Author Correction: Proton irradiation-decelerated intergranular corrosion of Ni-Cr alloys in molten salt

In the original version of this article, numbers for the beam current densities were incorrectly given as 1.5, 2.0, and 2.5 mA cm-2 in various locations, instead of the correct values 0.3, 0.4, and 0.5 mA cm-2. This was owing to a measurement error coming from the indirect correspondence between the...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Nature communications 2024-04, Vol.15 (1), p.3500-3500, Article 3500
Main Authors: Zhou, Weiyue, Yang, Yang, Zheng, Guiqiu, Woller, Kevin B., Stahle, Peter W., Minor, Andrew M., Short, Michael P.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Author Correction
Humanities and Social Sciences
MATERIALS SCIENCE
multidisciplinary
Science
Science (multidisciplinary)
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:In the original version of this article, numbers for the beam current densities were incorrectly given as 1.5, 2.0, and 2.5 mA cm-2 in various locations, instead of the correct values 0.3, 0.4, and 0.5 mA cm-2. This was owing to a measurement error coming from the indirect correspondence between the Faraday cup and the beam profile monitor (BPM) on the accelerator as the proton beam traveling along the beamline resulted in mismatching between calculated values and real beam currents, which were obtained by ex-situ calibration. The following changes have been made in the correct version. The eighth sentence of the Results, and the figure legend of Fig. 2j state '0.3, 0.4, 0.5 mA cm-2' in place of '1.5, 2.0, 2.5 mA cm-2'. The figure legend of Fig. 1j–l states '0.5, 0.4, 0.3 mA cm-2' in place of '2.5, 2.0, 1.5 mA cm-2'. Figure 1e states '0.5 mA cm-2' in place of '2.5 mA cm-2', Fig. 1h states '0.4 mA cm-2' in place of '2.0 mA cm-2', and Fig. 1k states ‘0.3 mA cm-2' in place of ‘1.5 mA cm-2'. Figure 2c states '0.5 mA cm-2' in place of '2.5 mA cm-2', Fig. 2d states '0.4 mA cm-2' in place of '2.0 mA cm-2', and Fig. 2e states '0.3 mA cm-2' in place of '1.5 mA cm-2'. Figure 2j and k states ‘0.3 mA cm-2', '0.4 mA cm-2', '0.5 mA cm-2' in place of '1.5 mA cm-2', '2.0 mA cm-2', and '2.5 mA cm-2', respectively. The figure legend of Fig. 3b states '0.4 mA cm-2' in place of '2.0 mA cm-2'. The figure legend of Supplementary Fig. 1 states '0.5 mA cm-2' in place of '2.5 mA cm-2'. This has been corrected in the PDF and HTML versions of the Article.
ISSN:2041-1723
2041-1723
DOI:10.1038/s41467-024-47902-4