2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.jallcom.2008.02.016
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The electronic band structures of , and alloys

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
12
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
0
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In general, one can classify the alloys into three main classes: (i) those which possess a bowing character such as the common-cation CdSe x Te 1−x and ZnSe x Te 1−x alloys [3][4][5][6][7][8]; (ii) those which possess almost a linear variation of bandgap energy versus composition such as the common-anion Cd 1−x Zn x Se and Cd 1−x Zn x Te alloys [6][7][8][9]; (iii) Those which neither have the bowing nor the linear behaviors, such as, the metallization observed in the highly lattice mismatched nitride IIIV 1−x N x alloys [10][11][12][13][14], the negative bowing behavior seen in the alloys of In x Ga 1−x As [15] and GaSb x As 1−x [16], and the anomalous behavior in lead chalcogenides [17] where the direct gap is measured to be at the L point of the Brillouin zone. Nevertheless, despite decades of extensive studies, there is no commonly accepted explanation for the different characters of bandgap variation as a function of alloy composition.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In general, one can classify the alloys into three main classes: (i) those which possess a bowing character such as the common-cation CdSe x Te 1−x and ZnSe x Te 1−x alloys [3][4][5][6][7][8]; (ii) those which possess almost a linear variation of bandgap energy versus composition such as the common-anion Cd 1−x Zn x Se and Cd 1−x Zn x Te alloys [6][7][8][9]; (iii) Those which neither have the bowing nor the linear behaviors, such as, the metallization observed in the highly lattice mismatched nitride IIIV 1−x N x alloys [10][11][12][13][14], the negative bowing behavior seen in the alloys of In x Ga 1−x As [15] and GaSb x As 1−x [16], and the anomalous behavior in lead chalcogenides [17] where the direct gap is measured to be at the L point of the Brillouin zone. Nevertheless, despite decades of extensive studies, there is no commonly accepted explanation for the different characters of bandgap variation as a function of alloy composition.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The VCA usually leads to qualitative explanations of most of the features in the bandgap bowing of alloys. Unfortunately, in systems where large atomic relaxations and reconstructions take place, the VCA vastly underestimates the bandgap bowing [10,14].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…alloys were patterned at selected compositions (x ¼0.25, 0.50, 0.75) using the construction of eight atoms supercell, used by Agrawal et al [21]. Many researchers have used this method to investigate various properties of alloys [22][23][24]. As a prototype, the atomic positions of Zn 1À x Hg x Te are given in Table 1.…”
Section: Structural Propertiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the structures considered, the structural optimization by minimizing the total energy with respect to the cell parameters and the atomic positions was performed. The idea of constructing an alloy by taking a large unit cell (cubic eight atoms) and repeating it three dimensionally for the calculation of the electronic structure of alloys used by Agrawal et al [22] has been adopted recently by many researchers to investigate properties of alloys [23][24][25]. For the compositions = 0 25 and 0 75 the simplest structure is an eight-atom simple cubic cell (luzonite): the anions with the lower concentration form a regular simple cubic lattice, but for the composition = 0 5, the atoms of the same layer are identical.…”
Section: Structural Propertiesmentioning
confidence: 99%