| Literature DB >> 31594976 |
Soyeong Kwon1, Min Hee Kwon1, Jungeun Song1, Eunah Kim1, Youngji Kim2, Bo Ra Kim1, Jerome K Hyun2, Sang Wook Lee1, Dong-Wook Kim3.
Abstract
In this work, the surface potential (VS) of exfoliated MoS2 monolayers on Au nanostripe arrays with period of 500 nm was investigated using Kelvin probe force microscopy. The surface morphology showed that the suspended MoS2 region between neighboring Au stripes underwent tensile-strain. In the dark, the VS of the MoS2 region on the Au stripe (VS-Au) was larger than that of the suspended MoS2 region (VS-S). However, under green light illumination, VS-Au became smaller than VS-S. To explain the VS modification, band diagrams have been constructed taking into consideration not only the local strain but also the electronic interaction at the MoS2/Au interface. The results of this work provide a basis for understanding the electrical properties of MoS2-metal contacts and improving the performance of MoS2-based optoelectronic devices.Entities:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31594976 PMCID: PMC6783531 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-50950-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1(a) Top view scanning electron micrograph and (b) a schematic diagram of a patterned Au stripe array on a SiO2/Si substrate.
Figure 2(a) An AFM topography image (area: 10 × 10 μm2) with 2 μm scale bar and a height profile and (b) a Raman spectrum of a MoS2 monolayer on a SiO2/Si substrate. (c) An optical microscopy image of the MoS2 monolayer transferred on an Au stripe array (area: 15 × 15 μm2).
Figure 3(a) AFM topography images and height profiles of (a) a MoS2 monolayer on an Au stripe array and (b) a bare Au stripe array. (c) A schematic cross-sectional view of a MoS2 monolayer on an Au stripe array. (d) A schematic illustration of the method to estimate strain in the samples. L0 and L indicate the original and strained MoS2 length between the neighboring Au stripes, respectively.
Figure 4(a) A V map and (b) an AFM topography image of a MoS2 monolayer on the Au stripe array. V maps of the same region under illumination of (c) TM- and (d) TE-mode linearly polarized light. (e) Measured surface potential data as a function of distance along the dashed lines on the maps. The black, red, and blue lines represent the measured data in the dark, under TM-mode light, and under TE-mode light, respectively. The yellow bars indicate the region on the Au stripe. (f) The measured SPV data at the MoS2 surface on the Au stripe (indicated by ‘Au’) and the suspended MoS2 surface (indicated by ‘Suspended’) under illumination with TM (red) and TE (blue) mode light.
Figure 5(a) Schematic band diagrams to explain the relation used in KPFM measurements, WF = WFtip − eV, where WF, WFtip, e, and VS are the work function of a sample (MoS2), the work function of the tip, the electron charge, and the surface potential, respectively. Evac, EC, EF, and EV are the vacuum level, conduction band minimum, Fermi level, and the valence band minimum of a sample, respectively. (b) The interfacial electric dipole energy, Δϕ, lowers the WF of the MoS2 region on the Au stripe (WF-S). It should be noted that eV = WFtip − WF. The band diagrams in (a,b) indicate V < 0, consistent with our experimental results. Thus, reduction of WF increases V and decreases |V| (V < 0), as illustrated in (b). Schematic band diagrams and illustration of the MoS2 monolayers on the Au stripe arrays in the dark, when including (c) only strain-induced bandgap reduction and (d) additional electronic interaction at the MoS2/Au interface.