| Literature DB >> 22824144 |
Vladimir A Yuryev1, Larisa V Arapkina, Mikhail S Storozhevykh, Valery A Chapnin, Kirill V Chizh, Oleg V Uvarov, Victor P Kalinushkin, Elena S Zhukova, Anatoly S Prokhorov, Igor E Spektor, Boris P Gorshunov.
Abstract
: Issues ofEntities:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22824144 PMCID: PMC3466158 DOI: 10.1186/1556-276X-7-414
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nanoscale Res Lett ISSN: 1556-276X Impact factor: 4.703
Figure 1Schematics of the Stacks of five layers of Ge hut clusters (quantum dots) separated by Si barriers are built in the intrinsic domains of the p–i–n diodes; the p–i–n mesa structures were formed on CZ n-Si(100) substrates (ρ=0.1 Ω cm); composition and thickness of each layer of the mesa structures as well as locations of Al contacts are shown in the scatches; (a) in the R 163 structure, the boron concentration in the Si cap layer is ∼5×1018 cm−3; (b) the boron concentration in the Si cap layer of the R 166 structure is ∼1019 cm−3.
Main parameters of the terahertz BWO-spectrometer
| Frequency range , THz | 0.03 to 2 |
|---|---|
| Probing radiation power, mW | 1 to 100 |
| Frequency resolution: | |
| relative, | 10−4–10−5 |
| absolute, cm−1 | 0.001 |
| Dynamical range, dB | 40 to 60 |
| Signal to noise ratio | 104 to 106 |
| Probing radiation polarization degree, % | 99.99 |
| Time to record a spectrum of 100 points, s: | |
| amplitude | 10 to 20 |
| phase | 20 to 40 |
| Temperature interval, K | 2 to 300 |
| Magnetic fields, T | up to 7 |
Figure 2STM images of Ge/Si(001) quantum dot arrays grown at 360℃. hGe(Å) is (a) 6, (b) 8, (c) 10, (d) 14, (e) 15, (f) 18.
Figure 3STM empty-state images of high-temperature pyramids. Tgr=650℃; (a) 87×87 nm, steps of the incomplete upper left facet, running normal to the base side, are seen near the left corner of the pyramid; (b) 87×87 nm, a cluster with edges split near the base and an apex formed by a set of incomplete {105} facets; (c) 57×57 nm, a magnified image of a facet with several {105} incomplete facets near an apex; (d) 22×22 nm, a split edge near a base.
Figure 4RHEED patterns of Ge/Si(001) films. E = 10 keV, [110] azimuth; (a) Tgr= 650℃, hGe= 4 Å; (b) Tgr= 360℃, hGe= 4 Å; (c) Tgr= 650℃, hGe= 5 Å; (d) Tgr= 650℃, hGe= 5 Å, annealing at the deposition temperature for 7 min; (e) Tgr= 650℃, hGe= 6 Å, the similar pattern is obtained for Tgr= 600℃; the patterns were obtained at room temperature after sample cooling.
Figure 5RHEED patterns of Ge/Si(001) deposited at 600℃ obtained during sample cooling. hGe= 6 Å; E = 10 keV, [110] azimuth; cooling rate is ∼0.4℃/s (see the cooling diagram in Ref. [10]); (a) T=600℃, before cooling; (b)–(d) during cooling, time from beginning of cooling (min.): (b) 1, (c) 2, (d) 3; (e) room temperature, after cooling; arrows indicate the arising ½-reflexes to demonstrate a process of the (2×1) pattern appearance; the images were cut from frames of a film.
Figure 6HRTEM data for the five-layer Ge/Si heterostructure with buried Ge clusters. h = 6 Å (see Figure 2a); (a) a long shot, the mark is 100 nm; (b) Ge clusters resolved in a layer, figure ‘1’ indicates one of the clusters, ‘2’ shows a WL segment; the mark is 50 nm; (c),(d) magnified images of a Ge cluster, the panel (d) corresponds to the light square in the panel (c); the marks are 10 and 5 nm, respectively; (e) a close-up image of a domain next to the top of the cluster imaged in (d); (f) the Fourier transform of the image (e), the measured periods are ∼5.4 Å along [001] and ∼3.8 Å along [110]; arrows in panels (c) to (f) indicate the [001] direction.
