Search

In the last few years, a controversy has been raised regarding the nature of the chemical bonding present in phase change materials (PCMs), many of which are minerals such as galena (PbS), clausthalite (PbSe), and altaite (PbTe). Two opposite bonding models have claimed to be able to explain the extraordinary properties of PCMs in the last decade: the hypervalent (electron-rich multicenter) bonding model and the metavalent (electron-deficient) bonding model. In this context, a third bonding model, the electron-deficient multicenter bonding model, has been recently added. In this work, we comment on the pros and cons of the hypervalent and metavalent bonding models and briefly review the three approaches. We suggest that both hypervalent and metavalent bonding models can be reconciled with the third way, which considers that PCMs are governed by electron-deficient multicenter bonds. To help supporters of the metavalent and hypervalent bonding model to change their minds, we have commented on the chemical bonding in GeSe and SnSe under pressure and in several polyiodides with different sizes and geometries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]