English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The quantityt named the excess surface stress in our paper is in fact the total surface stress t ­ s1yAddsyde ­ dsydA, with s the surface energy per surface cell, as indeed borne out by its operative definition on p. 1052. implies that all occurrences of “excess stress” in the text should be replaced by “stress.” Also, the text from a related context” (p. 1052, 2nd column, 22nd line from bottom) to “of the stress, since,” (p. 1052, 18th line bottom), inclusive, is incorrect and should be suppressed. We apologize for the confusion this might have gener We also add that our intervening calculations of surface stress taking into account surface relaxation [see A. Filippetti et al., Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 408, 457 (1996); A Filippetti and V. Fiorentini, Surf. Sci. 377, 112 (1997); P. Alippi and M. Scheffler (unpublished)] indicate typical stress reductions of ,20% to 40% with respect to the values reported in our paper. We finally point out that none of our conclusion is changed by the above corrections.

Erratum: Reconstruction Mechanism of fcc Transition Metal (001) Surfaces [Phys. Rev. Lett. 71, 1051 (1993)]