In a polemical exchange, the first-named author demonstrated that the other authors' simplified analysis of Rutherford back-scattering channelling data on damage production in SiC could not be used to calculate the atomic displacement energy. The value of 12eV which these authors had given was much too small. Also, their assumption of similar displacement energies in Si and SiC was essentially wrong. The latter 2 authors replied that their method of estimating the atomic displacement energy was correct since the analysis was limited to a case in which the average energy density within the collision cascade was of the order of only 0.0001eV/atom, while the areal density of displaced atoms approached the value which was expected on the basis of the Kinchin-Pease model.

V.Heera, M.G.Grimaldi, L.Calcagno: Journal of Applied Physics, 1998, 83[7], 3935-7