In the original publication [1], there was a mistake in Table 2 and Figure 2 as published. Within Table 2, the coordination numbers of the two stoichiometric terminations of surface (011) have been flipped [showing (011)-1 and (011)-2 with 6,6,8,8 and 7,7,9,9, respectively]. Figure 2 showed the surface of (011)-2 in the first row, third image with the same incorrect coordination numbers of 7,7,9,9 instead of 6,6,8,8. The authors state that the scientific conclusions are unaffected. This correction was approved by the Academic Editor. The original publication has also been updated.
