banner image
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.
Morphology and defect properties of the interface
Rent this article for
View: Figures


Image of FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

A interface with: (a) a passivated Ge–H bond, (b) a center and a released H atom. [(c) and (d)] similar to [(a) and (b)] but with H replaced by a F atom. Arrows point to H and F atoms. Ge–H dissociation is exothermic by 0.3 eV and the barrier is 1.2 eV. The energy penalty and barrier of Ge–F dissociation is close to zero and 0.4 eV, respectively, [Ge: light gray, O: gray, H, F: white spheres].

Image of FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

[(a)–(c)] Migration of a molecule (shown with arrows) in the near interfacial layer (NIL) of a interface, and (d) exothermic oxidation reaction and formation of new interfacial Ge–O–Ge bonds. The rate-limiting step is the migration of in the NIL [Ge: light gray, O: gray, migrating O: dark gray spheres].

Image of FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

O protrusions at a interface: [(a) and (b)] with two Ge–O–Ge bonds, [(c) and (d)] with three Ge–O–Ge bonds. [(b) and (d)] may act as carrier traps since they contain a divalent Ge atom (shown with an arrow) [Ge: light gray, O: gray, protruding O: dark gray spheres].


Article metrics loading...


Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: Morphology and defect properties of the Ge–GeO2 interface