Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T02:27:58.689Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Charged Dangling Bonds and Crystallization in Group IV Semiconductors

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 February 2011

P.J. Germain ,
M.A. Paesler ,
D.E. Sayers  and
K. Zellama
P.J. Germain
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27650
M.A. Paesler
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27650
D.E. Sayers
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27650
K. Zellama
Affiliation:
Université Paris VII, Groupe de Physique des Solides de L'E.N.S. Place JUSSIEU, 75221 Paris Cedex 05
Get access

Abstract

Crystallization of amorphous Ge (or Si) has been studied as a function of temperature and the flux of ionizing radiation (or doping). The crystallization growth rate Vg takes on the form Vg = vo exp(−E/kT) where vo is an increasing function of flux (or doping). We propose the following to explain these data: A concentration of mobile dangling bonds (DBs) exists in the bulk and near the amorphous-crystalline (a-c) interface. Ionization and doping induce transitions from the uncharged state Do to the charged states D+ and D−. The process controlling crystallization resulting in the above activation energy is discussed. Only certain sites on the a-side of the a-c interface are available for crystallization, and these sites are those which have captured DBs. The charged D+; and D− states have a larger capture cross section than the uncharged Do state. Increased concentrations of charged DBs results in an enhancement of the prefactor in the above equation.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 13 , 1982 , 135
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1983

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

on leave from Université Paris VII, address above

+

MAP acknowledges the support of the General Electric Corporation

References

REFERENCES

1.Laser and Electron-Beam Solid Interactions and Materials Processing, Gibbons, J. F., Hess, L. D. and Sigmon, T. W., eds., North-Holland, NY 1980.Google Scholar
2.Laser and Electron-Beam Interactions with Solids, Appleton, B. R. and Celler, G. K., eds., North-Holland, NY 1981.Google Scholar
3.Wautelet, M., Laude, L. D. and Andrews, R., Physics Letters 77A, 274 (1980).Google Scholar
4.Barna, A, Barna, P. and Pocze, J., J. Non-Cryst. Solids 8, 36 (1972)Google Scholar
5.Germain, P., Squelard, S. and Bourgoin, J., J. Non-Cryst. Solids 23, 159 (1977) andGoogle Scholar
5aRadiation Effects in Semiconductors, Dubrovnik 1976, Urli, N. and Corbett, J. eds.Google Scholar
6.Laude, L. and Willis, R., AIP Conf. Proc. No. 20, P. 65 (1975).Google Scholar
7.Germain, P., Zellama, K., Squelard, S., Bourgoin, J. and Gheorghiu, A., J. Appl. Phys. 50, 6986 (1979).Google Scholar
8.Germain, P. and Squelard, S., to be published.Google Scholar
9.Csepregi, L., Kennedy, E., Gallagher, T., Mayer, J. and Sigmon, T., J. Appl. Phys. 48, 4241 (1977).Google Scholar
10. The error in activation energies from reference 9 stems principally from the RBS instrument resolution of 20 keV (434 Å in depth), which results in an error in the determination of the activation energy of ~0.2 eV based on a leastsquares fit to a straight line on the Arrhenius plot.Google Scholar
11.Lietoila, A., Gold, R. B. and Gibbons, J. F., Appl. Phys. Lett. 39, 810 (1981).Google Scholar
12.Kokorowski, S., Olson, G. and Hess, L.. J. Appl. Phys. 53, 921 (1982) and references to earlier work sited therein.Google Scholar
13.Germain, P. and Paesler, M. A., to be published.Google Scholar
14.Mott, N. and Davis, E. A., Electronic Processes in Non-Crystalline Materials, 2nd edition (Clarendon Press, Oxford) 1979.Google Scholar
15. Applying error bars of earlier Hughes work to the data of ref. 11, one cannot make firm conclusions about the combined effects of doping and irradiation.Google Scholar
16.Thomas, P., Brodsky, M., Kaplan, D. and Lepine, D., Phys. Rev. B 18, 3059 (1978).Google Scholar
17.Kaplan, D., private communication.Google Scholar
18.Mayer, J. in Thin Films, Preparation and Properties, Rosenberg, K., ed., Pasadena, CA (1981).Google Scholar
19.Zellama, K., Germain, P., Squelard, S., Bourgoin, J. and Thomas, P., J. Appl. Phys. 50, 6995 (1979).Google Scholar
20.Harrison, W. A., Surface Science 55, 1 (1976).Google Scholar
21.Chadi, D., Phys. Rev. Letters 43, 43 (1979).Google Scholar
22.Csepregi, L., Kennedy, E. F. and Mayer, J. W., J. Appl. Phys. 49, 3906 (1978).Google Scholar