Si(111) step fluctuations at high temperature: Anomalous step-step repulsion

Physical Review B - Condensed Matter and Materials Physics

Volumn 66, Issue 11, 2002, Pages 1153101-1153106

  Cohen, Saul D ^a,c   Schroll, Robert D ^a   Einstein, T L ^a   Metois J J ^b   Gebremariam, Hailu ^a   Richards, Howard L ^a   Williams, Ellen D ^a  

^a Bldg 142   (United States)

^b CAMPUS DE LUMINY   (France)

^c Columbia University ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

SILICON;

ARTICLE; ELECTRON TRANSPORT; EVAPORATION; HIGH TEMPERATURE PROCEDURES; KINETICS; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; REFLECTOMETRY;

EID: 0037105185     PISSN: 01631829     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.66.115310     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. W.W. Mullins, J. Appl. Phys. 28, 333 (1957); 36, 77 (1959).
2. W.W. Mullins, J. Appl. Phys. 28, 333 (1957); 36, 77 (1959).
3. H.-C. Jeong and E.D. Williams, Surf. Sci. Rep. 34, 171 (1999).
4. A. Ichimiya, K. Hayashi, E.D. Williams, T.L. Einstein, M. Uwaha, and K. Watanabe, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 3662 (2000).
5. A. Pimpinelli and J. Villain, Physics of Crystal Growth (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 1998).
6. q ≡ qd.
7. C. Alfonso, J.M. Bermond, J.C. Heyraud, and J.J. Métois, Surf. Sci. 262, 371 (1992).
8. Z. L. Wang, Reflection Electron Microscopy and Spectroscopy for Surface Analysis (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 1996).
9. N.C. Bartelt, J.L. Goldberg, T.L. Einstein, Ellen D. Williams, J.C. Heyraud, and J.J. Métois, Phys. Rev. B 48, 15 453 (1993).
10. D.-J. Liu and J.D. Weeks, Phys. Rev. B 57, 14 891 (1998).
11. T. Ihle, C. Misbah, and O. Pierre-Louis, Phys. Rev. B 58, 2289 (1998).
12. A. Pimpinelli, J. Villain, D.E. Wolf, J.J. Métois, J.C. Heyraud, I. Elkinani, and G. Uimin, Surf. Sci. 295, 143 (1993).
13. H. Hibino, C.-W. Hu, T. Ogino, and I.S.T. Tsong, Phys. Rev. B 63, 245402 (2001), which provides a thorough discussion of work subsequent to Ref. 8.
14. J.C. Heyraud, J.J. Métois, and J.M. Bermond, Surf. Sci. 425, 48 (1999).
15. A.V. Latyshev, A.L. Aseev, A.B. Krasilnikov, and S.I. Stenin, Phys. Status Solidi A 113, 421 (1989).
16. J.M. Bermond, J.J. Métois, J.C. Heyraud, and F. Floret, Surf. Sci. 416, 430 (1998).
17. N. Akutsu and Y. Akutsu, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 11, 6635 (1999).
18. N.C. Bartelt, T.L. Einstein, and E.D. Williams, Surf. Sci. 276, 308 (1992).
19. From Fig. 6 of Ref. 16 we find this ratio to be 44% and 51% for the (211) and (211) steps, respectively. Although Ref. 8 did not distinguish between (211) and (211) steps, Fig. 6 was calibrated by assuming that Ref. 8 studied (211).
20. T.L. Einstein and O. Pierre-Louis, Surf. Sci. 424, L299 (1999).
21. M. Giesen and T.L. Einstein, Surf. Sci. 449, 191 (2000).
22. H.L. Richards, S.D. Cohen, T.L. Einstein, and M. Giesen, Surf. Sci. 453, 59 (2000).
23. T.L. Einstein, H.L. Richards, S.D. Cohen, and O. Pierre-Louis, Surf. Sci. 493, 460 (2001).
24. T.L. Einstein, J. Jpn. Assoc. Cryst. Growth 29, 20 (2002).
25. In studying physical (in contrast to Monte Carlo) data, it is usually best to perform a two-parameter fit in terms of o and an effective mean step separation rather than a single-parameter fit just to o (Ref. 21).
26. B. Sutherland, J. Math. Phys. 12, 246 (1971); Phys. Rev. A 4, 2019 (1971).
