2015
DOI: 10.1149/2.0071512jss
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Dual Mode Photocurrent Generation of Graphene-Oxide Semiconductor Junction

Abstract: The need for low-cost and highly versatile photosensing devices keeps increasing. In this work, we present a heterojunction device based on wafer-scale graphene grown by chemical vapor deposition (CVD) and sputtered InGaZnO (IGZO) semiconductor for dual mode photocurrent collection. The photocurrent can be collected either from the lateral gold/graphene/gold configuration or from the vertical graphene/IGZO/nickel heterojunction configuration with no external bias. Incident-energy-dependent photocurrent scannin… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 54 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Similar kind of hole transport may exist at ZNFO/CuPc interface as band energy difference E normalF (ZNFO) ≈ HOMO (CuPc) is also expected to be smaller (upper inset of Figure 4) than E normalF (ZNFO) ≈ LUMO(CuPc) at equilibrium. [ 21–24 ] However, the band energy difference E normalF (LSMO) ≈ HOMO (CuPc) (0.4 eV) is expected to be larger (upper inset of Figure 4) than E normalF (ZNFO) ≈ HOMO(CuPc) (<0.4 eV), which may have resulted in enhanced I–V curve nonlinearity for LSMO device as compared to ZNFO device. [ 21–25 ]…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Similar kind of hole transport may exist at ZNFO/CuPc interface as band energy difference E normalF (ZNFO) ≈ HOMO (CuPc) is also expected to be smaller (upper inset of Figure 4) than E normalF (ZNFO) ≈ LUMO(CuPc) at equilibrium. [ 21–24 ] However, the band energy difference E normalF (LSMO) ≈ HOMO (CuPc) (0.4 eV) is expected to be larger (upper inset of Figure 4) than E normalF (ZNFO) ≈ HOMO(CuPc) (<0.4 eV), which may have resulted in enhanced I–V curve nonlinearity for LSMO device as compared to ZNFO device. [ 21–25 ]…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[ 21–24 ] However, the band energy difference E normalF (LSMO) ≈ HOMO (CuPc) (0.4 eV) is expected to be larger (upper inset of Figure 4) than E normalF (ZNFO) ≈ HOMO(CuPc) (<0.4 eV), which may have resulted in enhanced I–V curve nonlinearity for LSMO device as compared to ZNFO device. [ 21–25 ]…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation