scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Institution

Charles University in Prague

EducationPrague, Czechia
About: Charles University in Prague is a education organization based out in Prague, Czechia. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Large Hadron Collider. The organization has 32392 authors who have published 74435 publications receiving 1804208 citations.


Papers
More filters
DOI
Claudia Backes1, Claudia Backes2, Amr M. Abdelkader3, Concepción Alonso4, Amandine Andrieux-Ledier5, Raul Arenal6, Raul Arenal7, Jon Azpeitia6, Nilanthy Balakrishnan8, Luca Banszerus9, Julien Barjon5, Ruben Bartali10, Sebastiano Bellani11, Claire Berger12, Claire Berger13, Reinhard Berger14, M.M. Bernal Ortega15, Carlo Bernard16, Peter H. Beton8, André Beyer17, Alberto Bianco18, Peter Bøggild19, Francesco Bonaccorso11, Gabriela Borin Barin20, Cristina Botas, Rebeca A. Bueno6, Daniel Carriazo21, Andres Castellanos-Gomez6, Meganne Christian, Artur Ciesielski18, Tymoteusz Ciuk, Matthew T. Cole, Jonathan N. Coleman1, Camilla Coletti11, Luigi Crema10, Huanyao Cun16, Daniela Dasler22, Domenico De Fazio3, Noel Díez, Simon Drieschner23, Georg S. Duesberg24, Roman Fasel20, Roman Fasel25, Xinliang Feng14, Alberto Fina15, Stiven Forti11, Costas Galiotis26, Costas Galiotis27, Giovanni Garberoglio28, Jorge M. Garcia6, Jose A. Garrido, Marco Gibertini29, Armin Gölzhäuser17, Julio Gómez, Thomas Greber16, Frank Hauke22, Adrian Hemmi16, Irene Hernández-Rodríguez6, Andreas Hirsch22, Stephen A. Hodge3, Yves Huttel6, Peter Uhd Jepsen19, I. Jimenez6, Ute Kaiser30, Tommi Kaplas31, HoKwon Kim29, Andras Kis29, Konstantinos Papagelis26, Konstantinos Papagelis32, Kostas Kostarelos33, Aleksandra Krajewska34, Kangho Lee24, Changfeng Li35, Harri Lipsanen35, Andrea Liscio, Martin R. Lohe14, Annick Loiseau5, Lucia Lombardi3, María Francisca López6, Oliver Martin22, Cristina Martín36, Lidia Martínez6, José A. Martín-Gago6, José I. Martínez6, Nicola Marzari29, Alvaro Mayoral37, Alvaro Mayoral7, John B. McManus1, Manuela Melucci, Javier Méndez6, Cesar Merino, Pablo Merino6, Andreas Meyer22, Elisa Miniussi16, Vaidotas Miseikis11, Neeraj Mishra11, Vittorio Morandi, Carmen Munuera6, Roberto Muñoz6, Hugo Nolan1, Luca Ortolani, A. K. Ott38, A. K. Ott3, Irene Palacio6, Vincenzo Palermo39, John Parthenios26, Iwona Pasternak40, Amalia Patanè8, Maurizio Prato41, Maurizio Prato21, Henri Prevost5, Vladimir Prudkovskiy13, Nicola M. Pugno42, Nicola M. Pugno43, Nicola M. Pugno44, Teófilo Rojo45, Antonio Rossi11, Pascal Ruffieux20, Paolo Samorì18, Léonard Schué5, Eki J. Setijadi10, Thomas Seyller46, Giorgio Speranza10, Christoph Stampfer9, I. Stenger5, Wlodek Strupinski40, Yuri Svirko31, Simone Taioli28, Simone Taioli47, Kenneth B. K. Teo, Matteo Testi10, Flavia Tomarchio3, Mauro Tortello15, Emanuele Treossi, Andrey Turchanin48, Ester Vázquez36, Elvira Villaro, Patrick Rebsdorf Whelan19, Zhenyuan Xia39, Rositza Yakimova, Sheng Yang14, G. Reza Yazdi, Chanyoung Yim24, Duhee Yoon3, Xianghui Zhang17, Xiaodong Zhuang14, Luigi Colombo49, Andrea C. Ferrari3, Mar García-Hernández6 
Trinity College, Dublin1, Heidelberg University2, University of Cambridge3, Autonomous University of Madrid4, Université Paris-Saclay5, Spanish National Research Council6, University of Zaragoza7, University of Nottingham8, RWTH Aachen University9, Kessler Foundation10, Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia11, Georgia Institute of Technology12, University of Grenoble13, Dresden University of Technology14, Polytechnic University of Turin15, University of Zurich16, Bielefeld University17, University of Strasbourg18, Technical University of Denmark19, Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Science and Technology20, Ikerbasque21, University of Erlangen-Nuremberg22, Technische Universität München23, Bundeswehr University Munich24, University of Bern25, Foundation for Research & Technology – Hellas26, University of Patras27, Center for Theoretical Studies, University of Miami28, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne29, University of Ulm30, University of Eastern Finland31, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki32, University of Manchester33, Polish Academy of Sciences34, Aalto University35, University of Castilla–La Mancha36, ShanghaiTech University37, University of Exeter38, Chalmers University of Technology39, Warsaw University of Technology40, University of Trieste41, Queen Mary University of London42, University of Trento43, Instituto Politécnico Nacional44, University of the Basque Country45, Chemnitz University of Technology46, Charles University in Prague47, University of Jena48, University of Texas at Dallas49
