2010
DOI: 10.1002/pssb.201046459
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Band offsets of polar and nonpolar GaN/ZnO heterostructures determined by synchrotron radiation photoemission spectroscopy

Abstract: C-plane (polar) and m-plane (nonpolar) GaN/ZnO heterostructures have been fabricated by pulsed laser deposition at room temperature, and their electronic structures have been characterized by synchrotron radiation photoemission spectroscopy. Based on the binding energies of core levels and valence band maximum values, the valence band offsets have been found to be 0.7 AE 0.1 and 0.9 AE 0.1 eV for polar and nonpolar GaN/ZnO heterojunctions, respectively. Both heterostructures show type-II band configurations wi… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

2
14
1

Year Published

2012
2012
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 26 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
2
14
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Our valence band-offset of 0.8 eV is in good agreement with the experimental results of Liu et al 10 based on photoemission 13 studied mixed ZnO/GaN solid solution systems and proposed a 1.6 eV band offset between the ZnO-phase and GaN-phase in such systems. They found an effective gap of about 2.6-2.8 eV in such systems, in agreement with our proposed interface gap.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…Our valence band-offset of 0.8 eV is in good agreement with the experimental results of Liu et al 10 based on photoemission 13 studied mixed ZnO/GaN solid solution systems and proposed a 1.6 eV band offset between the ZnO-phase and GaN-phase in such systems. They found an effective gap of about 2.6-2.8 eV in such systems, in agreement with our proposed interface gap.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…4, and indicate that the difference between the two kinds of nonpolar surface orientations is small at ∌0.1 eV. The calculated offset values using GW 0 @PBE, GW TC-TC , and GW 1 , however, are 0.3-0.4 eV larger than the experimental value reported for the GaN/ZnO (1010) interface [87]. There are several possible sources for the discrepancies between theory and experiment.…”
Section: B Interfacial Offset-based Band Alignmentmentioning
confidence: 62%
“…A relatively large difference between the experimental and GW 1 offsets is found for GaN/ZnO. Valence band offsets of 0.7-1.0 and 0.9 ± 0.1 eV have been obtained for polar (0001) and nonpolar (1010) GaN/ZnO interfaces, respectively, using ultraviolet and x-ray photoemission spectroscopy [87,88]. A larger value of 1.37 eV has also been reported using an x-ray photoemission spectroscopy measurement of a ZnO/AlN interface and assumption of transitivity among ZnO/AlN and AlN/GaN interfaces [89].…”
Section: B Interfacial Offset-based Band Alignmentmentioning
confidence: 84%
“…However, band offset parameters (Junction type: valence band offset (VBO)-DE v and conduction band offset (CBO)-DE c ) are measured for various heterojunctions in the literature, such as InN/GaN (Type-I: 0.58 6 0.08 and 2.22 6 0.1 eV), 14 GaN/ AlN (Type-I: 0.8 6 0.3 and %1.6 eV), 15 InN/AlN (Type-I: 1.52 6 0.17 and 4.00 6 0.2 eV), 16 InN/p-Si (Type-III: 1.39 and 1.81 eV), 17 ZnO/GaN (Type-II: 0.7 and 0.8 eV), 18 and MoS 2 /WSe 2 (Type-II: 0.83 and 0.76 eV). 19 To date there is no experimental report on the determination of band offset parameters (DE v and DE c ) and type of heterojunction by highresolution X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (HRXPS) for epitaxially formed GaN/SL-MoS 2 heterojunction.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%