Shu-Han Hsu1, Chia-Chen Wan2, Ta-Chun Cho3, Yao-Jen Lee3. 1. Sirindhorn International Institute of Technology (SIIT), Thammasat University, Pathum Thani 12120, Thailand. 2. Department of Electronics Engineering, National Chiao-Tung University, Rm. 107, Engineering Building D, Kuang-Fu Campus, No. 1001, University Road, Hsinchu, Taiwan. 3. Taiwan Semiconductor Research Institute, Hsinchu, Taiwan.
Abstract
Monolayer doping is a possible method for achieving complex-geometry structures with different semiconductors. Understanding the dopant diffusion behavior of monolayer doping, especially under different heating sources, is essential for further improvement. We examine and compare the doping profile and dopant activation with two different heating sources (rapid thermal annealing and microwave annealing), especially focused on SiO2/Si interface. These heating sources are used for junction diode fabrication, to realize current switching behavior. Direct observations of monolayer doping profiles, especially inside the capping oxide, are discussed to provide quantitative information for dopant concentration. This can provide significant information for better tuning of surface chemistries and process protocols applied in monolayer doping methodologies.
Monolayer doping is a possible method for achieving complex-geometry structures with different semiconductors. Understanding the dopant diffusion behavior of monolayer doping, especially under different heating sources, is essential for further improvement. We examine and compare the doping profile and dopant activation with two different heating sources (rapid thermal annealing and microwave annealing), especially focused on SiO2/Si interface. These heating sources are used for junction diode fabrication, to realize current switching behavior. Direct observations of monolayer doping profiles, especially inside the capping oxide, are discussed to provide quantitative information for dopant concentration. This can provide significant information for better tuning of surface chemistries and process protocols applied in monolayer doping methodologies.
Monolayer
doping is a potential doping technique to tackle the
challenges in the formation of sub-10-nm ultrashallow junctions. It
is suitable for doping in complex-geometry structures, such as nanopillar
arrays or fins in junctionless devices. It has advantages for mass
production and is applicable to semiconductors like n class="Chemical">Si, Ge, InAs,
GaAs, etc.
First, dopant-carrying molecules are covalently immobilized
on
the semiconductor surface via a surface reaction with an anchoring
group. Due to the self-limiting properties on the surface, the dose
of dopant molecules can be manipulated by optimizing the anchoring
group reaction conditions and molecular size. Subsequently, this monolayer
doping technique can create an ultrashallow junction. This is followed
by an annealing step for the incorporation and diffusion of dopants
into substrates.[1,2]Boron dopants introduced
by monolayer doping indeed draw much attention,
ranging from molecule selection[3] and monolayer
composition[4] to capping oxide consideration.[5] Ye and co-workers designed a new molecule with
carborane cluster having 10 boron atoms per molecule to enhance doping
levels in silicon.[3] Besides, they also
performed a detailed study on the relation between the mixing ratio
of molecules in solution and the doping dose inside the silicon after
annealing.[4]A few monolayer doping
methods were developed to enhance doping
efficiency. Briefly, the key difference is whether capping oxide is
applied. Previous studies used a layer of oxide over the monolayer
before thermal annealing and stated that this decreases the escape
of organic dopant molecules from the surface into the ambient environment.[1] Recent publication demonstrates the effect of
capping oxide for noncovalent monolayers of phenylboronic acid (PBA),
where the capping oxide not only prevents boron outdiffusion but also
acts as a thin solid source for monolayer doping methodologies.[5] Gao et al. noted that oxygen from the SiO2 capping layer can diffuse into the silicon substrate and
bond with boron dopants that slightly deactivate boron dopants (but
less than 1%).[6] Apparently, oxide capping
layer plays a significant role in the monolayer doping process. However,
there is no direct observation of the boron dopant distribution inside
capping oxide layer after thermal treatment. Therefore, quantitative
analysis is desired to provide significant information for better
tuning of surface chemistries and process protocols applied in monolayer
doping methodologies.Precisely controlling the dopant distribution
in nanoscale transistors
is a challenge. Therefore, dopant diffusion is often confined using
rapid thermal annealing (RTA) with a low thermal budget. Previous
works have confirmed that microwave annealing (MWA) is a good candidate
to replace RTA during the activation process for nanoscale devices
and three-dimensional (3D) integrated circuits (ICs).[7−9] This is due to its ability to provide a lower process temperature
for satisfactory activation, restraining the dopant diffusion. With
such low-temperature characteristics of MWA, an extended annealing
time is required to provide an equal amount of thermal budget for
dopant diffusion and activation, compared to RTA.This work
focuses on understanding the dopant distribution inside
Si and the capping oxide layer, especially with different thermal
treatments by RTA and MWA. First, boron-containing molecules (vinylboronic
acid dibutyl ester) modify the Si substrate, followed by oxide capping.
