Ambipolar charge injection and transport in a single pentacene monolayer island

Nano Letters

Volumn 4, Issue 11, 2004, Pages 2145-2150

  Heim, T ^a   Lmimouni, K ^a   Vuillaume, D ^a  

^a CNRS   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ATOMIC FORCE MICROSCOPY; CRYSTALLINE MATERIALS; FIELD EFFECT SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICES; GROWTH KINETICS; SEMICONDUCTING FILMS; SILICA; SURFACE ROUGHNESS;

CHARGE INJECTION; MOLECULAR DEVICES; MONOLAYER ISLANDS; ORGANIC TRANSISTORS;

MONOLAYERS;

EID: 9644258966     PISSN: 15306984     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/nl0487673     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Dimitrakopoulos, C. D.; Mascaro, D. J. IBM J. Res. Dev. 2001, 45, 11-27.
2. Dodabalapur, A.; Torsi, L.; Katz, H. E. Science 1995, 268, 270-271.
3. Horowitz, G.; Hajlaoui, R.; Bouchriha, H.; Bourguiga, R.; Hajlaoui, M. Adv. Mater. 1998, 10, 923-927.
4. Meyer zu Heringdorf, F.-J.; Reuter, M. C.; Tromp, R. M. Nature 2001, 412, 517-520.
5. Ruiz, R.; Nickel, B.; Koch, N.; Feldman, L. C.; Haglund, R. F.; Kahn, A.; Scoles, G. Phys. Rev. B 2003, 67, 125406.
6. Pratontep, S.; Brinkmann, M. Phys. Rev. B 2004, 69, 165201.
7. Granstrom, E. L.; Frisbie, C. D. J. Phys. Chem. B 1999, 103, 8842-8849.
8. Dinelli, F.; Murgia, M.; Levy, P.; Cavallini, M.; Biscarini, F. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2004, 92, 116802.
9. Lmimouni, K.; Troadec, D.; Vuillaume, D., manuscript in preparation.
10. Horowitz, G.; Hajlaoui, M. E. Synth. Met. 2001, 122, 185-189.
11. We modified simultaneously a "mechanical" parameter (substrate roughness) and a "physical" parameter (deposition growth) to ensure a large molecular order difference between the two samples. Further experiments are in progress to determine precisely the respective effect of each parameter on the reported results.
12. All images were processed and analyzed using the WS×M software by Nanotec Electronica S. L. (Spain).
13. Since the roughness has to be measured on a small area on the island, the roughness values are less accurate than on the bare substrate where larger surface areas can be used to determine the roughness data.
14. Melin, T.; Diesinger, H.; Deresmes, D.; Stievenard, D. Phys. Rev. B 2004, 69, 035321.
15. A correction is required because we used a semiconductor substrate instead of a metal. However, this correction can be neglected when using the ratio method, because almost the same correction factor applies in the capacitive and charge gradient forces. See ref 14.
16. According to the calculation of the factor g given in ref 14, the increase in the factor g reflects the decrease in the island charge screening when a thin insulating layer is inserted between the pentacene island and the silicon.
17. Fritz, S. E.; Martin, S. M.; Frisbie, C. D.; Ward, M. D.; Toney, M. F. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2004, 126, 4084-4085.
18. Watkins, N. J.; Gao, Y. J. Appl. Phys. 2003, 94, 5782-5786.
19. Hill, F. G.; Rajagopal, A.; Kahn, A.; Hu, Y. Appl. Phys. Lett. 1998, 73, 662-664.
20. To our knowledge, the interfacial dipole at the pentacene-Pt/Ir interface has not been measured by photoemission spectroscopy as in other metal/organic systems. However, such a value of about 1 eV is not unreasonable and it has been observed for various interfaces: Au/Alq3, Au/NPD, Au/TPD, and Au/DPNTCI, for example. Alq3 = tri(8-hydroxyquinolino)aluminium, NPD = N,N'-diphenyl-N.N'- bis(1-naphthyl)-l,1'-biphenyl-4,4'-diamine, TPD = N,N'-diphenyl-N,N'-(3- methylphenyl)-1,1'-biphenyl-4,4'-diamine, DP-NTCI = N,N'-diphenyl-1,4,5,8- naphthyltetracarboxilicimide. See a review in Ishii, H.; Sugiyama, K.; Ito, E.; Seki, K. Adv. Mater. 1999, 11, 605-625, and references therein.
21. This may be due to a lower chemical quality of the pentacene batch used for sample II, Chemicals were used as received.
22. In sample II, we used a native oxide, 1.5 to 2 nm thick. In sample I, to have a better controlled quality of the oxide surface (smoother surface), we used a microelectronics grade thermal oxide with a thickness of 4 nm.
23. Melin, T.; Deresmes, D.; Stievenard, D. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2002, 81, 5054-5056.
24. The lateral resolution is proportional to the tip - substrate distance. Its value can be inferred from the comparison of a topographic profile and the EFM profile of charged silicon small nanoparticles using similar equipment and measurement conditions; see Melin, T. et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 2004, 92, 166101.
25. Brédas, J. L.; Calbert, J. P.; da Silva Filho, D. A.; Cornil, J. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2002, 99, 5804-5809.
26. Heim, T.; Melin, T.; Deresmes, D.; Vuillaume, D. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2004, 85, 2637-2639.