<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd"><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en" article-type="research article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">JMP</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Journal of Modern Physics</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2153-1196</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Scientific Research Publishing</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/jmp.2021.1210084</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">JMP-111068</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="Discipline-v2"><subject>Physics&amp;Mathematics</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>
 
 
  Electronic Transport of Uranium Mononitride
 
</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Barbara</surname><given-names>Szpunar</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref><xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1"><sup>*</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Jayangani</surname><given-names>I. Ranasinghe</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Jerzy</surname><given-names>A. Szpunar</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff2"><addr-line>Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff1"><addr-line>Department of Physics and Engineering Physics, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada</addr-line></aff><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>03</day><month>08</month><year>2021</year></pub-date><volume>12</volume><issue>10</issue><fpage>1349</fpage><lpage>1357</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>14,</day>	<month>April</month>	<year>2021</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>1,</day>	<month>August</month>	<year>2021</year>	</date><date date-type="accepted"><day>4,</day>	<month>August</month>	<year>2021</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>&#169; Copyright  2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. </copyright-statement><copyright-year>2014</copyright-year><license><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><p>
 
 
  We investigated the electronic heat capacity, thermal conductivity, and resistivity of UN using Quantum Espresso and EPW code. GGA, PBEsol functional was used. The calculated electronic heat coefficient was found to be significantly reduced (0.0176 J
  &amp;sdot;mol
  <sup>&amp;minus;1</sup>
  &amp;sdot;K
  <sup>&amp;minus;2</sup> versus 0.0006 J
  &amp;sdot;mol
  <sup>&amp;minus;1</sup>
  &amp;sdot;K
  <sup>&amp;minus;2</sup>) when the non-local hybrid functional (B3LYP) was used. Furthermore, we calculated electrical resistivity using a very transparent Ziman’s formula for metals with the Eliashberg transport coupling function as implemented in EPW code for non-spin-polarized calculations. The number of mobile electrons in UN, as a function of temperature, was derived from the ratio of the calculated resistivity and available experimental data. The electronic thermal conductivity was evaluated from the calculated electronic resistivity via Wiedemann-Franz law with the number of mobility electrons (
  <em>n<sub>av</sub></em>) incorporated (averaged over the temperature range 300 K - 1000 K). Both the electronic thermal conductivity and resistivity, as calculated using newly evaluated 
  <em>n<sub>av</sub></em>, compare well with experimental data at ~700 K, but to reproduce the observed trend as a function of temperature, the number of mobile electrons must decrease with the temperature as evaluated.
 
</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>UN</kwd><kwd> Electronic Thermal Conductivity</kwd><kwd> Electronic Structure</kwd><kwd> Number of Mobility Electrons</kwd><kwd> Quantum ESPRESSO</kwd><kwd> EPW Codes</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body><sec id="s1"><title>1. Introduction</title><p>Urania fuel, which is used in conventional nuclear reactors, is not suitable for some designs of new generation reactors (e.g., SuperCritical Water Reactor) due to its low thermal conductivity [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.111068-ref1">1</xref>] . In the context of finding a sustainable development solution to the use of non-renewable energy sources, innovative research towards enhanced accident-tolerant nuclear fuel (EATF) that can withstand the loss of coolant for a long time is gaining momentum. EATF materials must have higher thermal conductivities to prevent meltdown [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.111068-ref2">2</xref>] . High-density metallic compounds, uranium silicide (U<sub>3</sub>Si<sub>2</sub>) and uranium and thorium nitrides (UN, ThN) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.111068-ref3">3</xref>] , have been proposed as alternative EATFs [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.111068-ref2">2</xref>] for implementation as lower enrichment fuel.</p><p>In our previous papers [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.111068-ref4">4</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.111068-ref5">5</xref>] , we have investigated UN, which has the same cubic structure ( F m 3 &#175; m symmetry) as ThN, and may be used in combination to enhance thermal conductivity as both are metals. In these metallic fuels, thermal conductivity does not deteriorate with increasing temperature like the lattice-governed thermal conductivity in insulators (e.g. urania [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.111068-ref6">6</xref>] ). This is due to the increasing presence of electronic carriers with mobility as temperature rises. Since both electronic conductivity and electronic contribution to thermal conductivity are related to electron mobility, they can be derived from each other via the Wiedemann-Franz proportionality law (WFL), which is very useful in determining the contribution from electrons to the measured total thermal conductivity.