Full text loading...
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Relationships of electrical properties and melting threshold in laser‐annealed ion‐implanted silicon
1.I. B. Khaibullin, E. I. Shtyrkov, M. M. Zaripov, M. F. Galyautdinov, and G. G. Zakirov, Sov. Phys.‐Semicond. 11, 190 (1977), and references therein;
1.R. T. Young, C. W. White, G. J. Clark, J. Narayan, W. H. Christie, M. Murakawi, P. W. King, and S. D. Kramer, Appl. Phys. Lett. 32, 139 (1978);
1.J. A. Golovchenko and T. N. C. Venkatesan, Appl. Phys. Lett. 32, 147 (1978);
1.G. A. Kachurin and E. V. Nidaev, Sov. Phys.‐Semicond. 11, 350 (1977);
1.G. K. Celler, J. M. Poate, and L. C. Kimerling, Appl. Phys. Lett. 32, 464 (1978);
1.H. J. Leamy, G. A. Rozgonyi, T. T. Sheng, and G. K. Celler, Appl. Phys. Lett. 32, 535 (1978);
1.P. Baeri, S. U. Campisano, G. Foti, and E. Remini, Appl. Phys. Lett. 33, 137 (1978).
2.For the substrate orientation dependence in solid‐phase‐epitaxial re‐growth see L. Csepregi, J. W. Mayer, and T. W. Sigmon [Appl. Phys. Lett. 29, 92 (1976)]. In our separate study, we observed no substrate orientation dependence in liquid‐phase epitaxy.
3.D. H. Auston, C. M. Surko, T. N. C. Venkatesan, R. E. Slusher, and J. A. Golovchenko, Appl. Phys. Lett. 33, 437 (1978);
3.for the enhancement of reflectivity of the molten silicon see K. M. Shvarev, B. A. Braun, and P. V. Gel’d [Sov. Phys. Solid State 16, 2111 (1975)].
4.Y. S. Liu and K. L. Wang, Appl. Phys. Lett. 34, 363 (1979).
5.J. Narayan, R. T. Young, R. F. Wood, and W. H. Christie, Appl. Phys. Lett. 33, 338 (1978).
6.J. A. Davies, in Material Characterization Using Ion Beams, edited by J. P. Thomas and A. Cachard (Plenum, New York, 1978).
7.Also see Channeling, edited by D. V. Morgan (Wiley, New York, 1973).
8.C. S. Fuller and J. A. Ditzenberger, J. Appl. Phys. 27, 544 (1956).
9.J. O. McCaldin, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. 11, 990 (1974).
10.Y. M. Shashkov and V. M. Gurevich, Sov. J. Phys. Chem. 42, 1082 (1968).
11.For example, see S. M. Sze, Physics of Semiconductor Devices (Wiley, New York, 1969), p. 102 ff.
12.This defect number was estimated by assuming a constant ratio of the measured data given in Ref. 14 to the theoretically calculated value using where ν is the nuclear energy loss. The interpolation was then carried out to obtain the defect concentration at the different energy.
13.The minimum detectable concentration was calculated from the bridge sensitivity (V/pf) and the substrate doping density (see Ref. 16).
14.B. L. Crowder and R. S. Title, Ion Implantation, edited by F. H. Eisen and L. T. Chadderton (Gordon and Breach, New York, 1971), p. 87.
15.In the measurement, the reverse induced current was obtained as a function of electron beam energy. The junction depth can be elucidated from the electron beam energy at which the electron‐hole pair collection efficiency is almost unity. Although the results will be published elsewhere, the technique can be referred to G. Possin [J. Appl. Phys. 48, 5245 (1977)].
16.P. Blood, G. Dearnley, and M. A. Wilkins, J. Appl. Phys. 45, 5123 (1974).
17.G. L. Miller, D. V. Lang, and L. C. Kimerling, in Ann. Rev. Mater. Sci. (Annual Rev. Inc., Palo Alto, Calif. 1977), Vol. 7.
Article metrics loading...