Surface barriers on layer semiconductors: GaS, GaSe, GaTe

Kurtin, Stephen; Mead, C. A.

doi:10.1016/0022-3697(69)90179-6

Cited by 22 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The value S = 0.18 for InSe compares with a value of S = 0.28 calculated for a defect-free MoS 2 layer [47]. It is interesting that the theoretical value S = 0.18 is also close to the old experimental value of Kurtin and Mead [51] of S = 0.26 for GaSe. (Note that their slope of barrier height vs Pauling electronegativity, must be converted to the dimension-less barrier height vs electronegativity [49,52] by the conversion factor of 2.27.)…”

Section: Contact Propertiessupporting

confidence: 75%

Band structure, band offsets, substitutional doping, and Schottky barriers of bulk and monolayer InSe

Guo

Robertson

2017

Phys. Rev. Materials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present a comprehensive study of the electronic structure of the layered semiconductor InSe using density functional theory. We calculate the band structure of the monolayer and bulk material with the band gap corrected using hybrid functionals. The band gap of the monolayer is 2.4 eV. The band edge states are surprising isotropic. The electron affinities and band offsets are then calculated for heterostructures as would be used in tunnel field effect transistors (TFETs). The ionization potential of InSe is quite large, similar to that of HfSe 2 or SnSe 2 , and so InSe is suitable to act as the drain in the TFET. The intrinsic defects are then calculated. For Se-rich layers, the Se adatom is the lowest energy defect, whereas for In-rich layers, the In adatom is most stable for Fermi energies across most of the gap. Both substitutional donors and acceptors are calculated to be shallow, and not reconstructed. Finally, the Schottky barriers of metals are found to be strongly pinned, with the Fermi level pinned by metal induced gap states about 0.5 eV above the valence band edge.

show abstract

Section: Contact Propertiessupporting

confidence: 75%

Band structure, band offsets, substitutional doping, and Schottky barriers of bulk and monolayer InSe

Guo

Robertson

2017

Phys. Rev. Materials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These positions are similar to the theoretically calculated ones for metallic nanotubes with a diameter of 1.4 nm [53][54][55]. The possible chiralities of exciting nanotubes are (20,1), (19,3), (17,4), (16,6), (15,8), (14,10) for 1.5-nm SWCNTs and (18,0), (17,2), (16,4), (13,7), (14,5), (10,10) for 1.4-nm SWCNTs [40,41].…”

Section: Figures 3a and B Demonstrate The Rbm-and G-bands Ofsupporting

confidence: 74%

“…These positions are similar to the theoretically calculated ones for semiconducting SWCNTs with a diameter of 1.3-1.5 nm [53][54][55]. The possible chiralities of exciting nanotubes are (19,0), (18,1), (17,3), (16,5), (12,10) for 1.5-nm SWCNTs; (17,1), (16,3), (14,6), (12,8), (11,9) for 1.4-nm SWCNTs, and (17,0), (16,2), (13,6), (12,7), (10,9) for 1.34-nm SWCNTs [40,41]. The shifts of peak positions in comparison to ones of the pristine SWCNTs are given in the parentheses.…”

Section: Figures 3a and B Demonstrate The Rbm-and G-bands Ofsupporting

confidence: 66%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparative analysis of electronic properties of tin, gallium, and bismuth chalcogenide-filled single-walled carbon nanotubes

Kharlamova

2014

J Mater Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the present work, the channels of singlewalled carbon nanotubes (SWCNTs) were filled with tin sulfide (SnS), gallium telluride (GaTe), and bismuth selenide (Bi 2 Se 3 ). The successful encapsulation of the compounds was proven by high-resolution transmission electron microscopy. The electronic properties of the filled SWCNTs were studied by optical absorption spectroscopy, Raman spectroscopy, and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy. It was found that the embedded metal chalcogenides have different influence on the electronic properties of the nanotubes. The incorporation of tin sulfide into the SWCNTs does not result in sufficient changes in the electronic structure of SWCNTs, except for a minor influence on metallic nanotubes. The filling of SWCNTs with gallium telluride causes the charge transfer from the SWCNT walls to the encapsulated compound due to acceptor doping of the nanotubes. The insertion of bismuth selenide inside the SWCNT channels does not lead to the modification of the electronic properties of nanotubes.

show abstract

“…Thirdly, the energy distribution curves [17, 181, particularly for GaSe, show detailed structure which would be smeared out if the band bending was significant. Finally the results of Kurtin and Mead [22], using the photoresponse technique indicate no surface states for Gas and a low value of the order of 1013/~m2 for GaSe. These latter measurements which may be due t o…”

Section: Energy Distribution Rurvesmentioning

confidence: 86%

Surface properties of the gallium monochalcogenides

Williams¹,

McEvoy²

1972

Phys. Stat. Sol. (a)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The electronic properties of atomically clean and contaminated cleaved basal surfaces of GaS, GaSe, and GaTe have been investigated by analysis of emitted photoelectron yield, photoelectron energy and contact potential differences. The photoelectric thresholds Ø, work functions φ and electron affinity χ have been established. Large values of φ for GaS and GaSe account for the difficulty encountered in establishing ohmic contacts to p‐type crystals. Auger electron spectroscopy demonstrates the extreme inertness of basal surfaces of all three materials but shows that GaTe is more reactive than GaSe or GaS. These results are discussed in the context of intrinsic and extrinsic surface states in these materials.

show abstract

Surface barriers on layer semiconductors: GaS, GaSe, GaTe

Cited by 22 publications

References 6 publications

Band structure, band offsets, substitutional doping, and Schottky barriers of bulk and monolayer InSe

Band structure, band offsets, substitutional doping, and Schottky barriers of bulk and monolayer InSe

Comparative analysis of electronic properties of tin, gallium, and bismuth chalcogenide-filled single-walled carbon nanotubes

Surface properties of the gallium monochalcogenides

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About