Understanding the growth mode transition in InAs/GaAs(001) quantum dot formation

Krzyzewski, T. J.; Joyce, P. B.; Bell, Gavin R.; Jones, T.S.

doi:10.1016/s0039-6028(03)00455-2

Cited by 31 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the literature, the above experimental observations [89,[123][124][125][126][127][128] have often been taken as strong experimental evidence to support the view that InAs QD formation should be a surface process remarkably similar to adatom aggregation in homoepitaxial growth in the submonolayer regime. However, it will be further demonstrated in Section 4 that the outcome of practical epitaxial growth of InAs QDs depends sensitively on the growth parameters, such as the flux rate F and temperature T ; although some experimental data in the literature obtained under certain growth conditions seem to be consistent with Eqs.…”

Section: Fitting Experimental Data On the Density And Size Distributimentioning

confidence: 81%

“…In contrast, from the experimental viewpoint, InAs QD formation is definitely a self-limited growth process, and the growth power law s av ∝ θ z for an aggregation process makes no sense for InAs QD growth behavior. Therefore, the apparent fitting of the experimental data reported in these references [89,[123][124][125][126][127][128] may only demonstrate that both the universal laws, Eqs. (3.2.2.9) and (3.2.3.6), are very versatile and flexible in fitting experimental data obtained in a large number of cases, and may provide little insight into the nature of the InAs QD formation process.…”

Section: Fitting Experimental Data On the Density And Size Distributimentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Moreover, by such a fitting, Shiramine et al [125] even obtained a critical island size of 1-10 atoms for InAs QD formation via adatom aggregation and a thermal activation energy of 2.0 eV for the corresponding Arrhenius behavior. Even further, some authors [127,128] have successfully fitted their experimental observations of the InAs QD size distribution with the scale invariance ansatz, Eq. (3.2.3.6), even though InAs QD formation is generally regarded as a self-limited growth phenomenon from the experimental viewpoint, which will be further discussed in the remainder of this section.…”

Section: Fitting Experimental Data On the Density And Size Distributimentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Self-assembly of InAs quantum dots on GaAs(001) by molecular beam epitaxy

Jin

2015

Front. Phys.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Currently, the nature of self-assembly of three-dimensional epitaxial islands or quantum dots (QDs) in a lattice-mismatched heteroepitaxial growth system, such as InAs/GaAs(001) and Ge/Si(001) as fabricated by molecular beam epitaxy (MBE), is still puzzling. The purpose of this article is to discuss how the self-assembly of InAs QDs in MBE InAs/GaAs(001) should be properly understood in atomic scale. First, the conventional kinetic theories that have traditionally been used to interpret QD self-assembly in heteroepitaxial growth with a significant lattice mismatch are reviewed briefly by examining the literature of the past two decades. Second, based on their own experimental data, the authors point out that InAs QD self-assembly can proceed in distinctly different kinetic ways depending on the growth conditions and so cannot be framed within a universal kinetic theory, and, furthermore, that the process may be transient, or the time required for a QD to grow to maturity may be significantly short, which is obviously inconsistent with conventional kinetic theories. Third, the authors point out that, in all of these conventional theories, two well-established experimental observations have been overlooked: i) A large number of “floating” indium atoms are present on the growing surface in MBE InAs/GaAs(001); ii) an elastically strained InAs film on the GaAs(001) substrate should be mechanically unstable. These two well-established experimental facts may be highly relevant and should be taken into account in interpreting InAs QD formation. Finally, the authors speculate that the formation of an InAs QD is more likely to be a collective event involving a large number of both indium and arsenic atoms simultaneously or, alternatively, a morphological/structural transformation in which a single atomic InAs sheet is transformed into a three-dimensional InAs island, accompanied by the rehybridization from the sp 2-bonded to sp 3-bonded atomic configuration of both indium and arsenic elements in the heteroepitaxial growth system.

show abstract

Section: Fitting Experimental Data On the Density And Size Distributimentioning

confidence: 81%

Section: Fitting Experimental Data On the Density And Size Distributimentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Fitting Experimental Data On the Density And Size Distributimentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Self-assembly of InAs quantum dots on GaAs(001) by molecular beam epitaxy

Jin

2015

Front. Phys.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They presented in situ STM measurements of InAs-QDs grown on GaAs (1 0 0) by MBE and observed two regions, similar to our results. They explained that this step consisted of InGaAs alloy due to InAs and GaAs [13][14][15]. In the case of the Ref sample, InAs-QDs are grown randomly at the two regions because of a lack of sufficient migration time for In.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The substrates were conventional semi-insulating GaAs (1 0 0) wafers. The substrates were cleaned in situ in the main chamber to remove native oxides on the GaAs substrate by a heat treatment at 580 1C for a period of 15 buffer layer was grown at 580 1C and InAs-QDs were then grown at 480 1C. The Ga, In, and As fluxes were 1.75 Â 10 À7 , 7.2 Â 10 À8 , and 5.0 Â 10 À6 Torr, respectively.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Self-alignment of self-assembled InAs quantum dots

Hong

Lee

Kwack

et al. 2006

Journal of Crystal Growth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Theoretical Investigations for Surface Reconstructions of Submonolayer InAs Grown on GaAs(001)

Akiyama

Nakamura

et al. 2018

Phys. Status Solidi A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Surface reconstructions of submonolayer InAs grown on GaAs(001) are investigated using ab initio pseudopotential calculations. Decreasing As chemical potential, calculated formation energies as a function of As chemical potential reveals that the surface reconstructions change from (4 Â 3) with one In-As and two As dimers at InAs coverage θ ¼ 0.71 monolayer (ML) to (2 Â 4) at θ ¼ 1.38 ML via c(4 Â 4) with two In-As and one As dimers at θ ¼ 0.88 ML. It should be noted that the (4 Â 3) with two In-As and one As dimers is less stable than the c(4 Â 4) with the same dimer constituents. The c(4 Â 4) with two In-As and one As dimers is still stable even due to the lattice constraint of GaAs that tend to destabilize c(4 Â 4) and (2 Â 4) but stabilize many (4 Â 3) phases. Consequently, the newly found c(4 Â 4) is an intermediate phase to form the (2 Â 4) domain on the (4 Â 3) surface in InAs/GaAs(001). status solidi physica a www.advancedsciencenews.com www.pss-a.com

show abstract

Understanding the growth mode transition in InAs/GaAs(001) quantum dot formation

Cited by 31 publications

References 19 publications

Self-assembly of InAs quantum dots on GaAs(001) by molecular beam epitaxy

Self-assembly of InAs quantum dots on GaAs(001) by molecular beam epitaxy

Self-alignment of self-assembled InAs quantum dots

Theoretical Investigations for Surface Reconstructions of Submonolayer InAs Grown on GaAs(001)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About