1991
DOI: 10.1016/0040-6090(91)90270-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Determination of properties of thin thermal SiO2 on silicon by spectroscopic ellipsometry

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

1991
1991
1998
1998

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Thus, the characteristics of devices utilizing this interface can be influenced by roughness, thickness, and composition of the thin interfacial transition region only a few nm thick in between the crystalline Si substrate and the amorphous and stoichiometric SiO2. Much work has been done to study the Si-SiO2 interface, using a variety of techniques, such as transmission electron microscopy (1-4), lowenergy electron diffraction (5), Auger spectroscopy (6), x-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (7), scanning tunneling microscopy (8), infrared spectroscopy (9), ellipsometry (10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19), and others (20)(21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26)(27)(28)(29). Emerging from these studies are not only commonly agreed upon points, viz., that the interfacial region is different from both film (overlayer) and substrate and that a variation of interfacial properties is a strong function of processing, but also considerable controversy about the detailed nature of the interface.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, the characteristics of devices utilizing this interface can be influenced by roughness, thickness, and composition of the thin interfacial transition region only a few nm thick in between the crystalline Si substrate and the amorphous and stoichiometric SiO2. Much work has been done to study the Si-SiO2 interface, using a variety of techniques, such as transmission electron microscopy (1-4), lowenergy electron diffraction (5), Auger spectroscopy (6), x-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (7), scanning tunneling microscopy (8), infrared spectroscopy (9), ellipsometry (10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19), and others (20)(21)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26)(27)(28)(29). Emerging from these studies are not only commonly agreed upon points, viz., that the interfacial region is different from both film (overlayer) and substrate and that a variation of interfacial properties is a strong function of processing, but also considerable controversy about the detailed nature of the interface.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…3 could be one of the reasons of such a difference in slopes. 12 Considering the AES results, the improved insulating properties with the increase of the thickness of the underlying poly-BT can be ascribed to the increase of the thickness of the transition region, a possible microcrystalline layer, 13,14 as shown in Figs. 3͑b͒-3͑d͒.…”
Section: Specimen Preparation and Measurementmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…As far as the processing of multi-BT is concerned, the change in roughness of the multi-BT implies that the local interface reaction rate is not isotropic. It is known that BaTiO 3 are compressively stressed 12 and that this stress originates from the volume expansion during the formation of the interface between the poly-BT and the a-BT. The formation of the interface is related to the thickness of underlying poly-BT and its microscopic structure.…”
Section: Characteristics Of the Multilayered Batio 3 Films Dependimentioning
confidence: 99%
“…n 4 (Si Ó) \ 3.858 [ j Kalnitsky et al 3 have subsequently computed the Ðlm index and thickness from these simulated ( SiO 2 and * data by assuming a single-layer model without the interface layer and thus explain the increase in the Ðlm index (Table 1) for thinner Ðlms when the SiO 2 single-layer model is assumed. Some of these simulated ( and * data of the graded index structure with an interface layer thickness of 15 as well as the Ðlm Ó, index and thickness found3 by assuming the single-layer model, are given in Table 1. Table 2 presents the four parameters found hereÈ', and a numerical accuracy of 0.001%…”
Section: Simulated Double-layer Data3mentioning
confidence: 99%