Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T16:53:43.091Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Interaction Between Defects and Tunneling Effect in Heterostructures

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 February 2011

D. Stievenard  and
M. Lannoo
D. Stievenard
Affiliation:
IEMN-Département ISEN, UMR 9929 (CNRS), 41 Bd Vauban, 59046 Lille Cédex, France
M. Lannoo
Affiliation:
IEMN-Département ISEN, UMR 9929 (CNRS), 41 Bd Vauban, 59046 Lille Cédex, France
Get access

Abstract

Due to the reduced size of quantum devices, defects play a dominant role in their electrical behaviour. We theoretically show that defects can change the electrical behaviour of a single barrier or a quantum well. For the barrier and the well, we have performed a quantum calculation of a defect assisted tunneling effect based on the WKB theory to describe the wave functions and on the Oppenheimer approach for the determination of the tunneling probability. The main effects are : appearance of a negative differential resistance (NDR) in the currentvoltage characteristics (I-V) of the single barrier and an apparent lowering of the band offset of the quantum well. In the latter case, we have experimentally measured this effect on an AlInAs-GaInAs-AlInAs well, using admittance spectroscopy. The apparent lowering is associated with a native defect located in the barrier, a defect studied using the DLTS technique.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 325: Symposium L – Physics and Applications of Defects in Advanced Semiconductors , 1993 , 61
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1994

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

1. Esaki, L. and Tsu, R., IBM J.Res.Dev. 14, 61, (1970)Google Scholar
2. Capasso, F., Mohammed, K. and Cho, A.Y., Phys.Rev.Lett. 57, 2303, (1986)Google Scholar
3. Tabe, M. and Tanimoto, M., Appl.Phys.Lett. 58, 2105, (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Dellow, M.W., Beton, P.H., Langerak, C.J.G.M., Foster, T.J., Main, P.C. and Eaves, L., Phys.Rev.Lett. 68, 1754, (1992)Google Scholar
5. Bardeen, J., Phys.Rev.Lett. 6, 57, (1961)Google Scholar
6. See, for example, Messiah, A., Mécanique quantique, (Dunod, Paris, 1959), p194 Google Scholar
7. Oppenheimer, J.R., Phys.Rev. 31, 66, (1928)Google Scholar
8. Stiévenard, D., Letartre, X. and Lannoo, M., Appl.Phys.Lett. 61(13), 1582, (1992)Google Scholar
9. Stiévenard, D., Letartre, X., Lannoo, M., Ababou, S. and Guillot, G., Phys.Rev.B, (to be published)Google Scholar
10. Georgakilass, A., Christou, A., Halkias, G., Zekentes, K., Kornilios, N., Dimoulas, A., Peiro, F., Ababou, S., Tabata, A. and Guillot, G., Journal of Electrochemical Society, 92–20, 141,(1992)Google Scholar