27. B. Sutherland, J. Math. Phys. 12, 246 (1971); Phys. Rev. A 4, 2019 (1971).
28. Conventionally, the TWD is fit to a Gaussian, from which the variance is gauged via the width at half maximum. This technique provides an adequate approximation if à is not too weak (Ref. 21). However, since Eq. (4) is barely more complicated than a Gaussian, there is little to recommend the Gaussian method (except tradition).
29. See, e. g., B. Joós, T.L. Einstein, and N.C. Bartelt, Phys. Rev. B 43, 8153 (1991).
30. P.J. Forrester, Nucl. Phys. B 388, 671 (1992); J. Stat. Phys. 72, 39 (1993).
31. P.J. Forrester, Nucl. Phys. B 388, 671 (1992); J. Stat. Phys. 72, 39 (1993).
32. V.Ya. Krivnov and A.A. Ovchinnikov, Sov. Phys. JETP 55, 162 (1982).
33. D. Sen and R.K. Bhaduri, Can. J. Phys. 77, 327 (1999).
34. I. S. Gradsteyn and I. M. Ryzhik, Table of Integrals, Series, and Products (Academic Press, San Diego, 1980).
35. See also F. Lesage, V. Pasquier, and D. Serban, Nucl. Phys. B 435[FS], 585 (1995). Moreover, Z.N.C. Ha, ibid. 435[FS], 604 (1995) presents an exact solution for an arbitrary value of o. Unfortunately, this solution does not appear to be computationally tractable.
36. See also F. Lesage, V. Pasquier, and D. Serban, Nucl. Phys. B 435[FS], 585 (1995). Moreover, Z.N.C. Ha, ibid. 435[FS], 604 (1995) presents an exact solution for an arbitrary value of o. Unfortunately, this solution does not appear to be computationally tractable.
37. D.M. Gangardt and A. Kamenev, Nucl. Phys. B 610[PM], 578 (2001).
38. For this Ã-in contrast to larger values (Ref. 22) the use of Eq. (4) makes negligible difference from the Gruber-Mullins analysis (Refs. 2,6 and 15) formulated in N.C. Bartelt, T.L. Einstein, and E.D. Williams, Surf. Sci. 240, L591 (1990).
39. A. Videcoq, A. Pimpinelli, and M. Vladimirova, Appl. Surf. Sci. 177, 213 (2001).
40. M. Degawa, K. Thürmer, I. Morishima, H. Minoda, K. Yagi, and E.D. Williams, Surf. Sci. 487, 171 (2001), and references therein.
41. S. Stoyanov, J.J. Métois, and V. Tonchev, Surf. Sci. 465, 227 (2000).
42. O. Pierre-Louis and C. Misbah, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 4761 (1996); Phys. Rev. B 58, 2259 (1998).
43. O. Pierre-Louis and C. Misbah, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 4761 (1996); Phys. Rev. B 58, 2259 (1998).
44. E.S. Fu, D.-J. Liu, M.D. Johnson, J.D. Weeks, and E.D. Williams, Surf. Sci. 385, 259 (1997).
45. C. Misbah, O. Pierre-Louis, and A. Pimpinelli, Phys. Rev. B 51, R17 283 (1995).
46. M. Sato, M. Uwaha, and Y. Saito, Phys. Rev. B 62, 8452 (2000).
47. J. Steward, O. Pohland, and J.M. Gibson, Phys. Rev. B 49, 13 848 (1994).
48. A. Pimpinelli, V. Tonchev, A. Videcoq, and M. Vladimirova, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 206103 (2002).
49. More generally, step bunching presumably also involves an altered form of the step-step interaction from an inverse-square dependence on separation. For the point of this simple argument, we ignore this complication.
50. E.g., P.J. Rous and D.N. Bly, Phys. Rev. B 62, 8478 (2000).
51. M. Giesen, Prog. Surf. Sci. 68, 1 (2001).
52. M. Giesen, M. Dietterle, D. Stapel, H. Ibach, and D.M. Kolb, Surf. Sci. 384, 168 (1997).
53. R. Koch, J.J. Schulz, and K.H. Rieder, Europhys. Lett. 48, 554 (1999).
54. -2 dependence of the offset seems compatible.
55. A succinct review is T. L. Einstein and S. V. Khare, in Dynamics of Crystal Surface and Interfaces, edited by P. M. Duxbury and T. Pence (Plenum, New York, 1997), p. 83.