2013
DOI: 10.1063/1.4858957
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Tomographic investigation of fermi level pinning at focused ion beam milled semiconductor surfaces

Abstract: Published by the AIP PublishingArticles you may be interested in Gas source molecular beam epitaxy of scandium nitride on silicon carbide and gallium nitride surfaces J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A 32, 061504 (2014); 10.1116/1.4894816Extending the detection limit of dopants for focused ion beam prepared semiconductor specimens examined by off-axis electron holography

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
(36 reference statements)
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For instance, Wolf et al measure a built-in potential of 0.45 V in Si, whereas 1.0 V is expected. 2 The discrepancy is known to be especially large in GaN, where built-in potentials of around 3.4 V are expected, and values of 0.68 V and lower are generally found. 3,4 To some extend, these discrepancies can be explained by amorphous and defective surface layers (usually dubbed "dead" layers) formed during specimen preparation [5][6][7] or by Fermi level pinning in this defective layers.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…For instance, Wolf et al measure a built-in potential of 0.45 V in Si, whereas 1.0 V is expected. 2 The discrepancy is known to be especially large in GaN, where built-in potentials of around 3.4 V are expected, and values of 0.68 V and lower are generally found. 3,4 To some extend, these discrepancies can be explained by amorphous and defective surface layers (usually dubbed "dead" layers) formed during specimen preparation [5][6][7] or by Fermi level pinning in this defective layers.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…3,4 To some extend, these discrepancies can be explained by amorphous and defective surface layers (usually dubbed "dead" layers) formed during specimen preparation [5][6][7] or by Fermi level pinning in this defective layers. 2,8 Irradiation by the electron beam during the electron holographic experiments (usually 200-300 kV) generates electronhole pairs within the depletion region. Usually this effect is not considered as a reason for the discrepancy.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The ability to measure local variations in charge density, electric field, and electrostatic potential in nanoscale materials and devices, such as doped semiconductors [1][2][3][4] and nanoscale field emitters, [5][6][7][8] in the transmission electron microscope (TEM) is important for understanding the relationship between internal microstructure, chemistry, defects, and functional properties.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We obtained V bi values that are comparable to the Si bandgap at RT in the p/n growth sequence for both types of growth. This was unexpected, since it has also been observed that measured V bi values via EH can be up to 55% lower than expected [51]. Although these differences are known to increase for materials with larger bandgaps [28] and lower doping levels [52].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 83%