After advanced annealing by RTA and MWA, monolayer molecules thermally
decompose and dopant atoms coming from a segment of the monolayer
diffuse into the target substrates (Figure ). X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS)
and point-by-point correction of secondary-ion mass spectrometry (PCOR-SIMS)
are utilized to understand the type of dopant diffusion and the precise
dopant distribution with dopant loss minimization. Further, this study
also demonstrates ultrashallow diode junction formation with monolayer
doping by RTA and MWA activation, which is applicable for device fabrications.
Figure 1
Schematic
representation of boron monolayer doping with rapid thermal
annealing and microwave annealing.
Schematic
representation of n class="Chemical">boron monolayer doping with rapid thermal
annealing and microwave annealing.
Results and Discussion
Formation of Boron-Containing
SAM (B SAM)
The exposure of the n class="Chemical">Si surface to a solution
of aqueous (HF) (5
wt %) for 1 min results in the removal of native n class="Chemical">oxide, with hydrogen
termination (water contact angle ≈80°, Figure , H-Si). After hydrosilylation
with vinylboronic acid dibutyl ester, a clear change in the polarity
of the surface is observed, as witnessed by a drop in the contact
angle to 60 ± 1°, indicating the formation of the boron-containing
SAM (B SAM).
Further evidence for the formation of the B SAM
is the peak at 185 eV in the XPS B 1s spectrum, which is characteristic
of the O–B–O boron of the B SAM (Figure a). The B SAM was capped with a layer of
SiO2 (15 nm) to prevent the outdiffusion of boron dopant
during thermal annealing. This oxide capping is removed before the
XPS measurement. To get clear information on the diffusion of dopant
atoms after thermal annealing, angle-resolved analysis (ARXPS) was
used to detect the chemical bonding states of boron inside the silicon
lattice, focusing on the surface layer. The B 1s spectra can be individually
decomposed into two spectra having binding energies of 186 and 188.8
eV (Figure b–d).
The binding energy at 186 eV is assigned to electrically activated
boron, and the binding energy at 188.8 eV is attributed to boron clusters
(such clusters cannot contribute electrical conduction).[10] The B SAM treated by RTA at 1000 °C for
60 s (Figure b) has
a higher ratio of activated boron, relative to annealing by MWA at
2800 W for 150 s (Figure c). Microwave annealing is a relatively low-temperature process
compared with RTA.[7] Therefore, boron atoms
from monolayer doped into silicon substrate by MWA cannot achieve
full activation by silicon atom replacement and some boron remains
as deactivated clusters. The spectra of BF2 implantation
(20 keV with a dose of 5 × 1015 cm–2) reveal that boron clusters are the dominant component on the Si
surface without annealing, and they require a descent amount of thermal
treatment for boron activation along with Si recrystallization. In
general, full recrystallization of Si lattice is hard to achieve without
junction depth compromised (Figure d).[9,11]
Figure 2
X-ray photoelectron spectra of B 1s of
(a) B SAM, followed by (b)
rapid thermal annealing or (c) microwave annealing; (d) sample prepared
by traditional BF2 implantation as reference. The two orange
lines indicate the position of activated boron (186 eV) and boron
clusters (188.8 eV) individually.[10]
X-ray photoelectron spectra of B 1s of
(a) B SAM, followed by (b)
rapid thermal annealing or (c) microwave annealing; (d) sample prepared
by traditional BF2 implantation as reference. The two orange
lines indicate the position of activated boron (186 eV) and boron
clusters (188.8 eV) individually.[10]Secondary-ion mass spectroscopy measurements were
performed to
quantify the doping profile. PCOR-SIMS (EAG Laboratories) was used
to clearly define the boron distribution along the matrix (SiO2/Si). To get complete information on the dopant distribution
after annealing, the capping oxide layer was kept for measurements,
to observe the boron diffusion inside the SiO2 and Si layers
(individually). The interface of SiO2/Si was defined at
10% oxygen intensity, which is decided by comparing the oxygen concentration
before and after oxide removal, to reflect the exact interface position.
