1984
DOI: 10.1016/0039-6028(84)90068-2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The effect of surface roughness on XPS and AES

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

1988
1988
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 38 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This is expected because angle resolved XPS is a good method to study the nanoscale surface composition and structure of the flat surfaces; however, it gives very complex results for rough surfaces. According to De Bernardez et al,49 the complexity of the XPS results on rough surfaces is due to two competitive mechanisms: (i) the shadowing effect of the neighboring clusters, which is the main effect and (ii) the electron emission from a tilted surface. Therefore, the XPS peak intensities are no straightforward for interpretation in case of rough substrates.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is expected because angle resolved XPS is a good method to study the nanoscale surface composition and structure of the flat surfaces; however, it gives very complex results for rough surfaces. According to De Bernardez et al,49 the complexity of the XPS results on rough surfaces is due to two competitive mechanisms: (i) the shadowing effect of the neighboring clusters, which is the main effect and (ii) the electron emission from a tilted surface. Therefore, the XPS peak intensities are no straightforward for interpretation in case of rough substrates.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We are aware that sensu stricto XPS analysis (like CA analysis) requires smooth homogeneous surfaces as surface roughness can affect the intensity of the XPS signal 49 50 . As an estimate for the influence of surface roughness the full width at half maximum (FWHM) of the Si 2p PE was used.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since it is more pronounced in the more surface sensitive 395 eV measurements, we infer that it is caused by the change in surface texture induced by etching (as discussed below) which may alter the sensitivity factors for photoelectrons generated from subsurface carbon. In particular, increased roughness results in a lower signal due to a broadening of the angular distribution of photoelectrons [31].…”
Section: A Xps C(1s)mentioning
confidence: 99%