2013
DOI: 10.1063/1.4840317
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Characterization of metal contacts for two-dimensional MoS2 nanoflakes

Abstract: While layered materials are increasingly investigated for their potential in nanoelectronics, their functionality and efficiency depend on charge injection into the materials via metallic contacts. This work explores the characteristics of different metals (aluminium, tungsten, gold and platinum) deposited on to nanostructured thin films made of two-dimensional (2D) MoS 2 flakes. Metals are chosen based on their work functions relative to the electron affinity of MoS 2. It is observed, and analytically verifie… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
103
0
1

Year Published

2014
2014
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 145 publications
(105 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
1
103
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…W, Au, Pd, and Ni, and that would be expected to form a high electron Schottky barrier with MoS 2 . [12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20] In another study, 21 the conductivity polarity measured on gold nanoparticles deposited on MoS 2 using I-V and Raman measurements also showed substantial inconsistencies. In that study, the n-and p-type behavior was measured on samples that were prepared in an identical manner and the variability was explained by the difference in MoS 2 thickness and/or by the Au-MoS 2 interface interaction.…”
mentioning
confidence: 93%
“…W, Au, Pd, and Ni, and that would be expected to form a high electron Schottky barrier with MoS 2 . [12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20] In another study, 21 the conductivity polarity measured on gold nanoparticles deposited on MoS 2 using I-V and Raman measurements also showed substantial inconsistencies. In that study, the n-and p-type behavior was measured on samples that were prepared in an identical manner and the variability was explained by the difference in MoS 2 thickness and/or by the Au-MoS 2 interface interaction.…”
mentioning
confidence: 93%
“…[10][11] Recently, efforts were made to improve the device performance through understanding the influence of contact electrode, limitations in carrier transport and effect of different substrate on charge carrier mobility. [8][9][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19] Analysis of the literature reveals that, variations in mobility values may came from the schottky barriers (SBs) at metal/semiconductor interfaces and differences in fabrication process. In order to overcome the schottky barrier problem, different strategies have been used.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The tunnel barrier height in Gr/TMD/metal heterostructure is determined by the band offset at graphene/TMD interface (Φ GT ) and metal/TMD interface (Φ MT ) [24]. If the Schottky-Mott rule is assumed to hold, then these band offsets can be expressed as Φ = φ − χ, where φ denote work function of the metal or graphene, χ the electron affinity of the TMD [25]. Recent density functional theory calculations have shown the electron affinity of WS 2 to be χ ~ 4.0 eV [22]; and so considering the fact that the work function of graphene, Ti, and …”
Section: (D) and (E) Note That Althoughmentioning
confidence: 99%