minor changes

[lectures/latex.git] / posic / thesis / defects.tex

diff --git a/posic/thesis/defects.tex b/posic/thesis/defects.tex
index 9cf9f56..8dd42a5 100644 (file)
--- a/posic/thesis/defects.tex
+++ b/posic/thesis/defects.tex
@@ -92,7 +92,7 @@ There are differences between the various results of the quantum-mechanical calc
 This is nicely reproduced by the DFT calculations performed in this work.
 
 It has turned out to be very difficult to capture the results of quantum-mechanical calculations in analytical potential models.
-Among the established analytical potentials only the EDIP \cite{bazant97,justo98} and Stillinger-Weber \cite{stillinger85} potential reproduce the correct order in energy of the defects.
+Among the established analytical potentials only the environment-dependent interatomic potential (EDIP) \cite{bazant97,justo98} and Stillinger-Weber \cite{stillinger85} potential reproduce the correct order in energy of the defects.
 However, these potentials show shortcomings concerning the description of other physical properties and are unable to describe the C-C and C-Si interaction.
 In fact the EA potential calculations favor the tetrahedral defect configuration.
 This limitation is assumed to arise due to the cut-off.