2010
DOI: 10.1063/1.3416681
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The temperature dependence of the inelastic scattering time in InGaN grown by MOVPE

Abstract: Low temperature electrical measurements of the resistivity, the Hall effect and the magnetoconductivity were performed on an InGaN sample having an electron concentration far above the critical value for the metalinsulator transition. Weak localization effect and two-band model were used to analyze the magnetoconductivity data. The temperature dependence of the inelastic scattering time was extracted from the magnetoconductivity data at low temperatures. It was found that the inelastic scattering time is propo… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…[ 33 ] We can understand the scattering mechanism of the PEDOT:PSS–TFSA films by interpreting the exponent p , which is an index determining the T dependence of τ φ as τ φ ∝ T − p (Figure S10 , Supporting Information). [ 59 ] For electron–phonon scattering, p = 3, and for electron–electron scattering, p = 2 (clean limit) and p = 1.5 (dirty limit) are expected. As shown in Figure 3F , the samples show only a small decrease of the p values from 1.8 to 1.6 along with the de‐doping, but still the values are within the carrier–carrier scattering regime.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[ 33 ] We can understand the scattering mechanism of the PEDOT:PSS–TFSA films by interpreting the exponent p , which is an index determining the T dependence of τ φ as τ φ ∝ T − p (Figure S10 , Supporting Information). [ 59 ] For electron–phonon scattering, p = 3, and for electron–electron scattering, p = 2 (clean limit) and p = 1.5 (dirty limit) are expected. As shown in Figure 3F , the samples show only a small decrease of the p values from 1.8 to 1.6 along with the de‐doping, but still the values are within the carrier–carrier scattering regime.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We attempt to evaluate the maximum possible value of L i at 5 K by taking D ∼ 0.275 cm 2 s −1 for a single crystal of TiO 2 [18], which will have a higher value than any other sample of TiO 2 . τ i for TiO 2 is known to be ∼320 fs at 77 K [19], which would vary as T −P , where P is an index that depends on the nature of the scattering mechanism [20]. We estimate the value of L i using these values and it turns out that L i is ∼45 nm, which is much lower than the film thickness.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Whatever the choice is, the inal equation remains the same. It may be noted that the imaginary potential term V i is a function of temperature [28,29] as the molecular vibrations or even chemical reaction rates can vary with temperature. So, it is possible to address the temperature variation by making V i as a function of temperature.…”
Section: ( )mentioning
confidence: 99%