</p><p>Enhanced computational capabilities have led to significant developments in extending the potentialities of based on density functional theory (DFT) codes. Ab initio calculations based on DFT have become an essential theoretical tool in investigating novel nuclear materials. In this study, we used first-principles, predictive calculations based on DFT, where ground state energy is calculated using functionals dependent on the electronic density only. Unlike urania, fewer such studies have been done on these alternative fuels. In particular number of mobility, electrons need to be investigated, since they are crucial in enhancing the thermal conductivity of metals at high temperatures. High thermal conductivity in metallic fuels allows for fast heat dissipation and makes reactors safer and more economical.</p><p>In an evaluation of the electronic heat capacity, very accurate calculations of electrondensities of states are required. In our previous work on thoria [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.111068-ref7">7</xref>] , we found that the non-local hybrid functional (B3LYP) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.111068-ref8">8</xref>] modified the electronic structure significantly and led to a larger bandgap. It was therefore of interest to examine the electronic structure of UN using B3LYP to find how it might affect the value of the electronic heat capacity coefficient of UN, as evaluated here.</p></sec><sec id="s2"><title>2. Calculation Methodology</title><p>To evaluate the geometrical and electronic structures of UN we used Quantum ESPRESSO (QE) code [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.111068-ref9">9</xref>] , since there is already an interface provided between QE and EPW (Electron-Phonon coupling using Wannier functions) code [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.111068-ref10">10</xref>] , which we used to evaluate electronic transport.</p><p>We calculated the electronic heat capacity coefficient (γ), which is proportional to the electron density of states at Fermi energy at the equilibrium lattice constants using the density of states of electrons per eV at the Fermi energy (ρ(ε<sub>F</sub>)) for UN from:</p><p>C e ( T ) = π / 3 &#215; 6.242 &#215; 10 18 ρ ( ε F ) N A k B 2 T ≡ γ T (1)</p><p>The respective electronic heat capacity is proportional to γ and increases linearly with temperature and can be evaluated using Equation (1). A very accurate evaluation of the electronic structure was required; therefore, in addition to generalized gradient approximation (GGA) of the Perdew, Burke, and Ernzerhof functional developed for solids (PBEsol) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.111068-ref11">11</xref>] DFT, we used non-local Becke three-parameter hybrid exchange (B3)+LYP functional (B3LYP) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.111068-ref8">8</xref>] to modify the electronic structure around Fermi energy, and the respective electronic heat coefficients were compared. We used the same norm-conserved pseudopotentials and setup for the electronic structure calculations as detailed in our previous work on UN [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.111068-ref5">5</xref>] .</p><p>Using the density functional perturbation theory (DFPT) method as implemented in QE code [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.111068-ref12">12</xref>] , we evaluated previously [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.111068-ref5">5</xref>] the phonons’ dispersion relation and the densities of states of UN.</p><p>We computed the electrical resistivity calculation (ρ<sub>calc</sub>(T)) using a very transparent Ziman’s formula for metals (Equation 54 in Ref. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.111068-ref10">10</xref>] ) with the Eliashberg transport coupling function: α t r 2 F ( ω ) (Equation 55 in Ref. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.111068-ref10">10</xref>] ) and a hardcoded number of mobility electrons (nc) per cell equal to 8 (assumed for lead as an example) as implemented in EPW code [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.111068-ref10">10</xref>] :</p><p>ρ c a l c ( T ) = 4 π m e n e 2 k B T &#215; ∫ 0 ∞ d ω ℏ α t r 2 F ( ω ) n ( ω , T ) [ 1 + n ( ω , T ) ] (2)</p><p>where n = nc/omega and omega is the calculated in the code volume of the primitive cell in a.u.. Note that in the new version (QE 6.7) nc is a parameter with the default value equal to (4).</p><p>We also calculated integrated electron-phonon strength (λ) as a function of frequency (ω) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.111068-ref10">10</xref>] :</p><p>λ = ∫ 0 ω α t r 2 F ( ω ) ω d ω (3)</p><p>The cumulative electron-phonon strength and Eliashberg transport coupling function could be used in future comparisons with other metallic fuels. Additionally, since the experimental resistivity is known for UN, we evaluated the effective number of electron carriers in electronic transport (n<sub>eff</sub>(T)):</p><p>n e f f ( T ) = 8 ρ ( T ) c a l c ρ ( T ) e x p (4)</p><p>When replacing n, the number of mobility electrons in Equation (2) with n<sub>eff</sub>(T), the calculated resistivity would become equal to the experimental. We also calculated averages of an effective number of electron carriers in the 300 K - 1000 K temperature range (n<sub>av</sub>) and calculated resistivity by replacing n with n<sub>av</sub>.