Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T00:45:57.553Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparison of ion beam and electron beam induced transport of hot charge carriers in metal-insulator-metal junctions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 July 2011

Johannes Hopster ,
Detlef Diesing ,
Andreas Wucher  and
Marika Schleberger
Johannes Hopster
Affiliation:
Universität Duisburg-Essen, Fakultät für Physik, 47048 Duisburg, Germany
Detlef Diesing
Affiliation:
Universität Duisburg-Essen, Fakultät für Physikalische Chemie, 45117 Essen, Germany
Andreas Wucher
Affiliation:
Universität Duisburg-Essen, Fakultät für Physik, 47048 Duisburg, Germany
Marika Schleberger
Affiliation:
Universität Duisburg-Essen, Fakultät für Physik, 47048 Duisburg, Germany
Get access

Abstract

The generation of hot charge carriers within a solid bombarded by charged particles is investigated using biased thin film metal-insulator-metal (MIM) devices. For slow, highly charged ions approaching a metal surface the main dissipation process is electronic excitation of the substrate, leading to electron emission into the vacuum and internal electron emission across the MIM junction. In order to gain a deeper understanding of the distribution and transport of the excited charge carriers leading to the measured device current, we compare ion induced and electron induced excitation processes in terms of absolute internal emission yields as well as their dependence on the applied bias voltage.

Keywords

electron irradiationmetal-insulator transitionion-solid interactions
Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 1354: Symposium II – Ion Beams—New Applications from Mesoscale to Nanoscale , 2011 , mrss11-1354-ii07-12
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2011

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.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Briand, J. P., de Billy, L., Charles, P. et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 65, 159 (1990)10.1103/PhysRevLett.65.159Google Scholar
2. Meyer, F. W., Overbury, S. H., Havener, C. C., van Emmichoven, P. A. Z. and Zehner, D. M., Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 723 (1991)10.1103/PhysRevLett.67.723Google Scholar
3. Burgdörfer, J., Lerner, P. and Meyer, F. W., Phys. Rev. A 44, 5674 (1991)10.1103/PhysRevA.44.5674Google Scholar
4. Das, J. and Morgenstern, R., Phys. Rev. A 47, R755 (1993)10.1103/PhysRevA.47.R755Google Scholar
5. Kost, D., Facsko, S., Möller, W., Hellhammer, H. and Stolterfoth, N., Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 225503 (2007)10.1103/PhysRevLett.98.225503Google Scholar
6. Arnau, A., Aumayr, F., Echenique, P. M. et al. Surf. Sci. Rep. 27, 113 (1997)10.1016/S0167-5729(97)00002-2Google Scholar
7. Aumayr, F., El-Said, A. S. and Meissl, W., Nucl. Instrum. Methods B 266, 2729 (2008)10.1016/j.nimb.2008.03.106Google Scholar
8. Gillaspy, J. D., J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 34, R93 (2001)10.1088/0953-4075/34/19/201Google Scholar
9. Winter, H., Europhys. Lett. 18, 207 (1992)10.1209/0295-5075/18/3/004Google Scholar
10. Kovacs, D., Golczewski, A., Kowarik, G., Aumayr, F. and Diesing, D., Phys. Rev. B 81, 075411 (2010)10.1103/PhysRevB.81.075411Google Scholar
11. Kovacs, D. A., Peters, T., Haake, C., Schleberger, M., Wucher, A., Golczewski, A., Aumayr, F. and Diesing, D., Phys. Rev. B 77, 245432 (2008)10.1103/PhysRevB.77.245432Google Scholar
12. Peters, T., Haake, C., Diesing, D., Kovacs, D. A., Golczewski, A., Kowarik, G., Aumayr, F., Wucher, A. and Schleberger, M., New Journal of Physics 10, 073019 (2008)10.1088/1367-2630/10/7/073019Google Scholar
13. Peters, T., Haake, C., Hopster, J., Sokolovsky, V., Wucher, A. and Schleberger, M., Nucl. Instr. Meth. B 267, 4 (2009)10.1016/j.nimb.2008.11.024Google Scholar
14. Diesing, D., Kritzler, G., Stermann, M., Nolting, D. and Otto, A., J. Solid State Electrochem. 7, 389 (2003)10.1007/s10008-002-0319-yGoogle Scholar
15. Thissen, P., Schindler, B., Diesing, D. and Hasselbrink, E., New Journ. of Physics 12 (2010)10.1088/1367-2630/12/11/113014Google Scholar
16. Lin, Y. and Joy, D. C., Surf. Interf. Anal. 37, 895–900 (2005)10.1002/sia.2107Google Scholar
17. Lotz, W., Journal of the Opical Society of America 60, 2 (1970)Google Scholar
18. Bethe, H. and Heitler, W., Proceedings of the Royal Society of London 146, A856 (1934)Google Scholar
19. Meyer, S., Diesing, D., and Wucher, A., Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 137601 (2004)10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.137601Google Scholar
20. Diesing, D., Kovacs, D., Stella, K. and Heuser, C., Nucl. Instr. Meth. B, accepted (in press) Google Scholar
21. Meyer, S., Heuser, C., Diesing, D. and Wucher, A., Phys. Rev. B 78, 035428 (2008)10.1103/PhysRevB.78.035428Google Scholar