Analysis of surface structures through determination of their composition using STM: Si(100)4×3-In and Si(111)4×1-In reconstructions

Саранин, А. А.; Зотов, А. В.; Lifshits, V.G.; Ryu, Jeong Tak; Kubo, Osamu; Tani, H.; Harada, T.; Katayama, Mitsuhiro; Oura, Kenjiro

doi:10.1103/physrevb.60.14372

Cited by 52 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The spatial distribution of forming clusters is random. With increasing In coverage, the number density of clusters increases, but their spatial distribution remains almost random [13,14]. This is clearly seen in Fig.…”

Section: B In/si(100)mentioning

confidence: 73%

“…However, when the saturation In coverage of ∼0.5 ML is attained the clusters become arranged into the well-ordered 4×3 superlattice [13,14] as one can see in Fig. 1b.…”

Section: B In/si(100)mentioning

confidence: 91%

“…Recently, two models of its atomic arrangement have been treated as the most plausible candidates. The first model was proposed by Zotov et al [15] and was modified later by Saranin et al [14]. The model was based mainly on the STM observations and took into account the preservation of the 4×1 reconstruction on the Si(100) substrate after removal of In atoms upon H exposure [16,17].…”

Section: B In/si(100)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Magic nanoclusters of group III metals on Si(100) surface

Kotlyar

Зотов

Саранин

et al. 2003

e-J. Surf. Sci. Nanotechnol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using scanning tunneling microscopy observations, the ability of group III metals, In, Al, Ga and Tl, to form identical-size magic nanoclusters upon high-temperature adsorption on Si(100) has been examined. Magic clustering has been detected in In/Si(100) and Al/Si(100) systems. In both cases, atomic structure of the nanocluster is plausibly described by the model of Bunk et al. [Appl.Surf.Sci. 123/124, 104 (1998)], in which six metal atoms and seven Si atoms form a stable pyramid-like cluster. In the case of In/Si(100) system, the perfectly-ordered 4×3 superlattice built of magic nanoclusters can be formed. The Al/Si(100) nanoclusters has been found to form local arrays with a 4×5 periodicity. In Ga/Si(100) and Tl/Si(100) systems, no indication of magic clustering has been detected. The criteria for magic cluster formation are discussed.

show abstract

Section: B In/si(100)mentioning

confidence: 73%

“…However, when the saturation In coverage of ∼0.5 ML is attained the clusters become arranged into the well-ordered 4×3 superlattice [13,14] as one can see in Fig. 1b.…”

Section: B In/si(100)mentioning

confidence: 91%

Section: B In/si(100)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Magic nanoclusters of group III metals on Si(100) surface

Kotlyar

Зотов

Саранин

et al. 2003

e-J. Surf. Sci. Nanotechnol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Because of the highly anisotropic nature in atomic arrangement and surface electronic structure of the 4×1-In surface [20][21][22][23], we expected anisotropic epitaxial growth of metals on this surface. It will be interesting to compare the results with the growth on an isotropic substrate of Si(111)-7×7 clean surface.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Epitaxial Growth of Ag on Si(111)-4×1-In Surface Studied by RHEED, STM, and Electrical Resistance Measurements

Ryjkov

Lifshits

Hasegawa

2003

e-J. Surf. Sci. Nanotechnol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We investigated the initial stages of Ag growth on a Si(111)-4×1-In surface at room temperature (RT) and low temperatures (LT, 70∼120K) in situ by reflection-high-energy electron diffraction (RHEED), scanning tunnelling microscopy (STM) and electrical resistance measurements in ultrahigh vacuum, together with on a Si(111)-7 × 7 clean surface for comparison. It has been revealed that the 4×1-In surface actually acts as a highly anisotropic template for Ag growth at RT, but not at LT. The Ag islands grown on the wetting layers were elongated along the 4×1-stripe at RT, while they were isotropic and round in shape at LT. This is due to a difference in migration ability of the arriving Ag adatoms. The anisotropic growth has been found to affect the formation of percolation paths for electrical conduction among the Ag islands; the growth conditions (deposition rate and temperature) do not affect the critical coverage for percolation so much on the 4×1-In surface, compared with in the case of isotropic growth on the 7×7 surface. The initial deposition of submonolayer-thick wetting layers has been found to induce some structural changes of the substrate surface; at RT, the 4×1-In structure changes into a 4×'2' structure, while the 8×'2'-In structure at LT changes into a 4×1 structure. The former change induces a resistance increase, while the latter induces a resistance drop. These changes may be caused by the induced changes in surface states and band bending beneath the surface.

show abstract

“…14 Most recently, Saranin and co-workers 15 reported their results of absolute 0.75 ML indium coverage and 4 ð 1 Si substrate reconstruction based on new AES, STM and low-energy electron diffraction (LEED) data, and concluded that the indium row is three atoms wide with 1/2 ML Si atoms existing between the metal rows on the surface. Based on these empirical results there continues to be challenging issues: the registry of indium atoms on the Si(111) surface, the structure model and the saturation coverage of the indium induced 4 ð 1 surfaces are still controversial problems.…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

Row structure in metal‐induced Si(111) surface reconstructions

Jin

Sanders

Shao-Hua

et al. 2001

Surface & Interface Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We demonstrate that quantum size effects play a crucial role in the row structure of metal-induced Si KEYWORDS: models of surface kinetics; quantum effects; surface relaxation and reconstruction; metalsemiconductor interfacesThe reconstruction of the Si(111) surface is a well-known process that has been the subject of numerous experimental and theoretical studies. However, metal-induced reconstruction of Si(111) continues to present theoretical challenges, particularly concerning the coverage-dependent structural arrangements. In such systems a submonolayer of metal atoms is deposited onto the Si(111) surface, resulting in a reconstruction of the Si(111) surface and arrangement of the metal adsorbate into rows of monolayer height.1 -17 Using scanning tunnelling microscopy, these rows are visible and both the height and width of the rows are evident. We introduce here a theoretical model that demonstrates that the quantum size effect plays a crucial role in determining the widths of these rows, and we show that our model provides complete agreement with all recent metal-induced M/Si(111)-3 ð 1 reconstructions (where M D Li, Na, K, Rb, Ag) and Si(111)-4 ð 1-In reconstructions. The quantum size effect has proved to be a crucial element in understanding and modelling the work function, 18 resistivity 19 and stability 20 of metallic thin films, and in the pattern formation of metal-on-metal surfaces. 21 The quantum size effect has proved to be a valuable tool for studying small, confined free-electron systems, and our application to metal-induced reconstruction of Si(111) surfaces represents another success of this approach.

show abstract

Analysis of surface structures through determination of their composition using STM: Si(100)4×3-In and Si(111)4×1-In reconstructions

Cited by 52 publications

References 53 publications

Magic nanoclusters of group III metals on Si(100) surface

Magic nanoclusters of group III metals on Si(100) surface

Epitaxial Growth of Ag on Si(111)-4×1-In Surface Studied by RHEED, STM, and Electrical Resistance Measurements

Row structure in metal‐induced Si(111) surface reconstructions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About