As shown in Figure , the peak concentration is inside the oxide capping layer above
the interface at about 1–2 nm for both annealing methods. This
further confirms the successful anchoring of B SAM on the Si surface,
acting like a self-limiting doping source. The standard definition
for junction depth is the distance from the surface at which the doping
concentration drops below 1018 atoms/cc. The junction depth
is 5.1 nm for boron dopants by MWA at 2800 W for 150 s, while the
depth is slightly increased to 7.1 nm for boron doping with RTA at
1000 °C for 60 s. Dopant profile appears to have unsymmetric
distribution that nearly 80% of boron remains inside SiO2. Furthermore, the difference in total thermal budget by MWA and
by RTA appears to impact dopant distribution. A longer annealing time
by MWA allows boron having pronounced diffusion inside SiO2 by thermal conduction resulted from microwave energy absorption.
Limited boron diffusion into Si was observed by considering MWA as
low-temperature treatment, while a relatively higher temperature by
RTA allows dopant diffusion inside SiO2 and into Si uniformly
from monolayer location.
Figure 3
(A) Schematic drawing of dopant distribution
at SiO2/Si interface by RTA and by MWA. (B) SIMS profile
of B SAM-modified
Si substrate by RTA at 1000 °C and by MWA at 2800 W. The boundary
of SiO2/Si was defined at 10% O intensity. The junction
depth is about 7.1 nm for doping with RTA and about 5.1 nm for microwave
annealing. Note that the maximum peak for both methods is in the same
position at 1–2 nm from the SiO2/Si interface, which
exactly corresponds to the monolayer location.
(A) Schematic drawing of dopant distribution
at SiO2/Si interface by RTA and by MWA. (B) SIMS profile
of B SAM-modified
Si substrate by RTA at 1000 °C and by MWA at 2800 W. The boundary
of SiO2/Si was defined at 10% O intensity. The junction
depth is about 7.1 nm for doping with RTA and about 5.1 nm for microwave
annealing. Note that the maximum peak for both methods is in the same
position at 1–2 nm from the SiO2/Si interface, which
exactly corresponds to the monolayer location.By integrating the surface area of the dopant profile (see the Supporting Information), annealing by RTA shows
a 2 times higher dopant concentration inside the Si substrate than
by MWA. The total concentration inside Si and SiO2 was
shown to be a similar level and consistent with the estimated monolayer
coverage. Monolayer doping occurs without outdiffusion under the oxide
capping layer protection. However, less than 20% of the dopants successfully
diffuse inside Si. This is different from the traditional ion implantation,
leading to a higher junction resistance for device applications.Four-point probe measurements (Figure A) were used to obtain sheet resistance values
(Rs) of monolayer doping on Si after RTA
at 900 and 1000 °C, and by MWA at different powers from 1200
to 2800 W individually. For RTA, the Rs values show a sharp decrease with annealing time, at both 900 and
1000 °C. This can be attributed to the efficient activation of
dopants in a short period of time. The enhancement of the diffusivity
constant of B at elevated temperatures can explain that the doping
profile at 1000 °C shows a consistently lower resistance than
at 900 °C after the same annealing time. More boron atoms diffuse
into the SiO2 and Si substrates individually from the B
SAM at a higher temperature in the same period. However, they eventually
have similar resistances due to self-limited source characteristics.
For MWA, the Rs values only show a slight
decrease after annealing from 1200 to 2300 W. When the microwave power
increases to 2800 W, Rs drops about 1
order of magnitude but is still higher than with RTA (Figure A). Temperature correlation
of microwave power shows that microwaving with 2800 W for 150 s is
less than 800 °C[8] and does not provide
as sufficient a thermal budget as RTA at 900 and 1000 °C for
boron dopant activation, which is shown in the XPS spectrum (Figure a). The SIMS profile
presents higher concentrations of boron atoms inside SiO2 for MWA treatment. The insufficient thermal budget and less dopants
inside Si contribute to the higher resistance of monolayer doping
by MWA than by RTA.
Figure 4
(A) Sheet resistance with annealing time for boron monolayer
doping
with RTA at 900 °C, at 1000 °C, and MWA with different powers.
The highlighted circles are the conditions used for the XPS and SIMS
analyses. (B) Sheet resistance as a function of junction depth (X at 1 × 1018/cm3) for boron-doped Si by RTA and MWA, which is compared with
boron monolayer doping from Ho et al.,[1] Ye et al.,[3,4] and traditional implantation techniques.[12−16]
(A) Sheet resistance with annealing time for boron monolayer
doping
with RTA at 900 °C, at 1000 °C, and MWA with different powers.
