Quantum Dot Long-Wavelength Detectors

Bhattacharya, P.; Stiff‐Roberts, Adrienne D.; Krishna, Sanjay; Kennerly, Stephen W.

doi:10.1557/proc-692-h3.2.1

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…2,3 But QWIPs are a one-dimensional confinement system, and are not sensitive to normal incidence light due to the selection rule of intersubband transition. [8][9][10] These materials are also predicted to have many advantages such as reduced phonon scattering, longer carrier lifetime, lower dark current, increased optical absorption coefficient, and higher detectivity. In the recent years, quantum dots ͑QDs͒ such as InGaAs 6 and Ge 7 dots have been successfully grown by selfassembling processes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tunable normal incidence Ge quantum dot midinfrared detectors

Song

Liu

Khitun

et al. 2004

Journal of Applied Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Effect of overgrowth temperature on the mid-infrared response of Ge/Si(001) quantum dots Appl.Midinfrared photodetectors in the 3-5 m region were demonstrated by using molecular beam epitaxy grown self-assembled Ge quantum dots at normal incidence. The structure was a p-i-p with p-type doped Ge dots embedded in the intrinsic layer sandwiched in the two heavily p-doped regions. The dark current density at 77 K is 6.4 mA/cm 2 at 1 V. The as-grown sample has a response at normal incidence in the wavelength range of 2.2 to 3.2 m and peaked at 2.7 m. Thermal annealing at 900°C for 10 min shifted the peak response to 3.6 m. Annealing effect was simulated with the interdiffusion behavior of Ge and Si atoms to explain the shift of the response wavelength.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tunable normal incidence Ge quantum dot midinfrared detectors

Song

Liu

Khitun

et al. 2004

Journal of Applied Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Lateral electron confinement is also used in quantum grid infrared photodetectors (QGIPs) [22] and the so-called quantum dot-in-a-well infrared detectors (QDWIPs) [23]. The principles of QDIP operation, results of experimental studies of QDIPs and analysis of their features were reviewed in some recent publications [24][25][26][27]. However, the assessment of the QDIP (and QRIP) potential is still controversial, so we feel that a comparative analysis of different intersubband infrared photodetectors, namely QWIPs, QRIPs and QDIPs, is needed.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of dark current, responsivity and detectivity in different intersubband infrared photodetectors

Ryzhii

Khmyrova

Ryzhii

et al. 2003

Semicond. Sci. Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper deals with the comparison of quantum well, quantum wire and quantum dot infrared photodetectors (QWIPs, QRIPs and QDIPs, respectively) based on physical analysis of the factors determining their operation. The operation of the devices under consideration is associated with the intersubband (intraband) electron transitions from the bound states in QWs, QRs and QDs into the continuum states owing to the absorption of infrared radiation. The redistribution of the electric potential across the device active region caused by the photoionization of QWs, QRs and QDs affects the electron injection from the emitting contact. The injection current provides the effect of current gain. Since the electron thermoemission and capture substantially determine the electric potential distribution and, therefore, the injection current, these processes are also crucial for the device performance. To compare the dark current, responsivity and detectivity of QWIPs, QRIPs and QDIPs we use simplified but rather general semi-phenomenological formulae which relate these device characteristics to the rates of the thermoemission and photoemission of electrons from and their capture to the QWs and the QR and QD arrays. These rates are expressed via the photoemission cross-section, capture probability and so on, and the structural parameters. Calculating the ratios of the QWIP, QRIP and QDIP characteristics using our semi-phenomenological model, we show that: the responsivity of QRIPs and QDIPs can be much higher than the responsivity of QWIPs, however, higher responsivity is inevitably accompanied by higher dark current; the detectivity of QRIPs and QDIPs with low-density arrays of relatively large QRs and QDs is lower than that of QWIPs; the detectivity of QRIPs and QDIPs based on dense arrays can significantly exceed the detectivity of QWIPs.

show abstract

“…Uma alternativa para os detectores QWIPs são os pontos quânticos, QDIPs (Quantum Dot Infrared Photodetector), que teoricamente podem apresentar uma performance muito superior, com maior detectividade e operando a temperaturas mais elevadas, devido à sua baixa corrente de escuro (Bhattacharya et al, 2002;Yakimov et al, 2001;Gunapala et al, 2006;Razeghi et al, 2002).…”

Section: Novas Tecnologias E Tendências Para O IV Próximo Médio E Dis...unclassified

Fotometria e imageamento THz de fontes termicas e não-termicas

Melo¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Quantum Dot Long-Wavelength Detectors

Cited by 3 publications

References 26 publications

Tunable normal incidence Ge quantum dot midinfrared detectors

Tunable normal incidence Ge quantum dot midinfrared detectors

Comparison of dark current, responsivity and detectivity in different intersubband infrared photodetectors

Fotometria e imageamento THz de fontes termicas e não-termicas

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About