Carrier relaxation and electronic structure in InAs self-assembled quantum dots

Composition, volume, and aspect ratio dependence of the strain distribution, band lineups and electron effective masses in self-assembled pyramidal In1−xGaxAs/GaAs and SixGe1−x/Si quantum dots

“…7 we compare the strain, band edges and effective masses profiles for three experimental InAs QDs grown by Schmidt et al, 33 Murray et al 34 and Noda, Abe, and Tamura, 35 respectively, with aspect ratios ranging from about 1.4 to about 4.5. The relevant quantities are reported in Tables IV and V. …”

Parallel fabrication and single-electron charging of devices based on ordered, two-dimensional phases of organically functionalized metal nanocrystals

“…Granular metal films and heteroepitaxially grown quantum dot islands are two possibilities, and indeed much important work has been done using these techniques. 6,7,13,14 However, control over particle size, size distribution, and particle density, in general, is nontrivial [15][16][17] especially for particles below 10 nm in diameter.…”

“…[1][2][3] One promising route to the fabrication of such devices is the use of nanometer-size metal and semiconductor particles as the active device elements. [4][5][6][7][8] Solution-phase chemical methods for synthesizing these passivated metal 9,10 and semiconductor nanocrystals 11,12 have rapidly evolved over the past few years. For single-electron device applications, recent work has indicated that passivated nanocrystals of coinage metals may be particularly useful.…”

Quantum box energies as a route to the ground state levels of self-assembled InAs pyramidal dots

“…In this particular case ͑i.e., Qϭ1), the heavy-holes ground state energies of the cubes are the same, to within 5%, as those of the pyramids, for 66 ÅϽV 1/3 Ͻ150 Å, which is the region of interest, in which the typical ͑uniformly sized and distributed͒ experimental selfassembled pyramidal dot dimensions range. [17][18][19][20][21] Nevertheless we have found that even for structures of a given shape and volume, E gs varies depending on the particular aspect ratio Q of the dot. This variation is volume dependent in the sense that the range of Q within which ⌬E gs ϭ͓E gs (Q) ϪE gs (Qϭ1)͔/E gs (Q) ͑i.e., the percentual variation of the ground state energy of a structure with a given Q, relative to that of a structure with Qϭ1) is, say, 3%, is smaller for small volumes than it is for large volumes.…”

“…͑7͒ and ␣(Q) both for the electrons and for the heavy holes ͑from Fig. 2͒, the connection rule model has been applied in order to predict the position of the ground state transition peak in the experimental PL spectra of the samples grown by Schmidt et al, 19 Murray et al, 20 and Noda et al, 21 which have aspect ratios Q of 1.428, 2.857, and 4.564, respectively, ͓for the latter, which was a rectangular-based pyramid, we defined the aspect ratio as Qϭͱb x b y /(2h)͔, and thus cover a large portion of the Q variation range. The results are presented in Table III together with the pyramidal calculation results and the experimental data.…”