conclusions
The universality class of the kinetic surface roughness for the (001) surface changes in a complex way depending on the temperatures T and due to the competition between 1) the large period of undulation caused by multilayered islands and the small period of clusters of adatoms and holes and 2) the 2D nucleation rate and the step growth rate. The results of our Monte Carlo study of the (001) surface during interface-limited steady growth at several temperatures are summarised as follows:
is the KPZ roughening transition point in non-equilibrium. For , the surface is KPZ rough and grows continuously in the 2D poly-nucleation process at temperatures lower than the critical temperature of the 2D nn Ising model. The KPZ rough surface is atomically smooth but thermodynamically rough. and decrease as the temperature increases because the step free energy decreases. The 2D poly-nucleation rate increases drastically with decreasing step free energy.
agrees with the crossover point between 2D single and poly-nucleation growth regime , where .
For , the surface grows via adhesive growth. The surface is atomically and thermodynamically rough. decreases as the temperature increases.
For , the surface is BKT rough. decreases as the temperature increases. Multilayered islands and negative islands on the terrace develop well to suppress the free step fluctuations on the surface.
For , the surface again tends to become KPZ rough. Similar to the case for the (2+1) Eden model, atoms on the surface detach rarely. slightly decreases as the temperature increases.
Supplementary Information
Acknowledgements
The author wishes to acknowledge the encouragement provided by Prof. T. Sasada, Prof. T. Koshikawa, and Prof. T. Ohachi. Funding: This work was supported in part by a KAKENHI Grant-in-Aid (nos. JP22K03487 (N. A.), JP24H00432 (Y. K.)) from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS). This work was supported in part by JST SICORP Grant Number JPMJSC22C1, Japan (Y. K.). This work was also supported in part by a Collaborative Research Program (2022S3–CD–1, 2023S3–CD–1) of the Research Institute for Applied Mechanics, Kyushu University. The authors wish to thank FORTE Science Communications (https://www.forte-science.co.jp/ https://www.forte-science.co.jp/) for English language editing assistance.
Author contributions
N.A. conceived and conducted the Monte Carlo calculations, analysed the results, and wrote the main manuscript text. Y.K. provided knowledge and discussions on epitaxial growth.
Data availibility
The datasets used and/or analysed in the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
Declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Declaration of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process
During the preparation of this work, N.A. made use of Google Translate and DeepL to help in the translation of parts of the manuscript from Japanese to English. After using this tool/service, the authors reviewed and edited the content as needed and take full responsibility for the content of the publication.
Footnotes
Publisher's note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1038/s41598-024-79380-5.
References
- 1.Burton, W. K., Cabrera, N. & Frank, F. C. The growth of crystals and the equilibrium structure of their surfaces. Philos. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond. A243, 299–358 (1951). [Google Scholar]
- 2.Chernov, A. A. The spiral growth of crystals. Sov. Phys. USP4, 116–148 (1961). [Google Scholar]
- 3.Gilmer, G. H. & Bennema, P. Simulation of crystal growth with surface diffusion. J. Appl. Phys.43, 1347–1360 (1972). [Google Scholar]
- 4.Saito, Y. Statistical Physics of Crystal Growth (World Scientific, 1996). [Google Scholar]
- 5.Pimpinelli, A. & Villain, J. Physics of Crystal Growth (Cambridge University Press, 1998). [Google Scholar]
- 6.Bennema, P. Theory of growth and morphology applied to organic crystals; possible applications to protein crystals. J. Cryst. Growth122, 110–119 (1992). [Google Scholar]
- 7.Nishinaga, T., Sasaoka, C. & Chernov, A. A. A numerical analysis for the supersaturation distribution around LPE macrostep. Morphology and Growth Unit of Crystals (eds Sunagawa, I.) (Terra Scientific Publishing Company, 1989).
- 8.Akutsu, N. Kardar-Parisi-Zhang roughening associated with nucleation-limited steady crystal growth. Sci. Rep.13(16086), 1–13 (2023). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Chui, S. T. & Weeks, J. D. Phase transition in the two-dimensional Coulomb gas, and the interfacial roughening transition. Phys. Rev. B14, 4978–4982 (1976). [Google Scholar]
- 10.Weeks, J.D. The roughening transition. In Ordering in Strongly Fluctuation Condensed Matter Systems 293 (ed Riste, T.) (Plenum, 1980).
