## 3 Results
### Microtexture Analysis  
MountainsMap software provides qualitative renderings that are also obtained from Fourier transforms to the profile height function. Those renderings simulate furrows and arrange contour lines along the surface that represent qualitative aspects of the surface microtexture, as shown in Figure 3. As can be seen, greater holes (black regions) are observed in GdMnO650 (Figure 3a) and GdMnO750 (Figure 3c) than in GdMnO850 (Figure 3e). More intense valleys (intense color regions) are observed in GdMnO850 that are due to their highest roughness.  
There is an overlap of microchannels that form contours between rough peaks. These contours are shown in Figure 3b,d,f and reveal that particle agglomerates are formed in GdMnO650 and GdMnO750., which confirms the lower growth of grains in these conditions. Furthermore, because of the greater roughness of GdMnO850, the rough peaks tapered the channels, which promoted the appearance of deeper channels, as the maximum depth of furrow (\(\sim\)12.2 nm) and the mean depth of furrow (\(\sim\)4.6 cm/cm\({}^{2}\)) was considerably greater for this sample. This differs from the other samples because there was a statistical difference between the means (\(p<0.05\)) (Table 4). However, GdMnO650 exhibited the highest mean density of furrows because there is a greater distribution of furrows in this sample.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline
**Parameter** & **Unit** & **GdMnO650** & **GdMnO750** & **GdMnO850** \\ \hline \multicolumn{5}{c}{Furrows} \\ \hline Maximum depth & (nm) & \(3.38\pm 0.43\) & \(4.16\pm 0.56\) & \(12.24\pm 0.52\) \\ \hline Mean depth & (nm) & \(1.51\pm 0.13\) & \(1.34\pm 0.19\) & \(4.60\pm 0.34\) \\ \hline Mean density & (cm/cm\({}^{2}\)) & 86,382.81 \(\pm\) 4997.06 & 78,881.94 \(\pm\) 1442.56 & 81,635.01 \(\pm\) 564.91 \\ \hline \multicolumn{5}{c}{Texture} \\ \hline TI & (\%) & \(63.58\pm 10.78\) & \(40.45\pm 15.08\) & \(65.44\pm 7.54\) \\ \hline Str & (-) & \(0.64\pm 0.11\) & \(0.40\pm 0.15\) & \(0.65\pm 0.08\) \\ \hline Std & (\({}^{\circ}\)) & \(169.75\pm 4.68\) & \(141.19\pm 7.05\) & \(120.62\pm 19.88\) \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 4: Surface microtexture parameters of GdMnO\({}_{3}\) thin films according to ISO 25178-2:2012.  
Notably, the different topographic profiles generated by the different sintering conditions of the thin films influenced the film's microtexture, as well as the texture isotropy, as displayed in Figure 4. As can be seen, there was a consistent smoothing of the texture distribution of GdMnO650 to GdMnO850, which is due to platykurtic behavior (Sku < 3), but a greater dispersion within the distribution of GdMnO850 was observed, which is attributed to the rougher profile of this surface. Although GdMnO650 and GdMnO850 have similar isotropies and texture aspect ratios (Str) -64 and 65% and 0.64 and 0.65, respectively, the texture distributions are different, where GdMnO850 presents the lower mean angle (\(\sim\)121\({}^{\circ}\)) for general texture direction (Std) (Table 4), which occurred due to the gradual change in surface microtexture from GdMnO650 to GdMnO850.  
Figure 3: Qualitative rendering of furrows and contour lines systems of the surface microtexture of (**a,b**) GdMnO650, (**c,d**) GdMnO750, and (**e,f**) GdMnO850.