1998
DOI: 10.1016/s0038-1101(98)00086-0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Thermal stability of Ti/Pt/Au ohmic contacts on InAs/graded InGaAs layers

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
5
0

Year Published

2000
2000
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
1
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…TLM patterns were performed using standard photolithography and lift-off techniques. 19 The grown samples were first cleaned with chemical solutions of trichloroethylene, acetone, and methanol. Then the samples were rinsed with deionized (DI) water and immediately blown dry with N 2 .…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…TLM patterns were performed using standard photolithography and lift-off techniques. 19 The grown samples were first cleaned with chemical solutions of trichloroethylene, acetone, and methanol. Then the samples were rinsed with deionized (DI) water and immediately blown dry with N 2 .…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is similar to the thermal degradation of a device at temperatures higher than 220 'C. Thermal degradation has been reported on non-alloyed ohmic contacts (such as the devices from chapter 3) on an InGaAs layer [33]. Indium has been found to leave the top InGaAs layer causing the contact resistance to increase.…”
Section: Mechanisms In Tlms and Hemtssupporting
confidence: 69%
“…27 assuming each SBH. [27][28][29][30][31] As described in the previous section, the values with the STLM have a variation where some points are out of the error range of values evaluated using the MSTLM. On the other hand, the value evaluated using the MSTLM has small variations thanks to the elimination of contact resistance, R mc , which is sensitive to the surface oxides of Ni-InAs, 6,7) and statistical evaluation, which mitigates the sample variations.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 88%