Examination of the Si(111)-SiO[sub 2], Si(110)-SiO[sub 2], and Si(100)-SiO[sub 2] Interfacial Properties Following Rapid Thermal Annealing

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to report the results of an experiment designed to investigate the density of interface states (DOS) measured at the normalSi­SiO2 interface immediately following rapid thermal annealing (RTA) (1040°C) in a nitrogen false(N2false) ambient. This work extends previous publications on Si(100) by examining (111), (110), and (100) silicon orientations. The DOS profiles were examined using a mercury probe capacitance-voltage technique, and characteristic peaks in the DOS across the energy gap were obtained for all orientations. Consideration of there results in relation to other works indicates that the peak features in the DOS profile after an RTA in N2 are a consequence of unpassivated dangling bond defects for the respective orientations. The significance of these results is considered. © 2002 The Electrochemical Society. All rights reserved.

Energy state distributions of the Pb centers at the (100), (110), and (111) Si∕SiO2 interfaces investigated by Laplace deep level transient spectroscopy

“…This could explain why the distribution of the interface density of state across the energy gap for the ͑100͒Si/ SiO 2 system is asymmetric in the lower half of the band gap while it is symmetric in the upper half. 13,19 It could also explain why for the ͑111͒ and ͑110͒ silicon, the density of states peaks in the lower and upper gaps have almost the same magnitudes while for ͑100͒, they do not. 13 On the other hand, it is known that under nonequilibrium conditions, some occupancies of the single-electron state of the negative-U defect can be observed.…”

“…13,19 It could also explain why for the ͑111͒ and ͑110͒ silicon, the density of states peaks in the lower and upper gaps have almost the same magnitudes while for ͑100͒, they do not. 13 On the other hand, it is known that under nonequilibrium conditions, some occupancies of the single-electron state of the negative-U defect can be observed. 20 As a result, depending on the experimental conditions, some disturbances of equilibrium could explain the controversy as to whether the P b1 center has an energy level in the Si band gap.…”

“…Full details of the sample preparation procedures and preliminary characterization were given elsewhere. 13 High-frequency 1 MHz capacitance-voltage ͑CV͒ measurements ͓Fig. 1͑a͔͒ showed a shift of the plot toward higher voltages as the measurement temperature decreases.…”

Alkyl Monolayer Passivated Metal–Semiconductor Diodes: 2: Comparison with Native Silicon Oxide

“…The relatively lower surface state density at the C 10 H 21 ÀSi interface indicates that the organic modification of atomically flat hydrogen-terminated silicon does not generate a substantial number of electronic states at the alkyl monolayer j silicon interfaces, which is consistent with previous studies of C 18 H 37 ÀSi and Si(111)ÀSiO 2 interfaces. [17,37] The comparison between the densities of the surface states in these two types of mercury ± silicon junctions also helps us to understand further the difference in the determined effective barrier heights. Although the two junctions were fabricated from the same metal and semiconductor, but in a real diode, the barrier height f b was also greatly affected by the density of the surface states and the interfacial insulating layer (beyond its contribution as an electron tunneling barrier, as discussed previously).…”

Process-Induced Degradation of SiO<inline-formula><tex-math>$_{\bf 2}$</tex-math></inline-formula> and a-Si:H Passivation Layers for Photovoltaic Applications

“…It is noted that this D it − E g calculation is derived from HFCV data, measured at 1 kHz and not from a QSCV. However, it has been shown that the density of states profile as evaluated from HFCV follows the QSCV signal for samples with such anomalous peak features [17]. The integrated density (in the energy range 0.6 eV < E < 1.0 eV) corresponding to this interface defect in the e-beam evaporated sample is 9 × 10 11 cm −2 .…”