| Literature DB >> 28931815 |
Kai Zang1, Xiao Jiang2,3, Yijie Huo4, Xun Ding2,3, Matthew Morea4, Xiaochi Chen4, Ching-Ying Lu4, Jian Ma2,3, Ming Zhou5, Zhenyang Xia5, Zongfu Yu5, Theodore I Kamins4, Qiang Zhang2,3, James S Harris4.
Abstract
Silicon single-photon avalanche detectors are becoming increasingly significant in research and in practical applications due to their high signal-to-noise ratio, complementary metal oxide semiconductor compatibility, room temperature operation, and cost-effectiveness. However, there is a trade-off in current silicon single-photon avalanche detectors, especially in the near infrared regime. Thick-junction devices have decent photon detection efficiency but poor timing jitter, while thin-junction devices have good timing jitter but poor efficiency. Here, we demonstrate a light-trapping, thin-junction Si single-photon avalanche diode that breaks this trade-off, by diffracting the incident photons into the horizontal waveguide mode, thus significantly increasing the absorption length. The photon detection efficiency has a 2.5-fold improvement in the near infrared regime, while the timing jitter remains 25 ps. The result provides a practical and complementary metal oxide semiconductor compatible method to improve the performance of single-photon avalanche detectors, image sensor arrays, and silicon photomultipliers over a broad spectral range.The performance of silicon single-photon avalanche detectors is currently limited by the trade-off between photon detection efficiency and timing jitter. Here, the authors demonstrate how a CMOS-compatible, nanostructured, thin junction structure can make use of tailored light trapping to break this trade-off.Entities:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28931815 PMCID: PMC5607005 DOI: 10.1038/s41467-017-00733-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nat Commun ISSN: 2041-1723 Impact factor: 14.919
Fig. 1Structure of light-trapping SPAD. a Three-dimensional (3D) cross-sectional schematics of layer configurations of control (left) and light-trapping SPADs (right). The color legend shows the names of all the layers in both devices. The design thicknesses of layers from N+ to the bottom oxide layer of SOI substrate are sequentially listed 600, 300, 700, 200, 500, 220, and 400 nm for both devices. b, c Scanning electron microscope (SEM) images (45° view of top of structure) of control (b) and light-trapping SPADs (c) both with 50 μm diameter. Scale bar in both, 20 μm. d SEM image (top-down view) of inverse pyramid nano-structure on light-trapping SPAD. Scale bar, 1 μm
Fig. 2Simulation of photon distribution probability and jitter performance. a FDTD simulation of 850 nm wavelength photon distribution in a control SPAD (left), nano-textured SPAD on Si substrate (middle), and light-trapping SPAD (right). Photons are incident in positive Z direction. The color bar on the right shows the color map of photon distribution probability density. b Normalized flux of 850 nm photons propagating varying horizontal distance in a control SPAD (blue cross), nano-textured SPAD on Si substrate (turquoise triangle) and light-trapping SPAD (magenta circle). c Monte Carlo simulation of jitter distribution at given photon absorption distribution for a control SPAD (blue) and light-trapping SPAD (red). d Simulated photon absorption at varying depths for a control SPAD (blue) and light-trapping SPAD (red), with top surface at 0 μm. Shaded areas correspond to regions being nano-structured. Dashed lines denote respective doping layer in an NIP junction from left (surface) to right (substrate)
Fig. 3EQE measurement. a EQE measurements of 500 μm diameter control (blue solid) and light-trapping SPADs (red solid); dashed black lines correspond to theoretical absorption of 3, 12, and 25 μm thick Si from left to right. b EQE enhancement: ratio of light-trapping SPAD EQE compared to control SPAD EQE at different wavelengths
Fig. 4Single photon measurements. In all figures, blue stands for control SPADs and red for light-trapping SPADs. The error bars in a–c are estimated measurement uncertainty (see Supplementary Notes 3 and 4 for uncertainty analysis). a PDE vs. excess voltage at 850 nm wavelength, error bar, s. d. b PDE vs. excess voltage at 980 nm wavelength, Error bar, s.d. c Jitter (FWHM) vs. excess voltage at 940 nm and 1 photon per pulse, error bar, s.d. d Jitter distribution of two SPADs at 940 nm wavelength with FWHM of 25 ps, measured at 1 photon per pulse and corrected for pile-up effect
Fig. 5Dark count rate. Dark count rate comparison of thicker-junction SPADs (3.5 μm) on Si substrates with and without nanostructured surface