29 Jan 2020
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present an overview of the main techniques for production and processing of graphene and related materials (GRMs), as well as the key characterization procedures, adopting a 'hands-on' approach, providing practical details and procedures as derived from literature and from the authors' experience, in order to enable the reader to reproduce the results.
Abstract: © 2020 The Author(s). We present an overview of the main techniques for production and processing of graphene and related materials (GRMs), as well as the key characterization procedures. We adopt a 'hands-on' approach, providing practical details and procedures as derived from literature as well as from the authors' experience, in order to enable the reader to reproduce the results. Section I is devoted to 'bottom up' approaches, whereby individual constituents are pieced together into more complex structures. We consider graphene nanoribbons (GNRs) produced either by solution processing or by on-surface synthesis in ultra high vacuum (UHV), as well carbon nanomembranes (CNM). Production of a variety of GNRs with tailored band gaps and edge shapes is now possible. CNMs can be tuned in terms of porosity, crystallinity and electronic behaviour. Section II covers 'top down' techniques. These rely on breaking down of a layered precursor, in the graphene case usually natural crystals like graphite or artificially synthesized materials, such as highly oriented pyrolythic graphite, monolayers or few layers (FL) flakes. The main focus of this section is on various exfoliation techniques in a liquid media, either intercalation or liquid phase exfoliation (LPE). The choice of precursor, exfoliation method, medium as well as the control of parameters such as time or temperature are crucial. A definite choice of parameters and conditions yields a particular material with specific properties that makes it more suitable for a targeted application. We cover protocols for the graphitic precursors to graphene oxide (GO). This is an important material for a range of applications in biomedicine, energy storage, nanocomposites, etc. Hummers' and modified Hummers' methods are used to make GO that subsequently can be reduced to obtain reduced graphene oxide (RGO) with a variety of strategies. GO flakes are also employed to prepare three-dimensional (3d) low density structures, such as sponges, foams, hydro- or aerogels. The assembly of flakes into 3d structures can provide improved mechanical properties. Aerogels with a highly open structure, with interconnected hierarchical pores, can enhance the accessibility to the whole surface area, as relevant for a number of applications, such as energy storage. The main recipes to yield graphite intercalation compounds (GICs) are also discussed. GICs are suitable precursors for covalent functionalization of graphene, but can also be used for the synthesis of uncharged graphene in solution. Degradation of the molecules intercalated in GICs can be triggered by high temperature treatment or microwave irradiation, creating a gas pressure surge in graphite and exfoliation. Electrochemical exfoliation by applying a voltage in an electrolyte to a graphite electrode can be tuned by varying precursors, electrolytes and potential. Graphite electrodes can be either negatively or positively intercalated to obtain GICs that are subsequently exfoliated. We also discuss the materials that can be amenable to exfoliation, by employing a theoretical data-mining approach. The exfoliation of LMs usually results in a heterogeneous dispersion of flakes with different lateral size and thickness. This is a critical bottleneck for applications, and hinders the full exploitation of GRMs produced by solution processing. The establishment of procedures to control the morphological properties of exfoliated GRMs, which also need to be industrially scalable, is one of the key needs. Section III deals with the processing of flakes. (Ultra)centrifugation techniques have thus far been the most investigated to sort GRMs following ultrasonication, shear mixing, ball milling, microfluidization, and wet-jet milling. It allows sorting by size and thickness. Inks formulated from GRM dispersions can be printed using a number of processes, from inkjet to screen printing. Each technique has specific rheological requirements, as well as geometrical constraints. The solvent choice