2015
DOI: 10.1149/2.0061506ssl
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Strong Diffusion Suppression of Low Energy-Implanted Phosphorous in Germanium by N2 Co-Implantation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
16
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
4
16
0
Order By: Relevance
“…• C. 8 On the contrary, the released phosphorous diffuses to the Ge bulk. (iv) P bulk diffusion beyond the a/c interface depends strongly on the CL.…”
Section: Phosphorous and Nitrogen Diffusion Results-figures 9 And 10mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…• C. 8 On the contrary, the released phosphorous diffuses to the Ge bulk. (iv) P bulk diffusion beyond the a/c interface depends strongly on the CL.…”
Section: Phosphorous and Nitrogen Diffusion Results-figures 9 And 10mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Implantation conditions were chosen the same as in Ref. 8 • C, and SiO 2 or Si 3 N 4 both deposited at 250…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…45 The lower carrier concentration for arsenic observed in this work is unlikely due to diffusion suppression. Nitrogen has been reported to supress diffusion of As in Ge 51 and also suppression of B in Si 52 but has not been reported to suppress the diffusion of As in Si. The lower observed carrier concentration is more likely to be attributed to poor yields of the alkyne-azide fusion reaction.…”
Section: Dopant Profilingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One possible approach that has not been fully explored is the co-implantation of fluorine and donors, with the explicit intention of leveraging the high electronegativity of fluorine to preferentially complex with vacancies present in the material, thus neutralizing their effect on the donors [19]. Density Functional Theory (DFT) calculations [20] indicate that the binding energy of a fluorine-vacancy (FV) complex is significantly higher than the DV complexes, whilst the formation of fluorinedonor complexes are considered highly unlikely (in contrast with the case of nitrogen [21] and carbon co-doping [22]). This approach is therefore expected to significantly improve the donor electrical activity through both reduced DV complex formation and retarded diffusivity (donor diffusion is vacancy-assisted).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%