% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded.  This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.

@ARTICLE{Stasevich:43042,
      author       = {Stasevich, T. J. and Einstein, T. L. and Zia, R. K. P. and
                      Giesen, M. and Ibach, H. and Szalma, F.},
      title        = {{E}ffects on next-nearest-neighbor interactions on the
                      orientation dependence of step stiffness: {R}econciling
                      theory with experiment for {C}u(001)},
      journal      = {Physical review / B},
      volume       = {70},
      number       = {24},
      issn         = {1098-0121},
      address      = {College Park, Md.},
      publisher    = {APS},
      reportid     = {PreJuSER-43042},
      pages        = {245404},
      year         = {2004},
      note         = {Record converted from VDB: 12.11.2012},
      abstract     = {Within the solid-on-solid (SOS) approximation, we carry out
                      a calculation of the orientational dependence of the step
                      stiffness on a square lattice with nearest- and
                      next-nearest-neighbor interactions. At low temperature our
                      result reduces to a simple, transparent expression. The
                      effect of the strongest trio (three-site, nonpairwise)
                      interaction can easily be incorporated by modifying the
                      interpretation of the two pairwise energies. The work is
                      motivated by a calculation based on nearest neighbors that
                      underestimates the stiffness by a factor of 4 in directions
                      away from close-packed directions, and a subsequent estimate
                      of the stiffness in the two high-symmetry directions alone
                      that suggested that inclusion of next-nearest-neighbor
                      attractions could fully explain the discrepancy. As in these
                      earlier papers, the discussion focuses on Cu(001).},
      keywords     = {J (WoSType)},
      cin          = {ISG-3 / ISG-4},
      ddc          = {530},
      cid          = {I:(DE-Juel1)VDB43 / I:(DE-Juel1)VDB44},
      pnm          = {Kondensierte Materie},
      pid          = {G:(DE-Juel1)FUEK242},
      shelfmark    = {Physics, Condensed Matter},
      typ          = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
      UT           = {WOS:000226112300087},
      doi          = {10.1103/PhysRevB.70.245404},
      url          = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/43042},
}