Protective overlayer techniques for preparation of InSb(001) surfaces

Evans, Stephen D.; Cao, Liling; Egdell, R.G.; Droopad, R.; Parker, Susan; Stradling, R. A.

doi:10.1016/0039-6028(90)90163-3

Cited by 19 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, their analysis of the HREELS data ignored spatial dispersion and was based on a Schottky depletion model. Both of these approximations are inappropriate for degenerate InSb(100), and the surface state density obtained from the analysis of Evans et al [12] (2.5 × 10 12 cm −2 ) is somewhat higher than that from our analysis (1.1 × 10 12 cm −2 ), in line with the increased band bending.…”

Section: The Four-layer Model and The Calculated Charge Profilecontrasting

confidence: 58%

“…A simple calculation of the coupled-mode dispersion shows that the plasmon and phonon excitations are only resonant in the intermediate layer, not in the bulk. Interfacial plasmon modes are not responsible for the additional intensity since the probing depth at E i = 3 eV is approximately twice the largest layer thickness, so all of the modes are surface-like rather than interface-like [12]. Furthermore, a high bulk plasmon damping would be required to damp out an interface mode propagating between layers 2 and 3, but this is not required since only the damping in layer 2 needs to be increased.…”

Section: The Three-layer Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This indicates that the surface Fermi level is pinned at least 120 meV above the valence band maximum. Evans et al [12] found the surface Fermi level of decapped InSb(100) to lie at most 100 meV above the valence band maximum, using HREELS and Ne(I) photoemission. However, their analysis of the HREELS data ignored spatial dispersion and was based on a Schottky depletion model.…”

Section: The Four-layer Model and The Calculated Charge Profilementioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is well known that the structural and electronic properties of the (100) surface are particularly sensitive to surface treatment. The preparation of clean surfaces is therefore more difficult and generally involves either desorption of a protective As (or Sb) capping layer following growth by molecular beam epitaxy (MBE) [3,4,12,13], or cycles of low-energy ion bombardment and annealing [11,14,15].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Limitations of step profile models in describing the space-charge distribution near semiconductor surfaces

Bell¹,

McConville²,

Mulcahy³

et al. 1997

J. Phys.: Condens. Matter

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

High-resolution electron energy-loss (HREEL) spectra have been analysed using local dielectric theory in a study of the depletion layer formed at the InSb(100) surface. Two-, three-and four-layer models were used to simulate a series of low-incidence-energy HREEL spectra (1.25-10 eV). An abrupt charge profile (the two-layer model) provided good agreement with experimental data when spatial dispersion and wavevector-dependent plasmon damping were included in the local dielectric model. This was in spite of the fact that the twolayer model does not accurately reflect the charge distribution, which was calculated using the modified Thomas-Fermi approximation (MTFA). Smoothing of the step profile by the inclusion of an intermediate layer (the three-layer model) introduced 'plasmaron' modes, unless the plasma damping in the middle layer was set to a very high level. These modes were not observed experimentally, indicating that the abrupt charge profile in fact produced more accurate simulations. A four-layer model more closely approximating the calculated charge profile produced superior fits to the experimental spectra, but only when the plasma damping in each layer was carefully controlled. The limitations of step profile approximations and the local dielectric theory approach in describing regions of highly non-uniform charge density are discussed. In particular, the spatial and wavevector dependence of the plasmon damping is considered.

show abstract

Section: The Four-layer Model and The Calculated Charge Profilecontrasting

confidence: 58%

Section: The Three-layer Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Four-layer Model and The Calculated Charge Profilementioning

confidence: 99%