Figure 1: Technique comparison between G-VS and the current state-of-art BEPS. | Nature Communications

Figure 1: Technique comparison between G-VS and the current state-of-art BEPS.

From: Rapid mapping of polarization switching through complete information acquisition

Figure 1: Technique comparison between G-VS and the current state-of-art BEPS.The alternative text for this image may have been generated using AI.

(a,b,e) In both techniques, the cantilever tip is excited with a waveform and the sample response is recorded through the cantilever deflection. (a,c) In BEPS, a slow bipolar triangular wave induces ferroelectric switching, while the piezoresponse is measured by exciting the cantilever with a narrow band around its contact resonance. (e) In G-VS, the tip is excited with a high-frequency, high-amplitude sinusoidal signal. (f) The cantilever response is intelligently filtered to reveal multiple strain loops. (c,d) Although BEPS is limited to ∼0.1–1 switching cycle per second and acquired over a sparse spatial grid, (f,g) G-VS results in 104−107 switching cycles per second over a dense spatial grid.

Back to article page