Figure 7HRTEM images of the one-layer Ge/Si structures with buried Ge clusters. h = 10 Å (see Figure 2c); (a) a perfect epitaxial structure of Ge and Si layers; the mark is 10 nm; (b), (c) a huge cluster (> 3,5 nm high) gives rise to tensile strain generating point and extended defects in the Si cap, the stress field spreads under the cluster [the mark is 10 nm in (b)]; (d) a magnified image obtained from the tensile domain, extended defects are seen; ‘1’ denotes Ge clusters, ‘2’ is a domain under tensile stress, ‘3’ indicates a twin boundary.
Figure 8TEM data for the five-layer Ge/Si heterostructures, (a) to (c) h = 9 Å; (d) to (i) h = 10 Å; (a) domains of tensile strain in Si over Ge clusters are observed more or less distinctly near most clusters, but not around all; the surface is down; the mark equals 20 nm; (b), (c) zoom in two strained domains, no extended defects are observed; (d) strained domains are more pronounced, the strain is well recognized even under some clusters; (e) a magnified image of a strained domain; a strained lattice is well contrasted with the normal one; (f) zoom in the dilated lattice, a perfectly ordered lattice is observed; (g) a Si domain next to the Ge/Si interface near the cluster apex, a vacancy (‘V’) and disordered lattice (upper right corner) are revealed; letter ‘I’ indicates the direction to the interface along <11 >; (h) the same as in (g) but some farther from the interface, the lattice is perfect; (i) the Fourier transform of an image obtained from a strained domain demonstrates an enhanced lattice parameter (the strain varies from domain to domain, the estimated lattice period in the [001] direction sometimes reaches ∼ 5.6 Å).
Figure 9STM images of Ge/Si(001), h = 9 Å, T = 360℃. (a) to (d) array top views with different magnifications; (e) a large cluster in the array, ∼ 2,5 nm high; (f) a huge cluster (> 3,5 nm high) interpreted as an array defect.
Figure 10Photo-emf spectra of the (a) R 163: (1) without bias lighting; (2)–(5) under bias lighting (Ge filter): (2) W=0.25 mW/cm2; (3) W=0.77 mW/cm2; (4) W=1.5 mW/cm2; (5) W=2.16 mW/cm2; (b) R 166: (1) without bias lighting; (2)–(6) under bias lighting (Si filter): (2) W=0.63 mW/cm2; (3) W=3.3 mW/cm2; (4) W=5.3 mW/cm2; (5) W=12 mW/cm2; (6) W=17.5 mW/cm2.
Figure 11Schematics of band structures of the Si-diodes with Ge QD arrays represented in Figure 1. (a) R 163, (b) R 166; figures ‘1’, arrows and wavy lines indicate potential barriers for holes in the valence band () which are associated with the Ge QD arrays; black and shaded parts of potential wells show bands of filled (above the Fermi level F) and empty (below F) energy levels in the QD ensemble; two vertical wavy lines in panel (b) indicate a gap in the drawing of a very thick buffer layer of Si (1690 nm) deposited on the n-Si substrate.
Figure 12Dependence of photo-emf response of the R 163 and R 166 The experimental conditions are the same as in Figure 10.
Figure 13Spectra of transmission coefficient of a silicon substrate (a commercial wafer, Dots show the measurement results, lines are least-square fits based on the Drude conductivity model, as described in the text.
Figure 14Temperature dependences of the silicon substrate parameters obtained by fitting the transmission coefficient spectra as shown in Figure 13 and described in the text. (a) plasma frequency of charge carriers and (b) scattering rate. Solid line in (b) shows the T−3/2 behavior.
Figure 15Spectra of transmission coefficient of Ge/Si heterostructure on Si substrate (solid symbols) and of bare substrate (open symbols) measured at two different temperatures. Horizontal lines show the difference in peak transmissivity that is observed at 300 K and disappears at ∼ 170 K. The peaks positions are shifted due to slight difference in the Si substrate thickness.
Figure 16Temperature dependences of dynamical conductivity of Ge/Si heterostructure and of Si substrate. Frequency is around 1 THz.
Figure 17Terahertz conductivity and absorption coefficient of Ge/Si heterostructure with Ge quantum dots versus Ge coverage. (a) terahertz conductivity, (b) absorption coefficient; lines are guides to the eye.