Indium-induced layer-by-layer growth and suppression of twin formation in the homoepitaxial growth of Cu(111)

Layer-by-layer growth of thin epitaxial Fe3Si films on GaAs (001)

“…Similar phenomena were previously observed during the Indium-induced layer-by-layer growth of Cu (111) [19]. There they were attributed to a monolayer with higher In content and subsequent interference phenomena.…”

Self-healing of stacking faults in homoepitaxial growth on Ir(111)

“…Some phenomenological studies of stackingfault formation have been performed [5][6][7][8][9][10][11], but only recently understanding of the underlying atomic processes was achieved in the model system Ir/Ir(1 1 1) [12]: The equilibrium distribution of small clusters between hcp and fcc sites is frozen in by the attachment of immobilizing adatoms during growth. Using the field ion microscopy data for the distributions of adatoms and small cluster between fcc and hcp sites [13,14] the temperature dependence of the probability for the formation of large fault islands could be quantitatively explained.…”

Bi induced layer-by-layer growth in the homoepitaxial growth of Fe on Fe (1 0 0)-c(2×2)O reconstruction surface

“…The second explanation is that Bi reduces the additional energy barrier at the step edge of islands E a : The reduced E a lowers the probability of nucleation on top of the island even if the island density does not change by the surfactant, leading to layer-by-layer growth. The reduced E a can be caused by either a decrease of E b or by an increase of E d : According to H. A. van der Vegt et al [15], the former is the case for the growth of Cu(1 0 0) [15] and Cu(1 1 1) [16] with In, and the latter which is local effect at the step edge is the case for the growth of Ag(1 1 1) with Sb [17][18][19]. When we deposited Bi on the Fe(1 0 0)-c(2 Â 2)O surface the RHEED intensities always decreased (not shown), whether the substrate temperature was 100 C or room temperature.…”