The Influence of the Amorphous Phase on Ion Distributions and Annealing Behavior of Group III and Group V Ions Implanted into Silicon

Crowder, B. L.

doi:10.1149/1.2408229

Cited by 126 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…also consistent with the literature for broad Ga-beam implantations into Si [19]. Finally, it is also clear that the structural damage in the 60 keV Si-FIB and Ge-FIB implants in Si can be fully recovered (within the sensitivity of our measurements) by annealing to high enough temperature.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Damage recovery of FIB modified Si for directed-assembly of semiconductor nanostructures

Balasubramanian

Hull

2015

J Mater Sci: Mater Electron

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Focused ion beam (FIB) techniques have previously been shown to have applications in templating semiconductor nanostructure growth on Si. To assess crystalline quality in this method, or in other FIB-based nano-fabrication methods in Si, we assess in this work FIBimplantation damage in Si and subsequent recovery by annealing. Specifically, we study Si substrates implanted to 1 9 10 12 -5 9 10 15 ions cm -2 fluences of 30 kV Si 2? , Ge 2? and Ga ? incident normally at room temperature, covering a structural damage regime from almost no damage to amorphization. Raman spectroscopy with incident photons of wavelength 405 and 514 nm were used for probing structural damage in different depths in as-implanted and thermally annealed substrates. Annealing was performed for varying times at 730-900°C in ultra-high purity nitrogen ambient. Structural damage quantification was performed through measurements of peak height and position of the crystalline Si peak at 520 cm -1 . Our analysis shows that a structural damage parameter, D, (defined by subtracting from unity, the ratio of the height of the Si Raman peak in implanted/annealed samples to that for the Si peak in an unimplanted standard, such that D = 0.00 and D = 1.00 correspond to pristine single crystal and amorphous Si respectively) is 0.05 or less in all the Si and Ge implants after annealing to 900°C, 1800 s. However, D for the Ga implants is close to zero for Ga fluences up to 3 9 10 13 cm -2 but increases steadily to 0.19 for 5 9 10 15 Ga cm -2 under these annealing conditions. The underlying damage recovery mechanisms are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Damage recovery of FIB modified Si for directed-assembly of semiconductor nanostructures

Balasubramanian

Hull

2015

J Mater Sci: Mater Electron

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…But similar to the well investigated case of gallium or arsenic in silicon [13,14,15], the theoretical values for Rp and ARp are about 20% lower than those measured by EPMA or SIMS, indicating too high cross sections used in the calculations of Gibbons et al [12].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 57%

Investigation of implanted gallium depth distributions in ZnSxSe-x by EPMA

et al. 1994

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. In the present work EPMA combined with Monte Carlo simulation was applied to investigate implanted gallium depth distributions in ZnSxSel_x layers. The layers of about 1 to 4 #m thickness were grown by MOVPE on (100)-GaAs substrate. The overlap of the Ga and zinc L X-ray spectra and the low gallium net count rates were overcome by stripping the spectra of non implanted layers and by applying appropriate beam currents and counting times. Capabilities and limitations of the EPMA technique as applied to depth profile analysis are demonstrated.Despite the mentioned L interference, the detectability limit of EPMA for 340 keV Ga in ZnSxSe 1 -x is as low as 1014 cm -2. The measured Ga Le intensity versus beam energy curves reveal variations of the Ga depth profiles during annealing. Evaluation of the intensity curves by means of Monte Carlo simulations yields the implanted dose densities and the first two moments of the depth distributions, i.e. the projected range and its standard deviation. The nonannealed profiles agree well with expectations, but after thermal annealing the profiles were significantly shifted towards the surface. Comparison of EPMA and SIMS results with the example of a non annealed profile in ZnSe has shown good agreement.Key words: ion implanation, depth profile analysis, II/VI semiconductors, MOVPE, EPMA.Electron probe X-ray microanalysis (EPMA) is a well established technique for quantitatively analysing solids on a microscopic scale [1]. During the last decade it has been further developed for analysing thin films and multilayers on substrates [2,3,4]. Recently, also the possibility of analysing implanted elements by EPMA was demonstrated [5, 6].

show abstract

“…Comparison of a typical spreading resistance profile with the predictions of the SUPREM model using joined half-Gaussians and with the amorphous target code 42 4.7 Schematic diagram of the electron-beam-sample interaction near an etch step Secondary electron picture of a cleaved and etched sample 0.5 deg to normal 49 4.12 Composite secondary electron and EBIC micrograph 52 4.13 Higher magnification of figure 4.12 53 4.14 Deflection modulation EBIC picture 54 5.1…”

Section: 6mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Room temperature implantation of arsenic at doses above 3 x 10^^c m"^leads to the formation of an amorphous layer at the silicon surface [52], This layer regrows epitaxially at temperatures below 600°C, with no detectable redistribution.…”

Section: F)mentioning

confidence: 99%