2012
DOI: 10.1016/j.egypro.2012.01.014
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Surface Work Function of Transparent Conductive ZnO Films

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4

Citation Types

3
26
1

Year Published

2015
2015
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 60 publications
(30 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
3
26
1
Order By: Relevance
“…With respect to the clean surface case, the electrostatic potential is greatly decreased after Be doping.This may be attributed to the small atomic number of Be compared to the Zn atom, and to the large structural relaxation induced by Be-doping.The calculated work function for the clean ZnO (000 1) surface is 5.65 eV. This value is somewhat higher than the reported values in literature which they are between 4.5 eV and 5.1 eV[62][63][64][65]. This difference can be attributed directly to the presence of surface states.…”
contrasting
confidence: 67%
“…With respect to the clean surface case, the electrostatic potential is greatly decreased after Be doping.This may be attributed to the small atomic number of Be compared to the Zn atom, and to the large structural relaxation induced by Be-doping.The calculated work function for the clean ZnO (000 1) surface is 5.65 eV. This value is somewhat higher than the reported values in literature which they are between 4.5 eV and 5.1 eV[62][63][64][65]. This difference can be attributed directly to the presence of surface states.…”
contrasting
confidence: 67%
“…The electrochemical electron transport through the shell region of the CdSeZnS nanoparticles is also observed by cyclic voltammogram. 56,57 In 59 This leads to work function modulated by oxidation/reduction as well as energy band bending of Si is increased/decreased. Consequence, the reference voltage is needed to do flatband of Si.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…WF values from UPS measurements are generally lower (probably because affected by artifacts induced by the UV exposure) than those from theoretical models (which, on the other hand do not take into account defects such as oxygen vacancies and interstitial Zn), although both approaches yielded WF values spread in a wide range. Conversely, C–I and KPFM measurements yielded similar WF values that are also more reproducible in the range 4.6–4.95 eV for the O‐polar and in the range 4.25–4.6 eV for the Zn‐polar, while the WF of the non‐polar (01‐10) ZnO crystal has been reported in the range 4.3–4.64 eV . Calibrating our KPFM values against the WF of a reference evaporated gold contact (WF(Au) = 4.75 eV) (scheme in Figure ), we measured 4.65 ± 0.05, 4.85 ± 0.05, and 4.71 ± 0.05 eV for the untreated Zn‐polar, O‐polar and non‐polar ZnO, respectively.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 58%