Skip to main content
. 2022 Nov 9;9(36):2204684. doi: 10.1002/advs.202204684

Figure 4.

Figure 4

The inflection‐point gap of Gr on liquid Cu and solid Cu(111) (with different Gr‐sheet strains as indicated in the legend) against simulation temperature for the MTP@PBE+MBD potential. The −0.1% data points correspond to the gigantic c(27 × 27√3) simulation cell employed for the quantitative “gap” comparison with the experiment.