2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.apsusc.2010.03.045
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Roughness evolution of Si surfaces upon Ar ion erosion

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
3
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
1
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The scaling exponents α = 0.26 ± 0.03 and β = 0.23 ± 0.02 are the same for both samples, i.e., independent of the roughness statistical parameters and of the crystallographic orientation of the Si substrate. Notice that, this independence of the scaling exponents on the substrate roughness was also observed in [10] during Ar ion etching of Si substrates. At the same time, the authors of [21] observed during heteroepitaxial growth of Fe films on Si substrates a difference between the scaling exponents depending on the crystallographic orientation of the substrate.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 70%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The scaling exponents α = 0.26 ± 0.03 and β = 0.23 ± 0.02 are the same for both samples, i.e., independent of the roughness statistical parameters and of the crystallographic orientation of the Si substrate. Notice that, this independence of the scaling exponents on the substrate roughness was also observed in [10] during Ar ion etching of Si substrates. At the same time, the authors of [21] observed during heteroepitaxial growth of Fe films on Si substrates a difference between the scaling exponents depending on the crystallographic orientation of the substrate.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 70%
“…However, as was indicated in [8], this simple expression ignores the fact that the memory of the initial roughness is lost during the growth process. Moreover, this expression cannot explain the surface smoothening observed in a number of experiments in the initial stages of film growth [4,5,9] and ion etching [10]. The authors of [8] analyzed the problem in more detail within the linear theory of film growth and demonstrated that equation ( 1) is still valid if we consider the contribution of the rough substrate to the film evolution to depend on the deposition time, i.e., σ S → σ S (t) in equation ( 1), and to decay universally upon film growth as…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 91%
“…The samples investigated were Si-terminated ML stacks consisting of 50 Mo/Si bilayers deposited on an ultra-smooth Si wafer. They were produced by magnetron sputtering, with post-deposition polishing of the individual Si layers by low energy Kr ions [19,20]. The layer thicknesses were ∼3 nm (Mo) and ∼4 nm (Si).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These were deposited by magnetron sputtering using in-house deposition facilities. An additional ion polishing step was applied to the Si layers in order to minimize the development of interfacial roughness during the course of the deposition[59,60]. (2013) 113507-113512. http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4821844 resonance in the nuclear reaction at 6.385 MeV, were detected with a 4x4 inch bismuth germanate scintillation detector placed directly behind the sample.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%