- 11.van Beijeren, H. Exactly solvable model for the roughening transition of a crystal surface. Phys. Rev. Lett.38, 993–996 (1977). [Google Scholar]
- 12.Kardar, M., Parisi, G. & Zhang, Y.-C. Dynamic scaling of growing interfaces. Phys. Rev. Lett.56, 889–892 (1986). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Pagnani, A. & Parisi, G. Numerical estimate of the Karder-Parisi-Zhang universality class in (2+1) dimensions. Phys. Rev. Lett.92, 010101 (2015). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Takeuchi, K. A. An appetizer to modern developments on the Kardar-Parisi-Zhang universality class. Physica A504, 77–105 (2018). [Google Scholar]
- 15.Demange, G., Zapolsky, H., Patte, R. & Brunel, M. A phase field model for snow crystal growth in three dimensions. npj Comput. Mater.3, 15 (2017). [Google Scholar]
- 16.Mullins, W. W. & Sekerka, R. F. Stability of a planar interface during solidification of a dilute binary alloy. J. Appl. Phys.35, 444–451 (1964). [Google Scholar]
- 17.Liu, X.-Y., Bennema, P. & van der Eerden, J. P. Rough-flat-rough transition of crystal surfaces. Nature356, 778–780 (1992). [Google Scholar]
- 18.Liu, X.-Y., van Hoof, P. & Bennema, P. Surface roughening of normal alkane crystals: Solvent dependent critical behavior. Phys. Rev. Lett.71, 109–112 (1993). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Cuppen, H. M., Meekes, H., van Enckevort, W. J. P., Vlieg, E. & Knops, H. J. F. Nonequilibrium free energy and kinetic roughening of steps on the Kossel(001) surface. Phys. Rev. B69(245404), 1–6 (2004). [Google Scholar]
- 20.Van Veenendaal, E., van Hoof, P. J. C. M., van Suchtelen, J., van Enckevort, W. J. P. & Bennema, P. Kinetic roughening of the Kossel (100) surface: Comparison of classical criteria with Monte Carlo results. Surf. Sci.417, 121–138 (1998). [Google Scholar]
- 21.Berezinskii, V. L. Destruction of long-range order in one-dimensional and two-dimensional systems having a continuous symmetry group I. Classical systems. Sov. Phys. JETP32, 493–500 (1971). [Google Scholar]
- 22.Kosterlitz, J. M. & Thouless, D. J. Ordering, metastability and phase transitions in two-dimensional systems. J. Phys. C6, 1181–1203 (1973). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Beijeren, V. H. & Nolden, I. The roughening transition. In Structure and Dynamics of Surfaces Vol. 2 (eds Schommers, W. & Blancken-Hagen, V.) 259–300 (Springer, 1987). [Google Scholar]
- 24.Jasnow, D. Critical phenomena at interfaces. Rep. Prog. Phys.47, 1059–1132 (1984). [Google Scholar]
- 25.Akutsu, N. & Akutsu, Y. Roughening, faceting and equilibrium shape of two-dimensional anisotropic interface. I. Thermodynamics of interface fluctuations and geometry of equilibrium crystal shape. J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.56, 1443–1453 (1987). [Google Scholar]
- 26.Bennet, J., Llombart, P., Sanz, E. & MacDowell, L. G. Premelting-induced smoothing of the ice-vapor interface. Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 096101 (2016). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Jayaprakash, C., Saam, W. F. & Teitel, S. Roughening and facet formation in crystals. Phys. Rev. Lett.50, 2017–2020 (1983). [Google Scholar]
- 28.Akutsu, Y., Akutsu, N. & Yamamoto, T. Universal jump of Gaussian curvature at the facet edge of a crystal. Phys. Rev. Lett.61, 424–427 (1988). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Yamamoto, T., Akutsu, Y. & Akutsu, N. Universal behavior of the equilibrium crystal shape near the facet edge. I. A generalized terrace-step-kink model. J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.57, 453–460 (1988). [Google Scholar]
- 30.Vicsek, T. Surface Disordering: Growth, Roughening, and Phase Transitions (eds.Jullien, R., Kertesz, J., Meakin, P., Wolf, D. E.) 155 (Nova Science, 1992).
