Rb2F
Rb2F has a DFT band gap of 0.24 eV across 35 reported structures in 6 space groups. Cross-validated across 2 computational databases.
Key Properties
Cross-validated computational properties for Rb2F, aggregated across 2 databases.
Band GapEnergy needed to move an electron from the valence band to the conduction band. Lower or zero values tend to behave more metallic; larger gaps are more insulating or semiconducting.
Energy Above HullThermodynamic distance from the most stable set of competing phases. 0 eV/atom is on the convex hull; small positive values may still be experimentally accessible.
StabilityA plain-language summary of the best reported energy-above-hull result. It reflects whether the lowest-energy structure is on, near, or far from the stability hull.
StructuresCount of reported calculated crystal structures for this formula, including alternate polymorphs, source databases, and observed space groups.
Cross-Source DFT Agreement
How well independent DFT databases agree on the thermodynamics of Rb2F. Tight agreement means computed properties can be trusted without re-running calculations.
Only 1 independent DFT source (oqmd) reports a hull energy for Rb2F, so cross-source agreement can't be assessed yet.
Reported Structures
Lowest-energy structures reported for Rb2F, ranked by energy above hull.
| Space GroupSymmetry classification of the crystal arrangement. The number is the international space-group index. | Crystal SystemBroad lattice family, such as cubic, tetragonal, monoclinic, or triclinic, derived from unit-cell symmetry. | Band Gap (eV)Electronic gap calculated for this specific reported structure, measured in electronvolts. | E above hull (eV/atom)Thermodynamic distance from the convex hull for this structure, normalized per atom. Lower is generally more stable. | E/atom (eV)Computed total energy normalized per atom. Use energy above hull, not this value alone, when comparing stability. | Density (g/cm³)Mass per relaxed crystal volume, reported in grams per cubic centimeter. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| — | — | 0.00 | 0.4009 | -1.504 | — |
| — | — | 0.24 | 1.0486 | -0.856 | — |
| Cm (No. 8) | monoclinic | — | — | — | 1.89 |
| Cm (No. 8) | monoclinic | — | — | — | 2.43 |
| P-1 (No. 2) | triclinic | — | — | — | 1.61 |
| P-1 (No. 2) | triclinic | — | — | — | 2.37 |
| P-1 (No. 2) | triclinic | — | — | — | 1.92 |
| P-1 (No. 2) | triclinic | — | — | — | 1.33 |
| P-1 (No. 2) | triclinic | — | — | — | 1.39 |
| Cm (No. 8) | monoclinic | — | — | — | 2.66 |
| P6/mmm (No. 191) | hexagonal | — | — | — | 1.42 |
| P-1 (No. 2) | triclinic | — | — | — | 2.16 |
Frequently Asked Questions
Common questions about Rb2F, answered from cross-validated data.
What is the band gap of Rb2F?
Rb2F has a DFT-computed band gap of 0.24 eV across 35 reported structures. Standard DFT underestimates band gaps, so the measured gap is typically larger.
Is Rb2F a metal, semiconductor, or insulator?
Is Rb2F thermodynamically stable?
How many polymorphs of Rb2F are known?
What elements does Rb2F contain?
Where does the data for Rb2F come from?
Data sources & attribution
- oqmd — Data from the OQMD (oqmd.org). Cite: Saal et al., JOM 65, 1501 (2013); Kirklin et al., npj Comp. Mater. 1, 15010 (2015). (CC-BY-4.0)
- mpaloe — Data from MP-ALOE. Cite: Kuner et al., npj Comput. Mater. (2025), doi:10.1038/s41524-025-01834-9.
Analyze Rb2F in the Lattice Graph platform
Polymorph comparison, confidence scoring, supply-chain risk, and patent monitoring — across 85 source databases.
Explore the Platform →