2004
DOI: 10.1140/epjb/e2004-00190-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Crystallisation kinetics and density profiles in ultra-thin hafnia films

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2005
2005
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…At the oxide surface and oxide/metal interface accumulation of carbon and chlorine is evident, consistent with the earlier observations on increasing impurity levels at interfaces. [43][44][45] Carbon contamination in the films was quite low. Although no quantitative data are presented due to the absence of calibration, we can safely consider the carbon content well below 0.1 atom%.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 95%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…At the oxide surface and oxide/metal interface accumulation of carbon and chlorine is evident, consistent with the earlier observations on increasing impurity levels at interfaces. [43][44][45] Carbon contamination in the films was quite low. Although no quantitative data are presented due to the absence of calibration, we can safely consider the carbon content well below 0.1 atom%.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…In the case of halide-based ALD and temperatures above 300°C, crystallization is promoted and stable capacitance observed in HfO 2 ͑or ZrO 2 ͒ films with thickness below 50 nm. [40][41][42][43] It has been noticed earlier that in the HfO 2 films with thickness below 10 nm the crystallization temperature tends to increase due to considerable residual chlorine content 42,44,45 The content of residues, such as chlorine, at the same time increases with the decrease in growth temperature. However, other studies have shown that the films can crystallize noticeably also within the thickness range of 3-10 nm, 42,[46][47][48] referring to rather complicated interdependences between crystal growth, temperature, reactor/precursor pressure, and ALD cycle time parameters, which cannot be regarded as a well-studied area.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…The rms surface roughness values of the Al 2 O 3 films a−h measured using XRR are summarized in Table and Figure . It is worth noticing that the XRR-determined rms surface roughness differs from the one measured using AFM because it takes into account not only the physical roughness but also the electronic density variations at the film/air interface . However, the trends determined using both techniques are similar.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Generally, because AFM measures the surface morphology of the topmost layer only, the rms roughness values derived from AFM images should be compared with the roughness values derived from the XRR fittings for the capping layer ͑see Table I͒. Moreover, XRR roughness values might be overestimated, because XRR does not distinguish between physical roughness and density variations, 39 while AFM is sensitive to the physical roughness only. The lateral resolution of the oxidized Si AFM probes used in these measurements might be reduced in contact with the oxide surface, due to the water meniscus formed between two hygroscopic solids.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%