- 31.Barabasi, A. L. & Stanley, H. E. Fractal Concepts in Surface Growth (Cambridge University Press, 1995). [Google Scholar]
- 32.Krug, J. & Spohn, H. Solids Far From Equilibrium (ed Godrèche, C), 479 (Cambridge University Press, 1991).
- 33.Krug, J. Origins of scale invariance in growth processes. Adv. Phys.46, 139–282 (1977). [Google Scholar]
- 34.Fujimoto, K., Hamazaki, R. & Kawaguchi, Y. Family-Vicsek scaling of roughness growth in a strongly interacting Bose gas. Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 210604 (2020). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Krim, J. & Palasantzas, G. Experimental observations of self-affine scaling and kinetic roughening at sub-micron length scales. Int. J. Mod. Phys. B9, 599–632 (1995). [Google Scholar]
- 36.Gupta, I. & Mohanty, B. C. Dynamics of surface evolusion in semiconductor thin films grown from a chemical bath. Sci. Rep.6, 33136 (2016). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Almeid, R. A. L., Ferreira, S. O., Ferraz, I. & Oliveira, T. J. Initial pseudo-steady state & asymptotic KPZ universality in semiconductor on poymer deposition. Sci. Rep.7, 3773 (2017). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
-
38.Carrasco, I.S.S., Machado, E.A., & Aar
o Reis, F.D.A. Simulations of dissolution of initially flat calcite surfaces: Retreat velocity control and surface roughness scaling. ACS Earth Space Chem.5, 2755–2767 (2021).
- 39.Zangwill, A. Some causes ad a consequance of epitaxial roughening. J. Cryst. Growth63, 8–21 (1996). [Google Scholar]
- 40.Reis, F. D. A. A. Numerical study of discrete models in the class of the nonlinear molecular beam epitaxy equation. Phys. Rev. E70, 031607 (2004). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Reis, F. D. A. A. Dynamic scaling in thin-film growth with irreversible step-edge attachment. Phys. Rev. E81, 041605 (2010). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42.Petrov, P. & Gogova, D. Surface roughness evolution in a solid-on-solid model of epitaxial growth. Appl. Phys. A118, 337–343 (2015). [Google Scholar]
- 43.Villain, J. Continuum models of crystal growth from atomic beams with and without desorption. J. Phys.I(1), 19–42 (1991). [Google Scholar]
- 44.Wolf, D. E. Kinetic roughening of vicinal surface. Phys. Rev. Lett.67, 1783–1786 (1991). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45.Langer, J. S. Instabilities and pattern formation in crystal growth. Rev. Mod. Phys.52, 1–30 (1980). [Google Scholar]
- 46.Furukawa, Y. & Shimada, W. Three-dimensional pattern formation during growth of ice dendrites - its relation to universal law of dendritic growth. J. Cryst. Growth128, 234–239 (1993). [Google Scholar]
- 47.Fujiwara, K., Maeda, K., Usami, N. & Nakajima, K. Growth mechanism of Si-faceted dendrites. Phys. Rev. Lett.101, 055503 (2008). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48.Sato, M., Uwaha, M. & Saito, Y. Instabilities of steps induced by the drift of adatoms and effect of the step permeability. Phys. Rev. B62, 8452–8472 (2000). [Google Scholar]
- 49.Pimpinelli, A., Tonchev, V., Videcoq, A. & Vladimirova, M. Scaling and universality of self-organized patterns on unstable vicinal surfaces. Phys. Rev. Lett.88, 206103 (2002). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50.Tokairin, M., Fujiwara, K., Kutsukake, K., Usami, N. & Nakajima, K. Formation mechanism of a faceted interface: In situ observation of the Si(100) crystal-melt interface during crystal growth. Phys. Rev. B80(174108), 1–4 (2009). [Google Scholar]
- 51.Krasteva, A., Popova, H., Akutsu, N. & Tonchev, V. Time scaling relations for step bunches from models with step-step attractions (B1-type models). AIP Conf. Proc. 220015, Vol. 1722 (2016).
