Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T10:14:25.513Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Atomic and Electronic Structure of Interfaces at Sic Studied by Indirect Super Hrtem and Electron Spectroscopyn Imaging

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 2011

J. Y. Yan ,
Hideki Ichinose ,
Fu-Rong Chen ,
J. J. Kai  and
Eriko Takuma
J. Y. Yan
Affiliation:
Center of Electron Microscopy, Dept. of Engineering and System Science, National Tsing Hua University, Hsin Chu, Taiwan.
Hideki Ichinose
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science, School of Engineering, The University of Tokyo, Japan
Fu-Rong Chen
Affiliation:
Center of Electron Microscopy, Dept. of Engineering and System Science, National Tsing Hua University, Hsin Chu, Taiwan.
J. J. Kai
Affiliation:
Center of Electron Microscopy, Dept. of Engineering and System Science, National Tsing Hua University, Hsin Chu, Taiwan.
Eriko Takuma
Affiliation:
Department of Materials Science, School of Engineering, The University of Tokyo, Japan
Get access

Abstract

Obtaining electronic and atomic structure of material simultaneously is very important for developing the nano-technology. In this paper, we demonstrate that atomic and electronic structure of an interface can be extracted with combination of Gerchberg-Saxton indirect microscopy and electron spectroscopy imaging (ESI) technique. Basically, Gerchberg-Saxton algorithm includes two projections. Projection in the real space is a maximum entropy (ME) de-convolution process and in reciprocal space is an amplitude substitution process. It has been shown that Gerchberg-Saxton algorithm can extend the structural resolution to near 0.1nm. An application case of Gerchberg-Saxton algorithm to solve the atomic structure for 3C-polytypic SiC boundary is shown.

ESI spectrum processed by FFT interpolation, maximum entropy de-convolution and wavelet transformation allow us to extract 2-dimensional map of the sp2/sp3 with a sub-nanometer resolution. Grain boundary and interface at SiC are good candidates for this study, since the bond distance of Si-C is slightly less than 0.1nm which is not routinely resolvable using a FEG TEM and Si-L (99eV) and C-K-edges (283 eV) locate in a reasonable energy range. The resultant electronic structure can be compared with that calculated using WIEN97. An example of quantitative analysis on 2-dimensional sp3/sp2 map deduced from the C K-edge of ESI spectra acquired from 6H-SiC is given.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 727: Symposium R – Nanostructured Interfaces , 2002 , R12.2
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2002

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. Chen, F. R., Kai, J. J., Chang, L., Wang, J. Y., and Chen, W. J., J. Electron Microscopy 48, 827–836 (1999).Google Scholar
2. Chen, F.R., Ichinose, H., Kai, J. J., and Chang, L., J. Electron Microscopy 50 (2002), in pressGoogle Scholar
3. Lo, S.C., Kai, J.J., Chen, F.R., Chen, L.C., Chang, L., Chiang, C.C., Ding, P., Chin, B., Zhang, H., and Chen, F., Journal of electron Microscopy, 50 (6), (2002) in pressGoogle Scholar
4. Yan, J.Y., Chen, F.R. and Kai, J.J., submit to Journal of electron Microscopy,Google Scholar
5. Dahmen, U., Chen, F.R. and Kai, J. J., submit to Phil.Mag. (2002)Google Scholar
6. Pond, R. C., Phil. Mag., A47, L49 (1983)Google Scholar
7. Jeanguillaume, C. and Colliex, C., Ultramicroscopy. 78, 252–257 (1989).Google Scholar
8. Reimer, L., Energy-filtering transmission electron microscopy (Springer-Verlag, New York, 1995)Google Scholar
9. Mayer, J. and Plitzko, J. M., J. Microsc. 183, 2–8 (1996)..Google Scholar
10. Martin, J. M., Vacher, B., Ponsonnet, L. and Dupuis, V., Ultramicroscopy. 65, 229–238(1996)Google Scholar
11. Martin, J. M., Vacher, B., Ponsonnet, L. and Dupuis, V., Ultramicroscopy. 65, 229–238 (1996).Google Scholar
12. Mayer, J., Eigenthaler, U., Plitzko, J. M. and Dettenwanger, F., Micron. 28, 361–370 (1997).Google Scholar
13. Thomas, P. J. and Midgley, P. A., Ultramicroscopy. 88, 179–186 (2001).Google Scholar
14. Bourdillon, A. J., Self, N. W. and Stobbs, W. M., Phil. Mag. A. 44, 1335–1350(1981b)Google Scholar
15. Suenage, K., Tence, M., Mory, C., Collies, C., Kato, H., Okazaki, T., Shinohrar, H., Hiraahara, K., Bandow, S. and Iijima, S., Science. 290, 2280–2282 (2000).Google Scholar
16. Krivanek, O. L., Ahn, C. C. and Keeney, R. B., 22, 103–116 (1987).Google Scholar
17. Egerton, R. F. Electron-energy loss spectroscopy in the electron microscopy (Plenum Press, New York, 1996).Google Scholar
18. Mayer, R. R. and Kirkland, A. I., Microsc. Res. Technique. 49, 269–280 (2000)..Google Scholar
19. F, M. H.. Overwijk and Reefman, D., Micron. 31, 325–331 (2000).Google Scholar
20. Keast, V. J., Scott, A. J., Brydson, R., Williams, D. B. and Brulley, J., J. Microsc. 203, 135–175 (2001).Google Scholar
21. Muto, S., J. Elec. Microsc. 49(4), 525–529 (2000).Google Scholar