A structural model for the interface between amorphous and crystalline Si or Ge

Spaepen, Frans

doi:10.1016/0001-6160(78)90145-1

Cited by 113 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The balance of the strain and interfacial energies sets the length scale for the roughness. Assuming total strain relaxation for each peak and an interfacial energy, γ, equal to 1.0 J/m 2 [9], such an energy balance gives a spatial scale for breakeven of roughly 400 nm, which is close to what we have observed. Note that this energeticallydriven instability predicts that the interface is unstable both in compression and tension.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

Effect of Non-Hydrostatic Stress on Kinetics and Interfacial Roughness During Solid Phase Epitaxial Growth in Si

Barvosa-Carter

Aziz

1996

MRS Proc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We report preliminary in-situ time-resolved measurements of the effect of uniaxial stress on solid phase epitaxial growth in pure Si (001) for the case of stress applied parallel to the amorphous-crystal interface. The growth rate is reduced by the application of uniaxial compression, in agreement with previous results. Additionally, the velocity continues to decrease with time. This is consistent with interfacial roughening during growth under stress, and is supported by both reflectivity measurements and cross-sectional TEM observations. We present a new kinetically-driven interfacial roughening mechanism which is consistent with our observations.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

Effect of Non-Hydrostatic Stress on Kinetics and Interfacial Roughness During Solid Phase Epitaxial Growth in Si

Barvosa-Carter

Aziz

1996

MRS Proc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Recently, Werner et al 60 produced direct evidence for the vacancy mechanism of diffusion when they found a positive activation volume in their highpressure study of Ge self-diffusion. They measured the tracer-diffusion coefficient for 71 Ge as a function of pressure, temperature, and doping and found that hydrostatic pressure reduces the diffusivity and that n-type doping enhances diffusion and p-type doping retards it. The doping behavior demonstrates that the vacancy has an acceptor level or a negatively charged state in the band gap.…”

Section: Implications For Vacancies In Gementioning

confidence: 99%

“…If a dangling bond migration event transfers r atoms from the amorphous phase to the crystal, ∆G o will be r times the free energy change per atom crystallized. Spaepen's model 71 of the (111) interface has been extended to the (100) interface by Saito and Ohdomari 72 . They identify a sequence of nine dangling bond jumps that result in the crystallization of three atoms.…”

Section: Kinetic Analysis Of the Dangling Bond Mechanismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pressure-enhanced crystallization kinetics of amorphous Si and Ge: Implications for point-defect mechanisms

Lü

Nygren

Aziz

1991

Journal of Applied Physics

152

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effects of hydrostatic pressure on the solid-phase epitaxial growth (SPEG) rate v of intrinsic Ge(100) and undoped and doped Si(100) into their respective self-implanted amorphous phases are reported. Samples were annealed in a high-temperature, high-pressure diamond anvil cell. Cryogenically loaded fluid Ar, used as the pressure transmission medium, ensured a clean and hydrostatic environment. v was determined by in situ time-resolved visible (for Si) or infrared (for Ge) interferometry. v increased exponentially with pressure, characterized by a negative activation volume of −0.46Ω in Ge, where Ω is the atomic volume, and −0.28Ω in Si. The activation volume in Si is independent of both dopant concentration and dopant type. Structural relaxation of the amorphous phases has no significant effect on v. These and other results are inconsistent with all bulk point-defect mechanisms, but consistent with all interface point-defect mechanisms, proposed to date. A kinetic analysis of the Spaepen–Turnbull interfacial dangling bond mechanism is presented, assuming thermal generation of dangling bonds at ledges along the interface, independent migration of the dangling bonds along the ledges to reconstruct the network from the amorphous to the crystalline structure, and unimolecular annihilation kinetics at dangling bond ‘‘traps.’’ The model yields v = 2 sin(θ)vsnr exp[(ΔSf + ΔSm)/k] exp− [(ΔHf + ΔHm)/kT], where ΔSf and ΔHf are the standard entropy and enthalpy of formation of a pair of dangling bonds, ΔSm and ΔHm are the entropy and enthalpy of motion of a dangling bond at the interface, vs is the speed of sound, θ is the misorientation from {111}, and nr is the net number of hops made by a dangling bond before it is annihilated. It accounts semiquantitatively for the measured prefactor, orientation dependence, activation energy, and activation volume of v, and the pressure of a ‘‘free-energy catastrophe’’ beyond which the exponential pressure enhancement of SPEG cannot continue uninterrupted due to a vanishing barrier to dangling bond migration. The enhancement of v by doping can be accounted for by an increased number of charged dangling bonds, with no change in the number of neutrals, at the interface. Quantitative models for the doping dependence of v are critically reviewed. At low concentrations the data can be accounted for by either the fractional ionization or the generalized Fermi-level-shifting models; methods to further test these models are enumerated. Ion irradiation may affect v by altering the populatio

show abstract

“…6 From an atomistic standpoint, growth results from crystal island nucleation at the growth interface with subsequent in-plane migration of island ledges. 8,9 The GFLS model proposes that individual nuclei may possess charge states such that the total nucleation rate ͑with ij =0͒ is given by…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Dopant-stress synergy in Si solid-phase epitaxy

Rudawski

Jones

Gwilliam³

2008

Applied Physics Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The influence of dopants on stressed solid-phase epitaxy of Si was studied in B-doped material up to B concentration of ϳ3.0ϫ 10 20 cm −3 and stress of 1.0Ϯ 0.1 GPa. As per the generalized Fermi level shifting model of growth enhancement in the presence of electrically active impurities, it is advanced that application of compressive stress may increase the energy difference between intrinsic Fermi and acceptor levels thus making dopant and stress effects synergistic in growth kinetics.

show abstract

A structural model for the interface between amorphous and crystalline Si or Ge

Cited by 113 publications

References 23 publications

Effect of Non-Hydrostatic Stress on Kinetics and Interfacial Roughness During Solid Phase Epitaxial Growth in Si

Effect of Non-Hydrostatic Stress on Kinetics and Interfacial Roughness During Solid Phase Epitaxial Growth in Si

Pressure-enhanced crystallization kinetics of amorphous Si and Ge: Implications for point-defect mechanisms

Dopant-stress synergy in Si solid-phase epitaxy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About