The Zintl Concept Applied to Intergrowth Structures: Electron‐Hole Matching, Stacking Preferences, and Chemical Pressures in Pd 5 InAs
Abstract Enumerating the potential stacking sequences of layers is a fundamental way to account for the structure diversity of solid state compounds. In many cases, these stacking variations represent polymorphs with only small energetic differences. Here, we examine a compound for which the preferred stacking pattern instead reveals key aspects about its chemical bonding: Pd 5 InAs. Its structure is based on the intergrowth of slabs of the AuCu 3 and PtHg 2 (or alternatively, fluorite) structure types. Two basic stacking arrangements are available to this compound, represented by the Pd 5 TlAs and HoCoGa 5 structure types. DFT total energy calculations reveal that the former outcompetes the latter by a staggering 0.65 eV/formula unit. Through a combination of DFT‐reversed approximation Molecular Orbital (DFT‐raMO) and DFT‐Chemical Pressure (DFT‐CP) analysis we trace this preference to two factors. First, with DFT‐raMO analysis, we derive a Zintl‐like bonding scheme of Pd 5 InAs. This scheme, along with the inspection of selected crystal orbitals, is then connected to preferred stacking through the coordination environments of the Pd atoms at the interface between the Pd−In and Pd−As layers. In the hypothetical HoCoGa 5 ‐type and observed Pd 5 InAs‐type structures, different Pd coordination environments arise at the interfaces. The hypothetical structure features square planar PdIn 2 As 2 units, in each of which the same 4d‐orbital serves in the Pd sublattice's role as both Lewis acid (for interactions with the As) and Lewis base (for interactions with the In). In the observed structure, tetrahedral PdIn 2 As 2 units occur instead, so that these contradictory roles are distributed to separate 4d‐orbitals, leading to more effective bonding. DFT‐CP analysis illustrates that this driving force for the Pd 5 TlAs‐type arrangement is supplemented by a favorable alignment of the packing tensions in the parent structures. Altogether, the resulting picture demonstrates how the reaction of simple intermetallic structures to form intergrowths can be guided by recognizable chemical interactions.