Interface effects on MgZn3P2 Schottky diodes

Current transport in Zn/p-Si(100) Schottky barrier diodes at high temperatures

“…Bowing of the experimental lnðI 0 =T 2 Þ vs. 1/T curve is caused by the temperature dependence of the BHs and ideality factor. As will be discussed below, the deviation in the Richardson plots may be due to the spatially inhomogeneous BHs and potential fluctuations at the interface that consist of low and high barrier areas [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11], that is, the current through the diode will flow preferentially through the lower barriers in potential distribution [14,[16][17][18][19]24]. Richardson constant value of 0.17 A cm À2 K À2 for the Zn/p-Si (1 0 0) SBD was determined from the intercept at the ordinate of the experimental lnðI 0 =T 2 Þ vs. 1/T plot in Fig.…”

“…The barrier height (BH) of Schottky diodes controls the electronic transport across MS interfaces and is, therefore, of vital importance to the successful operation of any semiconductor device. Despite the tremendous advances in solid state physics in the past several decades, our knowledge on the basic formation mechanism of the BH has not advanced much beyond a primitive level during the same period of time [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10]. There is currently a vast number of reports of experimental studies of BHs in a great variety of MS systems.…”

“…Therefore, the non-ideal behavior observed in Schottky barrier diodes (SBDs) has been generally attributed to the effect of interface states and the interfacial native oxide layer, which are present between metal contact and semiconductor interface by many authors aside from that the image force lowering [6]. Thereby, the performance and reliability of SBDs generally depend on interface state density and their energy distribution and the presence of the native oxide layer [7][8][9].…”

New Electrical characterization of the Metal-Semiconductor Interface in GaAs Schottky Junctions

“…Further on a general expression for the equilibrium (zero bias) Schottky barrier height has also been derived [6]. This expression has no initial assumptions concerning the energy distribution of the interface states and the equilibrium interface charge, in contrast to the previous expressions [7,8]. Moreover, it describes the interface by using two parameters only: by the relative interfacial layer thickness and the equilibrium interface charge.…”