Table 1 |
|||
Fitting results and mainly transport mechanism of three samples | |||
Sample 1 | Sample 2 | Sample 3 | |
Applied model | Equation 2 | Equation 2 | Linear fit |
N | 2 | 4 | - |
G_{0} (S · cm^{−1}) | 219.1 | 31.2 | - |
C_{1} (S · cm^{−1} · K^{−1.33}) | 3.1 × 10^{−2} | 8.2 × 10^{−3} | - |
C_{2} (S · cm^{−1} · K^{−2.5}) | - | 4.0 × 10^{−4} | - |
C_{3} (S · cm^{−1} · K^{−3.6}) | - | 6.1 × 10^{−8} | - |
∆ (K) | 104.7 | 2,832.4 | - |
E (meV) | 1.64 | 44.35 | - |
Straight slope (μΩ · cm/log(K)) | - | - | −849.1 |
Mainly transport | Tunneling | Hopping | Metallic paths |
The temperature dependence of conductivity of samples B and C are fitted by Equation 2, as shown in Figure 5b,d. The relationship between resistivity and ln T for sample A is fitted linear in Figure 5f.
Quan et al.
Quan et al. Nanoscale Research Letters 2014 9:6 doi:10.1186/1556-276X-9-6