2005
DOI: 10.1016/j.apsusc.2005.03.165
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

AES depth profiling and interface analysis of C/Ta bilayers

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
19
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2009
2009

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

3
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
0
19
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In the framework of the previous work 10 we found that the depth resolution at the C/Ta interface deteriorated with the ion incidence angle for a 1 keV ion beam, it is worst at an ion incidence angle of 71°. This shows the effect of ripple topography on the depth resolution.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 94%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In the framework of the previous work 10 we found that the depth resolution at the C/Ta interface deteriorated with the ion incidence angle for a 1 keV ion beam, it is worst at an ion incidence angle of 71°. This shows the effect of ripple topography on the depth resolution.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…3 the normalized sputtering yields for 1 keV ions for different ion incidence angles obtained at different sputtering parameters. 10 Experimental values of yields were calculated from the measured sputtering rates obtained from AES depth profiling of the whole graphite layer and normalized to the same ion current density and to the yield at an incidence angle of 22°. Figure 3 also shows sputtering yields calculated by the SRIM 2003 code used to simulate the sputtering process.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While for pure element layers, except for the interface region, this effect can be ignored by normalizing to 100% through the layer, 21 it will be detrimental for layers consisting of two or more elements (e.g. oxides).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…4, the AES intensity-depth profile of carbon is shown at a C/Ta interface of the type reported by Zalar et al, 10 Fig. 4.…”
Section: Interface C/tamentioning
confidence: 96%
“…The latter three parameters are taken into account by the MRI model. 14 -16 Using the expression of Barkshire et al, 12 Zalar et al 10 first calculated the 'ideal' profile expectation assuming ideally smooth, continuous thickness reduction, and then applied the MRI model to this calculated profile to obtain the 'measured' one. This two-step procedure is cumbersome, since some more calculations are necessary to obtain the optimum MRI fit.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%