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.
Activation volume for phosphorus diffusion in silicon and
4.A. Antonelli and J. Bernholc, Phys. Rev. B 40, 10643 (1989);
4.A. Antonelli and J. Bernholc, Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 163, 523 (1990);
4.W. Windl, M. S. Daw, N. N. Carlson, and M. Laudon, Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 677, AA9–4 (2001).
9.N. R. Zangenberg, J. Chevallier, J. L. Hansen, and A. Nylandsted Larsen, Appl. Phys. A: Mater. Sci. Process. Online First, DOI: 10.1007/s00339 (2004).
11.M. J. Aziz, Y. Zhao, H. J. Gossman, S. Mitha, S. P. Smith, and D. Schiferl (submitted).
12.P. M. Fahey, P. B. Griffin, and J. D. Plummer, Rev. Mod. Phys. 61, 289 (1989);
12.H.-J. Gossmann, G. H. Gilmer, C. S. Rafferty, F. C. Unterwald, T. Boone, J. M. Poate, H. S. Luftman, and W. Frank, J. Appl. Phys. 77, 1948 (1995).
13.That is, the ratio of the phosphorus flux to the phosphorus concentration gradient. The fitting results in an average value over the concentration regime over which our measurement is sensitive: from about ; falls near the middle of this range.
14.The uncertainties in relevant for reckoning the uncertainty in arise from run-to-run temperature irreproducibility and sample-to-sample SIMS irreproducibility. We also account for variations in the fitted resulting from varying the boundaries of the fitted region of all samples together. The run-to-run temperature reproducibility is responsible for a uncertainty in . The uncertainty in the pressure measurement is over the range but is virtually zero for the samples. In the unalloyed Si (low diffusivity) samples we estimated the combined effects of uncertainty in due to temperature measurement and uncertainty in nonzero from a statistical simulation resulting in . We separately evaluated the uncertainty in due to the uncertainty in SIMS depth profiling as by varying our treatment of the SIMS data (e.g., depth scale calibration) within bounds given by their uncertainties. These contributions were assumed to add in quadrature, resulting in an overall uncertainty of . In the Si–Ge alloy (high diffusivity) samples, the run-to-run SIMS depth profiling reproducibility is responsible for only a uncertainty in , which we added in quadrature to the uncertainty due to temperature measurement to obtain a nominal uncertainty in of . We estimated the combined effects of these uncertainties in and the uncertainty in by a statistical simulation resulting in . For the purpose of evaluating we have ignored these systematic errors in : the difference between extrinsic and intrinsic diffusivity (factor of 0.6) the transient time for point defect equilibration (possible 20% error) the sensitivity of the fitted to the boundaries of the fitted region in each individual sample (possible 10% error) the uncertainty in depth scale for the as-grown concentration-depth profile (possible 5% error).
Article metrics loading...
Full text loading...
Most read this month