</p><p>The electronic contribution to the thermal conductivity (κ<sub>e</sub>) can be calculated via Wiedemann-Franz law [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.111068-ref13">13</xref>] from the electrical conductivity (σ) or resistivity (ρ(T) = σ(T)<sup>−1</sup>):</p><p>κ e = π 3 ( k B e ) 2 σ T (5)</p><p>where k<sub>B</sub> is the Boltzmann constant, e is the electron charge, and T is the temperature in K. We calculated electronic thermal conductivity using the n<sub>av</sub> number of mobility electrons of Un and compared results with the experiment.</p></sec><sec id="s3"><title>3. Results and Discussion</title><p>Here we adopted for UN the same parameters and norm-conserving pseudopotentials: U.pbesol-n-nc.UPF and N.pbesol-nc.UPF from QE code as in our previous studies [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.111068-ref5">5</xref>] . We assumed 5f<sup>3</sup>, 6d<sup>1</sup>, 7s<sup>2</sup> for U and 2s<sup>2</sup>, 2p<sup>3</sup> for N as the electronic configurations. The evaluated lattice constants for non-magnetic UN (0.489 nm) and using this setup [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.111068-ref5">5</xref>] agreed very well with the experimental value of 0.489 [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.111068-ref14">14</xref>] .</p><sec id="s3_1"><title>3.1. Electrons’ Density of States and Electronic Heat Capacity</title><p>Using QE code, we previously performed [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.111068-ref5">5</xref>] non-spin-polarized calculations to evaluate the electronic structure of UN at the equilibrium lattice constants. In addition, we used here the non-local hybrid exchange functional (B3LYP) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.111068-ref8">8</xref>] to try to modify its electronic structure around Fermi energy as demonstrated before during an evaluation of the bandgap of ThO<sub>2</sub> [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.111068-ref7">7</xref>] . However, there are no pseudopotentials developed for B3LYP either for N or U atoms and the calculations are very computationally demanding. Therefore, we reduced the kinetic energy cutoff for wave functions to 200 Ry (2721 eV) and used existing pseudopotentials for other functionals: N.blyp-hgh.UPF and the used above U.pbesol-n-nc.UPF. Otherwise, we used a similar setup and the same lattice constants as previously determined for PBEsol calculations [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.111068-ref5">5</xref>] .</p><p>In <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>(a) and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>(b), we compare the electronic structure of UN evaluated using a) PBEsol and b) B3LYP functionals. We present the evaluated per formula unit (f.u.,: UN) total electronic density of states of UN (solid black line) together with the projected partial electron densities of states (plotted with 0.1 eV energy step) of nitrogen: 2p (dashed-dot-dot blue line), and 2s (dashed-long pink line) and for uranium: 6d (dark red dotted line) and 5f (dashed medium green line) electron densities of states. The Fermi energy is indicated by the grey dashed line. The integrated (with 0.01 eV energy step) total number of electrons as a function of energy is indicated as dashed-dot red lines, with the total number of electrons at Fermi energy: 11e. In both calculations (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>(a) and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>(b)) 2p electrons of the N atom are located below 10 eV while 2s electrons are located below 0 eV energy.</p><p>Similar to our previous results for thoria [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.111068-ref7">7</xref>] , we found that the non-local hybrid functional B3LYP pushed 5f electrons of U up and away from Fermi energy (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>(b)) when compared with our calculations using PBEsol in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>(a). This resulted in a lower density of states at Fermi energy (ρ(ε<sub>F</sub>)) as the hybridized states of 6d and 5f U electrons also moved up just above it, as shown in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref>, second row.</p><p>Our calculations predict a significant reduction of the electronic heat coefficient (γ) for UN (B3LYP result), as shown in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref>. It would be interesting to examine an experimental evaluation although recently Parker et al., using the experimental fit [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.111068-ref15">15</xref>] for ThN, also found γ to be very small (0.001 J&#183;mol<sup>−1</sup>&#183;K<sup>−2</sup>).