is critical, not only for the GRM stability, but also in terms of optimizing printing on different substrates, such as glass, Si, plastic, paper, etc, all with different surface energies. Chemical modifications of such substrates is also a key step. Sections IV-VII are devoted to the growth of GRMs on various substrates and their processing after growth to place them on the surface of choice for specific applications. The substrate for graphene growth is a key determinant of the nature and quality of the resultant film. The lattice mismatch between graphene and substrate influences the resulting crystallinity. Growth on insulators, such as SiO2, typically results in films with small crystallites, whereas growth on the close-packed surfaces of metals yields highly crystalline films. Section IV outlines the growth of graphene on SiC substrates. This satisfies the requirements for electronic applications, with well-defined graphene-substrate interface, low trapped impurities and no need for transfer. It also allows graphene structures and devices to be measured directly on the growth substrate. The flatness of the substrate results in graphene with minimal strain and ripples on large areas, allowing spectroscopies and surface science to be performed. We also discuss the surface engineering by intercalation of the resulting graphene, its integration with Si-wafers and the production of nanostructures with the desired shape, with no need for patterning. Section V deals with chemical vapour deposition (CVD) onto various transition metals and on insulators. Growth on Ni results in graphitized polycrystalline films. While the thickness of these films can be optimized by controlling the deposition parameters, such as the type of hydrocarbon precursor and temperature, it is difficult to attain single layer graphene (SLG) across large areas, owing to the simultaneous nucleation/growth and solution/precipitation mechanisms. The differing characteristics of polycrystalline Ni films facilitate the growth of graphitic layers at different rates, resulting in regions with differing numbers of graphitic layers. High-quality films can be grown on Cu. Cu is available in a variety of shapes and forms, such as foils, bulks, foams, thin films on other materials and powders, making it attractive for industrial production of large area graphene films. The push to use CVD graphene in applications has also triggered a research line for the direct growth on insulators. The quality of the resulting films is lower than possible to date on metals, but enough, in terms of transmittance and resistivity, for many applications as described in section V. Transfer technologies are the focus of section VI. CVD synthesis of graphene on metals and bottom up molecular approaches require SLG to be transferred to the final target substrates. To have technological impact, the advances in production of high-quality large-area CVD graphene must be commensurate with those on transfer and placement on the final substrates. This is a prerequisite for most applications, such as touch panels, anticorrosion coatings, transparent electrodes and gas sensors etc. New strategies have improved the transferred graphene quality, making CVD graphene a feasible option for CMOS foundries. Methods based on complete etching of the metal substrate in suitable etchants, typically iron chloride, ammonium persulfate, or hydrogen chloride although reliable, are time- and resourceconsuming, with damage to graphene and production of metal and etchant residues. Electrochemical delamination in a low-concentration aqueous solution is an alternative. In this case metallic substrates can be reused. Dry transfer is less detrimental for the SLG quality, enabling a deterministic transfer. There is a large range of layered materials (LMs) beyond graphite. Only few of them have been already exfoliated and fully characterized. Section VII deals with the growth of some of these materials. Amongst them, h-BN, transition metal tri- and di-chalcogenides are of paramount importance. The growth of h-BN is at present considered essential for the development of graphene in (opto) electronic applications, as h-BN is ideal as capping layer or substrate. The interesting optical and electronic properties of TMDs also require the development of scalable methods for their production. Large scale growth using chemical/physical vapour deposition or thermal assisted conversion has been thus far limited to a small set, such as h-BN or some TMDs. Heterostructures could also be directly grown.

