Metal homoepitaxial growth at very low temperatures: Lattice-gas models with restricted downward funneling

Physical Review B - Condensed Matter and Materials Physics

Volumn 64, Issue 7, 2001, Pages

  Caspersen, K J ^a   Evans, J W ^b  

^a IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADSORPTION; ARTICLE; CRYSTAL STRUCTURE; CRYSTALLIZATION; DIFFUSION; DRY DEPOSITION; FILM; GEOMETRY; LOW TEMPERATURE PROCEDURES;

EID: 0035881477     PISSN: 10980121     EISSN: 1550235X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.64.075401     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Morphological Organization in Epitaxial Growth and Removal, edited by Z. Zhang and M. G. Lagally (World Scientific, Singapore, 1998).
2. Another misconception (see Ref. 1) is that smoother growth at low T is simply due to the presence of smaller islands from which deposited atoms can more easily descend.
3. W F. Egelhoff and I. Jacob, Phys. Rev. Lett.62, 921 (1989).
4. D K. Flynn-Sanders, J W. Evans, and P A. Thiel, Surf. Sci.289, 77 (1993);
5. D K. Flynn-SandersJ W. EvansP A. ThielJ. Vac. Sci. Technol. A7, 2162 (1989).
6. J W. Evans, D E. Sanders, P A. Thiel, and A E. DePristo, Phys. Rev. B41, 479 (1990).
7. Long-range correlations have been attributed to intralayer “clumping” of atoms deposited nearby other adatoms, facilitated by low-barrier edge diffusion processes. See M C. Bartelt and J W. Evans, Surf. Sci.423, 189 (1999);
8. Surf. Sci.G. Vandoni, C. Felix, R. Monot, J. Buttet, and W. Harbich, 320, L63 (1994);
9. M. Breeman (unpublished).
10. C R. Stoldt, K J. Caspersen, M C. Bartelt, C J. Jenks, J W. Evans, and P A. Thiel, Phys. Rev. Lett.85, 800 (2000).
11. G. Constantini, F. Buatier de Mongeot, C. Boragno, and U. Valbusa, Surf. Sci.459, L487 (2000).
12. K J. Caspersen, C R. Stoldt, A R. Layson, M C. Bartelt, P A. Thiel, and J W. Evans, Phys. Rev. B63, 085401 (2001).
13. D E. Sanders and J W. Evans, in Structure of Surfaces III, edited by S. Y. Tong, M. A. Van Hove, K. Takayanagi, and X. D. Xie (Springer, Berlin, 1991);
14. D M. Halstead and A E. DePristo, Surf. Sci.286, 275 (1993).
15. C. Kelchner and A E. DePristo, Surf. Sci.393, 72 (1997).
16. A L. Barabasi and H E. Stanley, Fractal Concepts in Surface Growth (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1995).
17. See the Appendix in J W. Evans, Phys. Rev. B39, 5655 (1989) which normalized (formula presented) to the number of atoms in a complete layer. Here, we normalize to the number of columns (twice as large), hence the extra factor of 2 relating P’s and θ’s.
18. If (formula presented) and (formula presented) then (formula presented) (formula presented) (formula presented) (formula presented) and similarly with j even. If expressions in parentheses approximate an integral with error (formula presented) then (formula presented)
19. H C. Kang and J W. Evans, Surf. Sci.271, 321 (1992).
20. M C. Bartelt and J W. Evans, Phys. Rev. Lett.75, 4250 (1995).
21. M C. Bartelt and J W. Evans, Surf. Sci.423, 189 (1999).
22. P. Meakin, Fractals, Scaling and Growth Far From Equilibrium (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1998). See Fig. 55.8b for an alternative realization of DF in (formula presented)
23. Our nonsymmetric choice of (formula presented) for (formula presented) dimensions, atoms at the top (formula presented) and at the bottom (formula presented) of saw-tooth profiles are not weighted equally. A symmetric choice with (formula presented) would produce modified behavior, perhaps more like in sc geometries.
24. J. Krug, Adv. Phys.46, 139 (1997);
25. M. Prahofer and H. Spohn, Phys. Rev. Lett.84, 4882 (2000).
26. We have checked that behavior of a modified RDF model with only 4\0, 3\0, and 2\1 trap sites is similar to that of the RDF model analyzed here.
27. For the (formula presented) ballistic deposition (single-step) model (Ref. 12), κ reaches about 0.7 (-1.3), and Q reaches about 0.3 (0.3) at (formula presented) These models have KPZ scaling.
28. P A. Thiel and J W. Evans, J. Phys. Chem. B104, 1663 (2000).
29. K. Bromann, H. Brune, H. Roder, and K. Kern, Phys. Rev. Lett.75, 677 (1995).
30. J W. Evans and M C. Bartelt, in Ref. 1 estimate 0.13 eV for the (formula presented) pair bond energy. For refined estimates, see K A. Fichthorn and M. Scheffler, Phys. Rev. Lett.84, 5371 (2000).
31. C. Motel, R. Ferrando, F. Hontinfinde, and A C. Levi, Surf. Sci.402–404, 286 (1998).
32. M. Schimschak and J. Krug, Phys. Rev. B52, 8550 (1995);
33. Phys. Rev. BS. Das Sarma, C J. Lanczycki, S V. Ghaisas, and J M. Kim, 49, 10 693 (1994).
34. Y P. Pelligrini and R. Jullien, Phys. Rev. Lett.64, 1745 (1990);
35. Phys. Rev. Lett.H. Yan, D. Kessler, and L M. Sander, 64, 26 (1990);
36. Phys. Rev. Lett.J G. Amar and F. Family, 64, 543 (1990).
37. T. Natterman and L.-H. Tang, Phys. Rev. A45, 7156 (1992).
38. P. Meakin and R. Jullien, J. Phys. (France)48, 1651 (1987).
39. P. Smilauer and M. Kotrla, Phys. Rev. B49, 5769 (1994).
40. J A. Stroscio, D T. Pierce, M. Stiles, A. Zangwill, and L M. Sander, Phys. Rev. Lett.75, 4246 (1995).
41. W C. Elliott, P F. Miceli, and P W. Stevens, Bull. Am. Phys. Soc.44, 1604 (1999).
42. B D. Yu and M. Scheffler, Phys. Rev. Lett.77, 1095 (1996).