</p><table-wrap id="table1" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref></label><caption><title> The comparison of the calculated electron density of states at Fermi energy, the electronic heat capacity coefficient, and Fermi Energy of UN using PBEsol and B3LYP functionals</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Calc. QE This work</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >UN (PBEsol)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >UN (B3LYP)</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >ρ(ε<sub>F</sub>) [electr./eV/FU]</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.472</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.253</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >γ [J&#183;mol<sup>−1</sup>&#183;K<sup>−2</sup>]</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.0176</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.0006</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >E<sub>F</sub> [eV]<sub> </sub></td><td align="center" valign="middle" >12.31</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13.72</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap></sec><sec id="s3_2"><title>3.2. Electronic Resistivity</title><p>We calculated phonons’ dispersion and the density of states as before [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.111068-ref5">5</xref>] but used a finer grid: 6 &#215; 6 &#215; 6. Next, using EPW code, we calculated the Eliashberg transport coupling function: α t r 2 F ( ω ) (Equation 55 in Ref. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.111068-ref10">10</xref>] ) together with the integrated electron-phonon strength (λ) as a function of frequency (ω) using Equation (3). In <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>, we present the results by a dashed red line and dashed-dot blue line, respectively. The integration was done on a 48 &#215; 48 &#215; 48 homogeneous k-point mesh and a 48 &#215; 48 &#215; 48 homogeneous q-point mesh with Gaussian smearing of 100 meV for the electrons, and 0.1 meV for the phonons. The total integrated electron-phonon strength of 0.2472 only slightly increases (0.2516) when 36 &#215; 36 &#215; 36 grids are used while the Eliashberg transport coupling function (indicated by a solid black line), which is presented here using 0.5 meV smearing, shows a more visible effect of grid change (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>).</p><p>Next, we calculated the electrical resistivity of UN and the number of mobility electrons using Equations (2) and (4), and the results are presented in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3</xref> and <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4</xref>. We used porosity-free experimental resistivity for UN by Hayes et al. [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.111068-ref16">16</xref>] . We note that both the resistivity and the evaluated number of mobility electrons are not much affected by a change in the grid. The averages over a number of mobility electrons in the temperature range 300 K - 1000 K are slightly higher for the finer grid (n<sub>av</sub>: 0.343 e versus 0.337 e). We found that Ziman’s formula (Equation (2)) predicts a stronger decrease of resistivity for decreasing temperatures than experiment when assuming that the number of mobility electrons is constant and equal to n<sub>av</sub>, as indicated in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3</xref>. To reproduce the experimentally observed temperature dependence of the resistivity of UN as presented in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3</xref> (black solid line), a variable with a temperature-dependent number of electrons was needed, as evaluated in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4</xref>.</p></sec><sec id="s3_3"><title>3.3. Thermal Conductivity</title><p>In <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5</xref>, the electronic thermal conductivity of UN, as calculated from the experimental resistivity of UN [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.111068-ref16">16</xref>] , via Wiedemann-Franz law [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.111068-ref13">13</xref>] Equation (5), is shown by a solid black line.</p><p>We also calculated the electronic thermal conductivity of UN, using Equation (5) and the calculated resistivity shown in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3</xref> for the constant number of mobility electrons (n<sub>av</sub>): 0.343 e and 0.337 e, respectively. They are indicated by the dashed red line and vertical, black marks, respectively.</p><p>It can be noted that the derived thermal conductivity for the assumed constant number of mobility electrons is almost independent of temperature and behaves similarly to that studied by us for Al [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.111068-ref6">6</xref>] . Therefore, to reproduce the experimentally observed strong temperature dependence (indicated by black, solid line) of</p><p>the electronic thermal conductivity of UN it is necessary to use the number of mobility electrons that increase with the increasing temperature, as presented in <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4</xref>. Further experimental investigation of the number of mobility electrons in UN as a function of temperature is of interest.</p></sec></sec><sec id="s4"><title>4. Summary</title><p>We have investigated the electronic heat capacity, thermal conductivity, and resistivity of UN using Quantum Espresso and EPW code. GGA, PBEsol functional, and non-local hybrid functional (B3LYP) were implemented. The calculated electronic heat coefficient was found to be significantly reduced (0.0176 J&#183;mol<sup>−1</sup>&#183;K<sup>−2</sup> versus 0.0006 J&#183;mol<sup>−1</sup>&#183;K<sup>−2</sup>) when the non-local hybrid functional (B3LYP) was used.</p><p>Furthermore, we found that the calculated electrical resistivity using Ziman’s formula for metals with the Eliashberg transport coupling function as implemented in EPW code for non-spin-polarized calculations, would only reproduce the experimental results for UN when the derived number of mobility electrons, which increases with increasing temperature, was used. This also applies to the evaluated electronic thermal conductivity, which for any assumed constant number of carriers in UN would be not increasing with the increasing temperature but would remain almost independent of temperature, like Al for example.