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

We show how to correctly extract from the ellipsometric data the surfacesusceptibility and the surface conductivity that describe the opticalproperties of monolayer $\rm MoS_2$. Theoretically, these parameters stem frommodelling a single-layer two-dimensional crystal as a surface current, a trulytwo-dimensional model. Currently experimental practice is to consider thismodel equivalent to a homogeneous slab with an effective thickness given by theinterlayer spacing of the exfoliating bulk material. We prove that the error inthe evaluation of the surface susceptibility of monolayer $\rm MoS_2$, owing tothe use of the slab model, is at least 10% or greater, a significantdiscrepancy in the determination of the optical properties of this material.

Measurement of the surface susceptibility and the surface conductivity of atomically thin $\rm MoS_2$ by spectroscopic ellipsometry