Tight-binding-layer

Fig. 3 (a) Crystal structure of (DMET)2FeBr4. The dotted and dashed lines denote the intermo-lecular anion—anion and donor-anion contacts, respectively, (b) Fermi surfaces obtained for a donor layer around z = 1/2 using the tight-binding approximation. The solid arrow represents the nesting vector Q (a b )/2... 

FIGURE 6.4 (a) The re-bands of a 2D graphene layer derived on the basis of the tight-binding method. The... 

Charlier et al. [48] used the tight-binding model to study distorted stacking of graphene layers, termed pregraphitic or turbostratic carbon. The turbostratic structure was obtained by generating an amorphous cluster of graphene plates that... 

To deal with the electronic structure of surfaces within the framework of the spin-polarized relativistic KKR formalism, the standard layer techniques used for LEED and photoemission investigations (Pendiy 1974) have been generalized by several authors (Fluchtmann et al. 1995 Scheunemann et al. 1994). As an alternative to this, Szunyogh and co-workers introduced the so-called screened version of the KKR method (Szunyogh et al. 1994, 1995). A firm basis for this approach has been supplied by the tight-binding (TB) KKR scheme introduced by Zeller etal. (1995). The corresponding spin-polarized relativistic version has been applied by various authors to multilayer and surface-layer systems (Nonas et al. 2001). 

The tight-binding (TB) approximation is commonly used for theoretical consideration of the electronic structure of carbon nanotubes [1]. But it is desired to have a simpler qualitative model to predict physical properties of nanotubes without bulky numerical calculations and to assist in analysis of experimental data. For example, in [2] the free-electron (FE) model has been used. The aim of this work is to improve this model by taking into account the finite thickness of nanotube conducting layer. We compare our FE approximation with the commonly used TB approach to determine its area of application. 

---