Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-txr5j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-19T19:27:31.504Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Compound Semiconductor Surfaces and Interfaces: Whence Fermi Level Pinning?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 February 2011

Jerry M. Woodall
Jerry M. Woodall*
Affiliation:
IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center, P.O. Box 218 Yorktown Heights, NY, 10598
Get access

Abstract

Except for a few special cases, the electrical and optical properties of most III-V semiconductor surfaces and interfaces can be explained in terms of surface Fermi level pinning. However, despite years of research there is no universal agreement on the origin of this pinning. This problem is of more than just academic interest since pinning affects optoelectronic device performance via surface recombination losses, and high speed device performance through uncontrollable ohmic and Schottky contact properties for MESFETs and through a high interface trap density for MISFETs.

This talk reviews some of the approaches to the pinning problem and presents some recent results on the role of misfit dislocations in pinning. In particular it will be shown that there are are several models which can explain the usually observed pinning positions. However, we have developed a modified work function model capable of explaining both the usual pinning positions and the experimentally observed exceptions in Schottky barrier height for some metal/semiconductor interfaces. The electrical properties of lattice mismatched GaInAs/GaAs heterojunctions suggest that Fermi level pinning occurs at misfit dislocations.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 37: Symposium D – Layered Structures, Epitaxy, and Interfaces , 1984 , 381
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1985

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. Van Laar, J., Huijser, A. and Van Rooy, T. L., J. Vac. Sci. Technol. 114, 894 (1977).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Spicer, W. E., Lindau, I., Skeath, P. and Su, C. Y., J. Vac. Sci. Technol. 17, 1019 (1980).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Spicer, W. E., Lindau, I., Skeath, P. and Su, C. Y., Applications of Surface Science, 9, 83 (1981).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Zur, A., Mcgill, T. C., and Smith, D. I., Surface Science, 132, 456 (1983). A. Zur, T. C. McGill, and D. L. Smith, Physical Review B 28, 2060 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Woodall, J. M. and Freeouf, J. L., J. Vac. Sci. Technol., 19(3), 794 (1981).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Williams, R. H., J. Vac. Sci. Technol., 18, 929 (1981).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Okamoto, K., Wood, C. E. C., and Eastman, L. F., Appl. Phys. Lett., 38 636 (1981).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Freeouf, J. L. and Woodall, J. M., Appl. Phys. Lett., 39, 727 (1981).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Miller, R. C., Gossard, A. C., Klainman, D. A., and Munteanu, O., Phys. Rev. B 29, 3740 (1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Tersoff, J., Phys. Rev. B 30, 4874 (1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Tersoff, J., Phys. Rev. Lett. 52, 465 (1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Woodall, J. M., Pettit, G. D., Jackson, T. N., Lanza, C., Kavanagh, K. L., and Mayer, J. W., Phys. Rev. Lett., 51, 1783 (1981).CrossRefGoogle Scholar