2008
DOI: 10.1063/1.3050521
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Nanoscale doping fluctuation resolved by electrostatic force microscopy via the effect of surface band bending

Abstract: A technique for profiling doping fluctuation around source/drain regions on a sub-45-nm device is demonstrated. The mapping is achieved through the amplitude measurement of electrostatic force microscopy (EFM). A discovery was found that the EFM amplitude signal would reverse due to strong band bending at the doped semiconductor surface. We have illustrated this phenomenon to show its sensitive dependence on the local doping density. Combined with a tailored carbon nanotube modified cantilever, the EFM measure… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

2
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Local electrostatic techniques provide information on the 2D spatial distribution of charge carriers in semiconductors (Chin et al ., 2008; Musumeci et al ., 2017), nanostructures (Krauss & Brus, 1999; Cherniavskaya et al ., 2003; Marchi et al ., 2008; Borgani et al ., 2016) and devices (Pingree et al ., 2009) and, more recently, in volume (3D) (Collins et al ., 2015; Fabregas & Gomila, 2020) and in time (Araki et al ., 2019; Borgani & Haviland, 2019; Mascaro et al ., 2019). These techniques were proven useful in studying the localization of trapped charges in thin films (Silveira & Marohn, 2004; Chen et al ., 2005a; Chen et al ., 2005b; Muller & Marohn, 2005), quantum dots (Tevaarwerk et al ., 2005) and nanotubes (Chin et al ., 2008); to measure the resistance at metal–semiconductor interfaces and grain boundaries in operating devices (Annibale et al ., 2007); to relate electrical properties, such as dielectric permittivity (Gramse et al ., 2009; El Khoury et al ., 2016; Fumagalli et al ., 2018), conductivity (Castellano‐Hernández & Sacha, 2015; Aurino et al ., 2016), piezoelectricity (Moon et al ., 2017) and percolation pathways (Barnes & Buratto, 2018), directly to the organization of the material at the mesoscopic length scales. Charge distribution in supramolecular architectures (Dabirian et al ., 2009; Borgani et al ., 2014; Garrett et al ., 2018), biomolecules (Gil et al ., 2002; Cuervo et al ., 2014; Dols‐Perez et al ., 2015; Lozano et al ., 2018; Lozano et al ., 2019), living organism (Esteban‐Ferrer et al ., 2014; Van Der Hofstadt et al ., 2016a; Van Der Hofstadt et al ., 2016b) and 2D materials (Collins et al ., 2013; Miyahara et al ., 2015; Shen et al ., 2018; Altvater et al ., 2019) was recently addressed with these techniques.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Local electrostatic techniques provide information on the 2D spatial distribution of charge carriers in semiconductors (Chin et al ., 2008; Musumeci et al ., 2017), nanostructures (Krauss & Brus, 1999; Cherniavskaya et al ., 2003; Marchi et al ., 2008; Borgani et al ., 2016) and devices (Pingree et al ., 2009) and, more recently, in volume (3D) (Collins et al ., 2015; Fabregas & Gomila, 2020) and in time (Araki et al ., 2019; Borgani & Haviland, 2019; Mascaro et al ., 2019). These techniques were proven useful in studying the localization of trapped charges in thin films (Silveira & Marohn, 2004; Chen et al ., 2005a; Chen et al ., 2005b; Muller & Marohn, 2005), quantum dots (Tevaarwerk et al ., 2005) and nanotubes (Chin et al ., 2008); to measure the resistance at metal–semiconductor interfaces and grain boundaries in operating devices (Annibale et al ., 2007); to relate electrical properties, such as dielectric permittivity (Gramse et al ., 2009; El Khoury et al ., 2016; Fumagalli et al ., 2018), conductivity (Castellano‐Hernández & Sacha, 2015; Aurino et al ., 2016), piezoelectricity (Moon et al ., 2017) and percolation pathways (Barnes & Buratto, 2018), directly to the organization of the material at the mesoscopic length scales. Charge distribution in supramolecular architectures (Dabirian et al ., 2009; Borgani et al ., 2014; Garrett et al ., 2018), biomolecules (Gil et al ., 2002; Cuervo et al ., 2014; Dols‐Perez et al ., 2015; Lozano et al ., 2018; Lozano et al ., 2019), living organism (Esteban‐Ferrer et al ., 2014; Van Der Hofstadt et al ., 2016a; Van Der Hofstadt et al ., 2016b) and 2D materials (Collins et al ., 2013; Miyahara et al ., 2015; Shen et al ., 2018; Altvater et al ., 2019) was recently addressed with these techniques.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We sought to gain insight into the role of surface-bond oxides in inhibiting carbon deposition from a microscopic examination of the BaO-Ni interfacial regions as a function of fuel exposure. Our hypothesis was that electrostatic force microscopy (EFM), a scanning probe technique based on the electrostatic interaction between the atomic force microscope (AFM) probe tip and surface phases on the electrode, could be used to distinguish species deposited on the nickel surface. In this study, a well-defined BaO-Ni interface was created by block copolymer patterning and deposition of 10–100 nm diameter BaO nanoclusters on the nickel surface. Early stage carbon deposition was simulated by treating the BaO-modified nickel anodes to propane-containing fuels for a short period of time. The distribution and morphology of early stage carbon deposition was revealed by EFM, confocal Raman spectroscopy, and scanning electron microscopy.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We again ameliorate the problem of flexibility using in situ trimming inside the UHV chamber. The CNT probe in figure 6 has a sharp apex like a SWCNT and a MWCNT as its base to enhance the probe rigidity [29,30].…”
Section: Trimming the Apex Of Carbon Nanotubementioning
confidence: 99%