2010
DOI: 10.1134/s1063785010080134
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Physicochemical aspects of quantum dot array formation in the InAs/GaAs system by droplet epitaxy under MOVPE conditions

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 6 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We attribute this to an out‐diffusion of indium and redistribution on the InGaAsP surface during the thermal ramp step which can lead to a reduction in droplet size and a “re‐wetting” of the surface. [ 35 ] As for the case of QDs on InGaAs, no long‐range etch pits around each QD are present. [ 12,13,15 ] From these observations, we can conclude that inserting the InGaAs(P) layers results in a modification of the growth kinetics from a mass‐transport regime (on bare InP) to a surface reaction‐limited regime on the interlayers, as previously suggested in our cross‐sectional tunneling microscopy (XSTM) study on InAs QDs on both InGaAs and InP [ 15 ] and predicted by Yoon et al [ 36 ] Although at the typical droplet temperature of 400 °C the In surface diffusion ρ apparently strongly differs for InGaAs and InGaAsP surfaces, with ρ InGaAs << ρ InGaAsP as discussed above (see also Figure 3 as reference) we observe that, after crystallization, QDs on both layers present a similar density of 1 × 10 10 cm −2 versus 2 × 10 10 cm −2 for InGaAs and InGaAsP, respectively (Figure 5c,d).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We attribute this to an out‐diffusion of indium and redistribution on the InGaAsP surface during the thermal ramp step which can lead to a reduction in droplet size and a “re‐wetting” of the surface. [ 35 ] As for the case of QDs on InGaAs, no long‐range etch pits around each QD are present. [ 12,13,15 ] From these observations, we can conclude that inserting the InGaAs(P) layers results in a modification of the growth kinetics from a mass‐transport regime (on bare InP) to a surface reaction‐limited regime on the interlayers, as previously suggested in our cross‐sectional tunneling microscopy (XSTM) study on InAs QDs on both InGaAs and InP [ 15 ] and predicted by Yoon et al [ 36 ] Although at the typical droplet temperature of 400 °C the In surface diffusion ρ apparently strongly differs for InGaAs and InGaAsP surfaces, with ρ InGaAs << ρ InGaAsP as discussed above (see also Figure 3 as reference) we observe that, after crystallization, QDs on both layers present a similar density of 1 × 10 10 cm −2 versus 2 × 10 10 cm −2 for InGaAs and InGaAsP, respectively (Figure 5c,d).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%