330 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Haplotype data demonstrate that ΔF508 occurred more than 52,000 years ago, in a population genetically distinct from any present European group, and spread throughout Europe in chronologically distinct expansions, which are responsible for the different frequencies of ΔF50 in Europe.
Abstract: delta F508 is the most frequent cystic fibrosis (CF) mutation and accounts for approximately 70% of CF chromosomes worldwide. Three highly polymorphic microsatellite markers have been used to study the origin and evolution of delta F508 chromosomes in Europe. Haplotype data demonstrate that delta F508 occurred more than 52,000 years ago, in a population genetically distinct from any present European group, and spread throughout Europe in chronologically distinct expansions, which are responsible for the different frequencies of delta F508 in Europe.

330 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Morad Aaboud, Alexander Kupco1, Peter Davison2, Samuel Webb3  +2944 moreInstitutions (220)
TL;DR: In this article, a search for new resonant and non-resonant high-mass phenomena in dielectron and dimuon fi nal states was conducted using 36 : 1 fb(-1) of proton-proton collision data.
Abstract: A search is conducted for new resonant and non-resonant high-mass phenomena in dielectron and dimuon fi nal states. The search uses 36 : 1 fb(-1) of proton-proton collision data, collected at root ...

329 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The availability of wrist-worn fitness wearables and analyze availability of relevant fitness sensors from 2011 to 2017 was examined to assess brand usage in research projects, compare common brands in terms of developer access to collected health data, and features to consider when deciding which brand to use in future research.
Abstract: Background: New fitness trackers and smartwatches are released to the consumer market every year. These devices are equipped with different sensors, algorithms, and accompanying mobile apps. With recent advances in mobile sensor technology, privately collected physical activity data can be used as an addition to existing methods for health data collection in research. Furthermore, data collected from these devices have possible applications in patient diagnostics and treatment. With an increasing number of diverse brands, there is a need for an overview of device sensor support, as well as device applicability in research projects. Objective: The objective of this study was to examine the availability of wrist-worn fitness wearables and analyze availability of relevant fitness sensors from 2011 to 2017. Furthermore, the study was designed to assess brand usage in research projects, compare common brands in terms of developer access to collected health data, and features to consider when deciding which brand to use in future research. Methods: We searched for devices and brand names in six wearable device databases. For each brand, we identified additional devices on official brand websites. The search was limited to wrist-worn fitness wearables with accelerometers, for which we mapped brand, release year, and supported sensors relevant for fitness tracking. In addition, we conducted a Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE) and ClinicalTrials search to determine brand usage in research projects. Finally, we investigated developer accessibility to the health data collected by identified brands. Results: We identified 423 unique devices from 132 different brands. Forty-seven percent of brands released only one device. Introduction of new brands peaked in 2014, and the highest number of new devices was introduced in 2015. Sensor support increased every year, and in addition to the accelerometer, a photoplethysmograph, for estimating heart rate, was the most common sensor. Out of the brands currently available, the five most often used in research projects are Fitbit, Garmin, Misfit, Apple, and Polar. Fitbit is used in twice as many validation studies as any other brands and is registered in ClinicalTrials studies 10 times as often as other brands. Conclusions: The wearable landscape is in constant change. New devices and brands are released every year, promising improved measurements and user experience. At the same time, other brands disappear from the consumer market for various reasons. Advances in device quality offer new opportunities for research. However, only a few well-established brands are frequently used in research projects, and even less are thoroughly validated. [J Med Internet Res 2018;20(3):e110]

329 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: What is known about how determinants of naturalization in plants interact at various scales, and how their importance varies along the continuum is explored.
Abstract: The literature on biological invasions is biased in favour of invasive species--those that spread and often reach high abundance following introduction by humans. It is, however, also important to understand previous stages in the introduction-naturalization-invasion continuum ('the continuum'), especially the factors that mediate naturalization. The emphasis on invasiveness is partly because most invasions are only recognized once species occupy large adventive ranges or start to spread. Also, many studies lump all alien species, and fail to separate introduced, naturalized and invasive populations and species. These biases impede our ability to elucidate the full suite of drivers of invasion and to predict invasion dynamics, because different factors mediate progression along different sections of the continuum. A better understanding of the determinants of naturalization is important because all naturalized species are potential invaders. Processes leading to naturalization act differently in different regions and global biogeographical patterns of plant invasions result from the interaction of population-biological, macroecological and human-induced factors. We explore what is known about how determinants of naturalization in plants interact at various scales, and how their importance varies along the continuum. Research that is explicitly linked to particular stages of the continuum can generate new information that is appropriate for improving the management of biological invasions if, for example, potentially invasive species are identified before they exert an impact.

329 citations


Authors

Showing all 32719 results

NameH-indexPapersCitations
Ronald C. Petersen1781091153067
P. Chang1702154151783
Vaclav Vrba141129895671
Milos Lokajicek139151198888
Christopher D. Manning138499147595
Yves Sirois137133495714
Rupert Leitner136120190597
Gerald M. Reaven13379980351
Roberto Sacchi132118689012
S. Errede132148198663
Mark Neubauer131125289004
Peter Kodys131126285267
Panos A Razis130128790704
Vit Vorobel13091979444
Jehad Mousa130122686564
Network Information
Related Institutions (5)
University of Milan
139.7K papers, 4.6M citations

90% related

Sapienza University of Rome
155.4K papers, 4.3M citations

90% related

University of Amsterdam
140.8K papers, 5.9M citations

89% related

University of Oxford
258.1K papers, 12.9M citations

89% related

Tel Aviv University
115.9K papers, 3.9M citations

89% related

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Institution in previous years
YearPapers
2023203
2022554
20214,838
20204,793
20194,421
20183,991