- 52.Akutsu, N. Faceted-rough surface with disassembling of macrosteps in nucleation-limited crystal growth. Sci. Rep.11(3711), 1–11 (2021). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 53.Akutsu, N., Akutsu, Y. & Yamamoto, T. Thermal step bunching and interstep attraction on the vicinal surface with adsorption. Phys. Rev. B67, 125407 (2003). [Google Scholar]
- 54.Akutsu, N. Thermal step bunching on the restricted solid-on-solid model with point contact inter-step attractions. Appl. Surf. Sci.256, 1205–1209 (2009). [Google Scholar]
- 55.Akutsu, N., Hibino, H. & Yamamoto, T. A lattice model for thermal decoration and step bunching in vicinal surface with sub-monolayer adsorbates. e-J. Surf. Sci. Nanotechnol.7, 39–44 (2009). [Google Scholar]
- 56.Akutsu, N. Non-universal equilibrium crystal shape results from sticky steps. J. Phys. Condens. Matter23(485004), 1–17 (2011). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 57.Akutsu, N. Faceting diagram for sticky steps. AIP Adv.6, 035301 (2016). [Google Scholar]
- 58.Akutsu, N. Profile of a faceted macrostep caused by anomalous surface tension. Adv. Condens. Matter Phys.2017, 2021510 (2017). [Google Scholar]
- 59.Akutsu, N. & Akutsu, Y. Slope-temperature faceting diagram for macrosteps at equilibrium. Sci. Rep.12(17037), 1–11 (2022). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 60.Akutsu, N. Disassembly of faceted macrosteps in the step droplet zone in non-equilibrium steady state. Crystals7, 7020042 (2017). [Google Scholar]
- 61.Akutsu, N. Height of a faceted macrostep for sticky steps in a step-faceting zone. Phys. Rev. Mater.2, 023603 (2018). [Google Scholar]
- 62.Akutsu, N. Relationship between macrostep height and surface velocity for a reaction-limited crystal growth process. Cryst. Growth Des.19, 2970–2978 (2019). [Google Scholar]
- 63.Amar, J. G. & Family, F. Phase transition in a restricted solid-on-solid surface-growth model in 2+1 dimensions. Phys. Rev. Lett.64, 543 (1990). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 64.Krug, J. & Spohn, H. Mechanism for rough-to-rough transitions in surface growth. Phys. Rev. Lett.64, 2332–2332 (1990). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 65.Müller-Krumbhaar, H. Current Topics in Materials Science (eds Kaldis, E.) Vol. 1, Cha. 1 1 (North-Holland Publishing, 1978).
- 66.den Nijs, M. Corrections to scaling and self-duality in the restricted solid-on-solid model. J. Phys. A Math. Gen.18, L549–L556 (1985). [Google Scholar]
- 67.Akutsu, Y. Exact landau free-energy of solvable N-state vertex model. J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.58, 2219–2222 (1989). [Google Scholar]
- 68.Knops, H. J. F. Exact relation between the solid-on-solid model and the XY model. Phys. Rev. Lett.39, 766–769 (1977). [Google Scholar]
- 69.Den Nijs, M. & Rommelse, K. Preroughening transitions in crystal surfaces and valence-bond phases in quantum spin chains. Phys. Rev. B1989(40), 4709–4734 (1989). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
-
70.Okunishi, K., Hieida, Y. & Akutsu, Y.