</p></sec><sec id="s5"><title>Acknowledgements</title><p>The authors acknowledge access to high-performance supercomputers at Compute Canada (Calcul Quebec, West Grid and SHARCNET).</p><p>Free access to Quantum Espresso, EPW, with technical support is acknowledged. The first author acknowledges a very constructive discussion with Dr. Samuel Ponc&#233;.</p><p>This work was supported by the Discovery grant from the National Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.</p></sec><sec id="s6"><title>Conflicts of Interest</title><p>The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.</p></sec><sec id="s7"><title>Cite this paper</title><p>Szpunar, B., Ranasinghe, J.I. and Szpunar, J.A. (2021) Electronic Transport of Uranium Mononitride. Journal of Modern Physics, 12, 1349-1357. https://doi.org/10.4236/jmp.2021.1210084</p></sec></body><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="scirp.111068-ref1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Pioro, I.L., Khan, M., Hopps, V., et al. (2008) Journal of Power and Energy Systems, 2, 874-888. https://doi.org/10.1299/jpes.2.874</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.111068-ref2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">OECD (2018) Nuclear Science 2018, NEA No. 7317, &amp;copy;, State-of-the-Art Report on Light Water Reactor Accident-Tolerant Fuels. 367.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.111068-ref3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Brown, N.R., Gorton, J.P., Collins, B.S. and Nelson, A.T. (2019) Nuclear Engineering and Design, 355, Article ID: 110317.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nucengdes.2019.110317</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.111068-ref4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Szpunar, B. and Szpunar, J.A. (2014) International Journal of Nuclear Energy, 2014, Article ID: 178360. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/178360</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.111068-ref5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Szpunar, B., Ranasinghe, J.I., Malakkal, L. and Szpunar, J.A. (2020) Journal of Physics and Chemistry of Solids, 146, Article ID: 109636.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpcs.2020.109636</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.111068-ref6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Ranasinghe, J.I., Szpunar, B., Jossou, E., Malakkal, L. and Szpunar, J.A. (2018) The ASME Journal of Nuclear Engineering and Radiation Science, 4, Article ID: 031020.  
https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4039886</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.111068-ref7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Szpunar, B. and Szpunar, J.A. (2013) Journal of Nuclear Materials, 439, 243-250.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnucmat.2012.10.009</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.111068-ref8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Becke, A.D. (1993) The Journal of Chemical Physics, 98, 5648-5652.  
https://doi.org/10.1063/1.464913</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.111068-ref9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Giannozzi, P., et al. (2009) Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter, 21, 395502-395521. https://doi.org/10.1088/0953-8984/21/39/395502</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.111068-ref10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Poncé, S., Margine, E.R., Verdia, C. and Giustinoa, F. (2016) Computer Physics Communications, 209, 116-133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpc.2016.07.028</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.111068-ref11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Perdew, J.P., Ruzsinszky, A., Csonka, G.I., Vydrov, O.A., Scuseria, G.E., Constantin, L.A., Zhou, X. and Burke, K. (2008) Physical Review Letters, 100, Article ID: 136406. (Erratum: Physical Review Letters, 102 (2009) 039902 p. 1)</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.111068-ref12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Baroni, S., Giannozzi, P. and Testa, A. (1987) Physical Review Letters, 58, 1861-1864. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.58.1861</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.111068-ref13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Wiedemann, F.R. (1853) Annalen der Physik, 165, 497-531. (In German)  
https://doi.org/10.1002/andp.18531650802</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.111068-ref14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Knott, H.W., Lander, G.H., Mueller, M.H. and Vogt, O. (1980) Physical Review B, 21, 4159-4165. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.21.4159</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.111068-ref15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Parker, S.S., White, J.T., Hosemann, P. and Nelson, A.T. (2019) Journal of Nuclear Materials, 526, Article ID: 151760. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnucmat.2019.151760</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.111068-ref16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Hayes, S.L., Thomas, J.K. and Peddicord, K.L. (1990) Journal of Nuclear Materials, 171, 289-299. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3115(90)90376-X</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>