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.
Effect of Acceptor Density on Photoemission from p‐GaAs–Cs and ‐Cs2O
1.J. J. Scheer and J. van Laar, Solid State Commun. 3, 189 (1965).
2.R. C. Eden, J. L. Moll, and W. E. Spicer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 18, 597 (1967).
3.A. A. Turnbull and G. B. Evans, J. Phys. D (Brit. J. Appl. Phys.) 1, 155 (1968).
4.L. W. James, Y. Z. Liu, and W. E. Spicer, Stanford Electronics Laboratory Quarterly Report No. 9, SU‐SEL‐68‐047, p. 3 (1968).
5.John J. Uebbing and Ronald L. Bell, Proc. IEEE 56, 1624 (1968).
6.D. Khang, Solid‐State Electron. 6, 281 (1963).
7.It is clear that we are referring here to the minority‐carrier (electron) mobility and assuming that the hole mobility is a qualitative measure of the electron mobility. Although not necessarily true in every case, it is probably a safe assumption in most instances. See for instance S. M. Sze and J. C. Irvin, Solid‐State Electron. 11, 599 (1958).
8.H. Sonnenberg, Appl. Phys. Lett. 14, 289 (1969). For the same reasons given in this reference, we will neglect the effect of the potential spike at the interface.
9.J. J. Scheer and J. van Laar, Solid State Commun. 5, 393 (1967).
10.J. J. Uebbing and R. L. Bell, Appl. Phys. Lett. 11, 357 (1967).
11.L. W. James, Stanford Electronics Laboratories Quarterly Report No. 12, Contract No. DA‐44‐009‐AMC‐1474 (T) (1969).
12.S. Garbe (unpublished).
Article metrics loading...
Full text loading...
Most read this month
Most cited this month