Low-temperature scanning tunneling spectroscopy of n-type GaAs(110) surfaces

Physical Review B - Condensed Matter and Materials Physics

Volumn 66, Issue 16, 2002, Pages 1652041-1652049

  Feenstra, R M ^a,d   Meyer, G ^b   Moresco, F ^c   Rieder, K H ^c  

^a CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b PAUL DRUDE INSTITUT FÜR FESTKÖRPERELEKTRONIK   (Germany)

^c FREIE UNIVERSITÄT BERLIN   (Germany)

^d IBM RESEARCH ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

GALLIUM ARSENIDE;

ARTICLE; CONDUCTANCE; IMAGE ANALYSIS; LOW TEMPERATURE PROCEDURES; MICROSCOPY; SCANNING TUNNELING MICROSCOPY; SCANNING TUNNELING SPECTROSCOPY; SEMICONDUCTOR; SPECTROSCOPY;

EID: 0037110114     PISSN: 01631829     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.66.165204     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. R.M. Feenstra and J.A. Stroscio, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 5, 923 (1987).
2. R.M. Feenstra, Phys. Rev. B 50, 4561 (1994).
3. R.S. Becker, J.A. Golovchenko, D.R. Hamann, and B.S. Swartzentruber, Phys. Rev. Lett. 55, 2032 (1985).
4. R.J. Hamers, R.M. Tromp, and J.E. Demuth, Phys. Rev. Lett. 56, 1972 (1986).
5. J.A. Stroscio, R.M. Feenstra, and A.P. Fein, Phys. Rev. Lett. 57, 2579 (1986).
6. S.Y. Tong, A.R. Lubinsky, B.J. Mrstik, and M.A. Van Hove, Phys. Rev. B 17, 3303 (1978).
7. R.M. Feenstra, Phys. Rev. Lett. 63, 1412 (1989).
8. R. Dombrowski, Chr. Steinebach, Chr. Wittneven, M. Morgenstern, and R. Wiesendanger, Phys. Rev. B 59, 8043 (1999).
9. M. Morgenstern, Chr. Wittneven, R. Dombrowski, and R. Wiesendanger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 5588 (2000).
10. A. Depuydt, C. Van Haesendonck, N.S. Maslova, V.I. Panov, S.V. Savinov, and P.I. Arseev, Phys. Rev. B 60, 2619 (1999).
11. G. Meyer, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 67, 2960 (1996).
12. R.M. Feenstra, G. Meyer, F. Moresco, and K.H. Rieder, Phys. Rev. B 64, 081306 (2001).
13. J. Singh, Physics of Semiconductors and their Heterostructures (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1993), p. 272.
14. M.B. Johnson, O. Albrektsen, R.M. Feenstra, and H.W.M. Salemink, Appl. Phys. Lett. 63, 2923 (1993); 64, 1454 (1994).
15. M.B. Johnson, O. Albrektsen, R.M. Feenstra, and H.W.M. Salemink, Appl. Phys. Lett. 63, 2923 (1993); 64, 1454 (1994).
16. J.F. Zheng, X. Liu, N. Newman, E.R. Weber, D.F. Ogletree, and M. Salmeron, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72, 1490 (1994).
17. C. Domke, Ph. Ebert, M. Heinrich, and K. Urban, Phys. Rev. B 54, 10 288 (1996).
18. M.C.M.M. van der Wielen, A.J.A. van Roij, and H. van Kempen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 1075 (1996).
19. Chr. Wittneven, R. Dombrowski, M. Morgenstern, and R. Wiesendanger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 5616 (1998).
20. R. de Kort, M.C.M.M. van der Wielen, A.J.A. van Roij, W. Kets, and H. van Kempen, Phys. Rev. B 63, 125336 (2001).
21. G. Lengel, R. Wilkins, G. Brown, M. Weimer, J. Gryko, and R.E. Allen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 72, 836 (1994).
22. Ph. Ebert and K. Urban, Phys. Rev. B 58, 1401 (1998).
23. Semiconductors: Group IV elements and III-V compounds, edited by O. Madelung (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1991).
24. At RT, the effects of tip-induced band bending on the observed band gaps were found to be remarkably small (<0.05 eV) for high doping values of the type used here, as discussed in Ref. 2. However, we note that in the present LT spectra tip-induced band bending effects may be more apparent, since for the RT results both the VB and CB probably extend into the gap region by several kT, thereby masking the effects of tip-induced band bending.
25. J.A. Stroscio and R.M. Feenstra, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 6, 1472 (1988).
26. C. Domke, M. Heinrich, Ph. Ebert, and K. Urban, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 16, 2825 (1998).
27. J.A. Stroscio, R.M. Feenstra, and A.P. Fein, Phys. Rev. Lett. 16, 1668 (1987).
28. J. van Laar, A. Huijser, and T.L. van Rooy, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. 14, 894 (1977).
29. z state of a donor in the bulk, so that its binding energy is decreased by a factor of 4 compared to the 1s ground state of a bulk donor; [see, e.g., G. Bastard, Surf. Sci. 113, 165 (1982); Eq. (5)]. We thus expect the ground-state binding energy for a surface donor to be similar to that of a bulk donor.
30. z state of a donor in the bulk, so that its binding energy is decreased by a factor of 4 compared to the 1s ground state of a bulk donor; [see, e.g., G. Bastard, Surf. Sci. 113, 165 (1982); Eq. (5)]. We thus expect the ground-state binding energy for a surface donor to be similar to that of a bulk donor.
31. A. Schwarz, W. Allers, U.D. Schwarz, and R. Wiesendanger, Phys. Rev. B 62, 13 617 (2000).
32. Y. Huang, C.C. Williams, and M.A. Wendman, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A 14, 1168 (1996).
33. M. Barrett, M. Dennis, D. Tiffin, Y. Li, and C.K. Shih, IEEE Electron Device Lett. 16, 118 (1995).