The highlighted circles are the conditions used for the XPS and SIMS
analyses. (B) Sheet resistance as a function of junction depth (X at 1 × 1018/cm3) for boron-doped Si by RTA and MWA, which is compared with
boron monolayer doping from Ho et al.,[1] Ye et al.,[3,4] and traditional implantation techniques.[12−16]Figure B compares
the current work of monolayer doping by MWA and RTA with other implantation
results. Junction depth (Xj) is defined
at a concentration of 1 × 1018/cm3, and
the shallow junction (Xj) was observed
in this study by MWA, as shown by PCOR-SIMS (Figure B). The current work with monolayer doping
reveals junction requirement, while a higher Rs can be further decreased by multilayer doping of boron-containing
molecules. Such a shallow junction was successfully demonstrated for
its superior properties as conformal shell doping of a junctionless
FinFET device.[17,18]The p–n junction
formation shows rectification for modern
electronic applications and is widely used in MOSFETs to prevent the
source and drain region from leaking current. The starting material
is (100) n-type silicon wafer that is patterned with the B SAM, capped
with SiO2, and followed by two different annealing methods:
RTA and MWA. Figure shows the I–V characteristics
of the monolayer doping with RTA at 1000 °C for 60 s and MWA
at 2800 W for 150 s. The control diode was fabricated by directly
patterning a metal pad on the Si surface, without monolayer doping.
For boron monolayer doping with MWA, the I–V curve shows rectification behavior as a control sample.
This may result from current tunneling with such an ultrashallow junction,
incomplete junction formation due to an insufficient dopant concentration,
and activation level inside the Si layer. For boron monolayer doping
with RTA, a lower leakage current was observed that contributed to
a higher activation rate of dopants with RTA at 1000 °C for 60
s and relatively deeper junction formation. To improve the junction
for monolayer doping with MWA, B SAM modification followed by MWA
was repeated twice. Nearly 2 times the current enhancement was observed
for the forward current. The leakage current was further suppressed,
indicating better junction formation, as shown in the Supporting Information.
Figure 5
(A) I–V characteristics
of a diode junction with monolayer doping by MWA at 2800 W for 150
s and by RTA at 1000 °C for 60 s. (B) Schematic showing the diode
structure without and with monolayer doping.
(A) I–V characteristics
of a diode junction with monolayer doping by n class="Chemical">MWA at 2800 W for 150
s and by n class="Chemical">RTA at 1000 °C for 60 s. (B) Schematic showing the diode
structure without and with monolayer doping.
Conclusions
Direct observation of the monolayer
doping profile, especially
inside capping oxide, is for the first time being discussed comprehensively.
Such a dopant diffusion behavior shows significant influences by heating
source manipulation. Boron dopants diffuse symmetrically into Si and
SiO2 with uniform heating by RTA, while showing an unsymmetrical
distribution profile by MWA. Therefore, the distribution of dopants
can be manipulated by controlling the heating source types with the
self-limited characteristics of monolayer doping.Monolayer
doping provides a shallow dopant distribution that can
be obtained easily, especially without lattice damage. Traditional
implantation damage cannot be fully recovered. This damage-free monolayer
doping with MWA has already been successfully demonstrated for junctionless
device fabrication, showing active leakage current suppression.[17,18] However, monolayer doping has some remaining challenges. The actual
dopant concentration inside Si is much less than that in traditional
ion implantation due to its self-limiting source, and significant
diffusion loss occurs inside the capping oxide, as demonstrated from
this work. Further improvement needs to be focused on the improvement
of the self-limiting source, such as using an organic multilayer structure
or polymer and optimizing the capping materials and thickness to reduce
the dopant loss.The microwave-asn class="Chemical">sisted doping method was extended
to additional
n class="Chemical">dopants such as phosphorus using suitable molecular precursors.[17] This method can be further applied to other
substrates such as Ge and two-dimensional (2D) materials by appropriate
surface chemistry, for improving the fine control of nanomaterials.[19]
Methods
Substrate
and Monolayer Preparation
Single-side-polished silicon substrates
(100) and p-doped and n-doped
silicon substrates were used for monolayer preparation. A hydrogen-terminated
silicon surface was generated by immersion of the substrates in an
HF solution (5 wt %) for 1 min, followed by extensive rinsing with
water. After drying with a nitrogen stream, the substrates were used
immediately for providing freshly hydrogen-terminated surfaces to
form boron-containing monolayers (hydrosilylation by vinylboronic
acid dibutyl ester).[20] Monolayers were
formed in all experiments using diluted reagents as the molecular
precursor, in refluxing mesitylene (bp = 166 °C) as the solvent.
