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.
Local structure and bonding of Er in GaN: A contrast with Er in Si
1.See, e.g., J. Michel, L. V. C. Assali, M. T. Morse, and L. C. Kimerling, Semicond. Semimet. 49, 111 (1998).
2.See, e.g., A. J. Steckl and J. M. Zavada, Mater. Res. Bull. 24, 33 (1999).
3.D. L. Adler, D. Jacobson, D. J. Eaglesham, M. Marcus, J. Benton, J. M. Poate, and P. H. Citrin, Appl. Phys. Lett. 61, 2181 (1992).
4.R. Sema, M. Lohmeier, P. M. Zagwijn, and A. Polman, Appl. Phys. Lett. 66, 1385 (1995).
5.P. H. Citrin, D. R. Hamann, P. Northrup, D. Jacobson, J. Michel, T. Chen, M. Platero, and L. C. Kimerling (unpublished).
6.A. J. Steckl and R. Birkhahn, Appl. Phys. Lett. 73, 1700 (1998).
7.M. Garter, J. Scofield, R. Birkhahn, and A. J. Steckl, Appl. Phys. Lett. 74, 182 (1999).
8.R. Birkhahn, J. Heikenfeld, M. Garter, D. S. Lee, A. J. Steckl, K. Lorenz, R. Vianden, M. F. da Silva, J. C. Soares, E. Alves, A. Saleh, P. A. Northrup, and P. H. Citrin (unpublished).
9.J. D. MacKenzie, C. R. Abernathy, S. J. Pearton, U. Hömmerich, J. T. Seo, R. G. Wilson, and J. M. Zavada, Appl. Phys. Lett. 72, 2710 (1998).
10.P. A. Lee, P. H. Citrin, P. Eisenberger, and B. M. Kincaid, Rev. Mod. Phys. 53, 769 (1981).
11.K. E. Miyano, J. C. Woicik, L. H. Robins, C. E. Bouldin, and D. K. Wickenden, Appl. Phys. Lett. 70, 2108 (1997).
12.EXAFS from Er in other configurations destructively interfere and lead to reduced amplitudes.
13.Consistent results were obtained using phase shifts and scattering amplitudes determined empirically from model compounds or theoretically from FEFF6, cf., S. Zabinsky, J. Rehr, A. Ankoudinov, R. Albers, and M. Eller, Phys. Rev. B 52, 2995 (1995).
14.R. Anwander, Top. Curr. Chem. 179, 33 (1996).
15.G. Busch and H. Schade, Vorlesgungen Über Festkörperphysik (Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, 1973).
16.The electronegativity of Er, as well as the sizes of and are comparable to those of and or and
17.Trivalent Er(III), which is its configuration in the solid state, simply means there are three available valence electrons rather than the two available in the divalent free atom,
18.R. D. Shannon, Acta Crystallogr., Sect. A: Cryst. Phys., Diffr., Theor. Gen. Crystallogr. 32, 751 (1976).
19.The ∼ linearly varying radii with coordination from Ref. 18 are extrapolated, while the radii are assumed to vary linearly as those for
20.Consider, e.g., the 6 Er–O bonds in Standard heats of formation, vaporization, and dissociation are from common sources, except for ErN and which are, respectively, from J. Kordis and K. Gingerich, J. Nucl. Mater. 66, 197 (1977);
20.R. Pretorius, T. Marais, and C. Theron, Mater. Sci. Eng. 10, 1 (1993).
20.The Er free-atom configuration energy, is from A. Fujimori, M. Grioni, and J. Weaver, Phys. Rev. B 33, 726 (1986), as is the contribution to from the 2.5 Si–Si bonds in (it is subtracted from to isolate the contribution of Er–Si bonds).
21.The similar Er–N and Ga–N bond energies also explain why the local Er structure, i.e., the EXAFS in Fig. 2, is so highly ordered.
22.The low solubility observed for Er in O-poor Si, cf., Ref. 1, is consistent with the low Er–Si bond energy.
Article metrics loading...
Full text loading...
Most read this month
Most cited this month