Rémi
Dupuy
a,
Jakob
Filser
b,
Clemens
Richter
a,
Robert
Seidel
c,
Florian
Trinter
ad,
Tillmann
Buttersack
a,
Christophe
Nicolas
e,
John
Bozek
e,
Uwe
Hergenhahn
a,
Harald
Oberhofer
bf,
Bernd
Winter
a,
Karsten
Reuter
*a and
Hendrik
Bluhm
*a
aFritz-Haber-Institut der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft, Faradayweg 4-6, 14195 Berlin, Germany. E-mail: Reuter@fhi-berlin.mpg.de; Bluhm@fhi-berlin.mpg.de
bChair for Theoretical Chemistry and Catalysis Research Center, Technische Universität München, Lichtenbergstr. 4, 85747 Garching, Germany
cHelmholtz-Zentrum Berlin für Materialien und Energie, Albert-Einstein-Str. 15, 12489 Berlin, Germany
dInstitut für Kernphysik, Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main, Max-von-Laue-Straße 1, 60438 Frankfurt am Main, Germany
eSynchrotron SOLEIL, L’Orme des Merisiers, Saint-Aubin - BP 48, 91192, Gif-sur-Yvette Cedex, France
fChair for Theoretical Physics VII and Bavarian Center for Battery Technology, University of Bayreuth, Universitätsstraße 30, 95447 Bayreuth, Germany
First published on 9th August 2023
Correction for ‘Photoelectron angular distributions as sensitive probes of surfactant layer structure at the liquid–vapor interface’ by Rémi Dupuy et al., Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 2022, 24, 4796–4808, https://doi.org/10.1039/D1CP05621B.
“For sodium cations, we used a Lennard-Jones (LJ) potential with ε = 0.01814 kJ mol−1 and σ = 3.206 Å.”
The correct value of ε = 0.01814 kJ mol−1 was used in all calculations, and thus the results of the calculations and the conclusions based on them are not affected by this error.
The Royal Society of Chemistry apologises for these errors and any consequent inconvenience to authors and readers.
This journal is © the Owner Societies 2023 |