A long needle, serving as the nitrogen inlet, was inserted through
the septum in one of the inlets. Under N2 flow, freshly
hydrogen-terminated samples were inserted. The reactions were carried
out for 4 h at 166 °C. The samples were then rinsed with mesitylene
and acetone to remove physisorbed materials.
Contact
Angle Measurements
Contact
angles were measured with Millipore n class="Chemical">water (18.2 MΩ·cm)
on a Krüss GH-100 contact angle measuring instrument equipped
with a CCD camera. Static angles (θstatic) were determined
automatically by a drop shape analyn class="Chemical">sis.
XPS
XPS spectra were recorded on
a Thermo Fisher Scientific theta probe equipped with a monochromatic
Al Kα X-ray source operated at 1486.6 eV. Angle-resolved analysis
(ARXPS) (takeoff angle, 30°) was used to probe subsurface chemical
states without sputtering (which would destroy the surface). The spectra
were referenced to the main C 1s peak set at 284.0 eV. The X-ray beam
size was varied from 15 to 400 μm. The data were collected from
a surface area of 100 μm × 300 μm with a pass energy
of 224 eV, with a step energy of 0.8 eV for survey scans and 0.4 eV
for high-resolution scans. For quantitative analysis, the sensitivity
factors used to correct the number of counts under each peak were
C 1s, 1.00; N 1s, 1.59. The measurement was made after 25 cycles of
scanning.
PCOR-SIMS
PCOR-SIMS (EAG Laboratories)
was used to measure the continuous dopant distribution based on matrix
composition. This is also called point-by-point-corrected SIMS or
PCOR-SIMS. The SIMS measurements were carried out using a Physical
Electronics ADEPT-1010 quadrupole setup. 10B, 11B, and 30Si were monitored under O2+ bombardment, with an impact energy
of 650 eV incident at 45°. The analysis chamber was backfilled
with a partial pressure of O2 to decrease ion yield variations
at the surface and improve quantification. Secondary ions were collected
from the center 10% of a 450 × 450 μ raster area. Stylus
profilometry was used to determine the depth of sputtered craters
and calibrate the depth scale, assuming a constant sputter rate for
the entire profile. Concentrations of 10B and 11B in the Si were calculated, using the relative sensitivity factor
determined from a standard sample. The B profiles were normalized
on a point-to-point basis to the 30Si profile before the
relative sensitivity factor was applied.
Microwave
System
A custom-made microwave
system conn class="Chemical">sisted of a vertical heating chamber (5.57 × 106 cm3) with n class="Chemical">six heating powers. It can be operated
to adjust the input power from 100 to 600 s. Microwaves were generated
by magnetrons, and the frequency is 5.8 GHz. The power amplitude of
each magnetron is about 500–600 W. A nitrogen purge was performed
before starting the microwave, and the N2 flow was maintained
throughout the process. The microwave power and time settings were
obtained from a previous correlation study with RTA.
Thermal Processor
Rapid thermal annealing
was performed un class="Chemical">sing an AG Associates Heatpulse 610 rapid thermal processor.
The semiconductor-grade quartz process chamber can use 21 tunpan>gsten
halogen lamps in an upper and lower array with an extended-range pyrometer
(400–1300 °C). The heating rate is user-controllable from
1 to 200 °C/s.
Motorized Four-Point Probe
Sheet
ren class="Chemical">sistance was measured by a motorized four-point probe setup (Swing,
MFP6). All samples were sealed in a n class="Chemical">nitrogen flow chamber immediately
after HF dipping and measured by a tungsten-steel probe.
Authors: Johnny C Ho; Roie Yerushalmi; Gregory Smith; Prashant Majhi; Joseph Bennett; Jeffri Halim; Vladimir N Faifer; Ali Javey Journal: Nano Lett Date: 2009-02 Impact factor: 11.189
Authors: Liang Ye; Sidharam P Pujari; Han Zuilhof; Tibor Kudernac; Michel P de Jong; Wilfred G van der Wiel; Jurriaan Huskens Journal: ACS Appl Mater Interfaces Date: 2015-01-29 Impact factor: 9.229
Authors: Johnny C Ho; Roie Yerushalmi; Zachery A Jacobson; Zhiyong Fan; Robert L Alley; Ali Javey Journal: Nat Mater Date: 2007-11-11 Impact factor: 43.841
Authors: Liang Ye; Arántzazu González-Campo; Rosario Núñez; Michel P de Jong; Tibor Kudernac; Wilfred G van der Wiel; Jurriaan Huskens Journal: ACS Appl Mater Interfaces Date: 2015-12-07 Impact factor: 9.229