-function Bose-gas picture of S= 1 antiferromagnetic quantum spin chains near critical fields. Phys. Rev. B59, 6806–6812 (1999). [Google Scholar] - 71.Bethe, H. A. Zur theorie der metalle. Zeit. für Physik71, 205–226 (1931). [Google Scholar]
- 72.Müller-Krumbhaar, H., Burkhardt, T. W. & Kroll, D. M. A generalized kinetic equation for crystal growth. J. Cryst. Growth38, 13–22 (1977). [Google Scholar]
- 73.Enomoto, Y., Kawasaki, K., Ohta, T. & Ohta, S. Interface dynamics under the anisotropic surface tension. Phys. Lett.107, 319–323 (1985). [Google Scholar]
- 74.Van der Eerden, J. P. The advance velocity of steps under the influence of volume and surface diffusion, by direct and indirect incorporation of growth units. J. Cryst. Growth56, 174–188 (1982). [Google Scholar]
- 75.Kempisty, P. & Kangawa, Y. Evolution of the free energy of the GaN(0001) surface based on first-principles phonon calculations. Phys. Rev. B100, 085304 (2019). [Google Scholar]
- 76.Akutsu, N. Crossover from BKT-rough to KPZ-rough surfaces for interface-limited crystal growth/recession. Sci. Rep.10(13057), 1–11 (2020). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 77.Widom, B. Statistical Mechanics: A Concise Introduction for Chemists (Cambridge University Press, 2002). [Google Scholar]
- 78.Akutsu, N. Equilibrium crystal shape of planar ising antiferromagnets in external fields. J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.61, 477–498 (1992). [Google Scholar]
- 79.Ohta, T., Jasnow, D. & Kawasaki, K. Universal scaling in the motion of random interfaces. Phys. Rev. Lett.49, 1223–1226 (1982). [Google Scholar]
- 80.Ookawa, A. Crystal Growth (Syōkabō, 1977) (in Japanese). [Google Scholar]
- 81.Novotny, M. A., Rikvold, P. A., Kolesik, M., Townsley, D. M. & Ramos, R. A. Simulations of metastable decay in two-and three-dimensional models with microscopic dynamics. J. Non-Crystaaline Solid274, 356–363 (2000). [Google Scholar]
- 82.Rikvold, P. A., Tomita, H., Miyashita, S. & Sides, S. W. Metastable lifetimes in a kinetic Ising model: Dependence on field and system size. Phys. Rev. E49, 5080–5090 (1994). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 83.Ramos, R. A., Rikvold, P. A. & Novotny, M. A. Test of the Kolmogorov-Johnson-Mehl-Avrami picture of metastable decay in a model with microscopic dynamics. Phys. Rev. B59, 9053–9069 (1999). [Google Scholar]
- 84.Akutsu, N. & Akutsu, Y. Thermal evolution of step stiffness on the Si (001) surface: Temperature-rescaled Ising-model approach. Phys. Rev. B57, R4233–R4236 (1998). [Google Scholar]
- 85.Akutsu, N. & Akutsu, Y. The equilibrium facet shape of the staggered body-centered-cubic solid-on-solid model—A density matrix renormalization group study. Prog. Theor. Phys.116, 983–1003 (2006). [Google Scholar]
- 86.Nishino, T. & Okunishi, K. Product wave function renormalization group. J. Phys. Soc. Jpn.64, 4084–4087 (1995). [Google Scholar]
- 87.Hieida, Y., Okunishi, K. & Akutsu, Y. Magnetization process of a one-dimensional quantum antiferromagnet: The product-wave-function renormalization group approach. Phys. Lett. A233, 464–470 (1997). [Google Scholar]
- 88.White, S. R. Density matrix formulation for quantum renormalization groups. Phys. Rev. Lett.69, 2863–2866 (1992). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 89.Orús, Román. Tensor networks for complex quantum systems. Nat. Rev. Phys.1, 538–550 (2019). [Google Scholar]
- 90.Bricmont, J., Lebowitz, J. L. & Pfister, C. E. On the local structure of the phase separation line in the two-dimensional Ising system. J. Stat. Phys.26, 313–332 (1981). [Google Scholar]
- 91.Akutsu, Y. & Akutsu, N. Intrinsic structure of the phase-separation line in the two-dimensional Ising model. J. Phys. A20, 5981–5990 (1987). [Google Scholar]
- 92.Devillard, P. & Stanley, E. Scaling properties of Eden clusters in three and four dimensions. Physica A160, 298–309 (1989). [Google Scholar]
- 93.Zhang, H. et al. Rapid solidification of non-stoichiometric intermetallic compounds: Modeling and experimental verification. Acta Materialia148, 86–99 (2018). [Google Scholar]
-
94.Naskar, M., Acharyya, M., Vatanserver, E. & Fytas, N. G. Metastable hehavior of the spin-
Ising and Blume-Capel ferromagnets: A Monte Carlo study. Phys. Rev. E104, 014107 (2021).
[DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] - 95.Buendia, G. M., Rikvold, P. A. & Kolesik, M. Microstructure and velocity of field-driven solid-on-solid interfaces moving under stochastic dynamics with local energy barriers. Phys. Rev. B73, 045437 (2006). [Google Scholar]
- 96.Buendia, G. M., Rikvold, P. A. & Kolesik, M. Field-driven solid-on-solid interfaces moving under a stochastic Arrhenius dynamics: Effects of the barrier height. J. Molec. Struc.769, 207–210 (2006). [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Supplementary Materials
Data Availability Statement
The datasets used and/or analysed in the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.






