4.3 Article

Evaluation of the Tauc method for optical absorption edge determination: ZnO thin films as a model system

Journal

PHYSICA STATUS SOLIDI B-BASIC SOLID STATE PHYSICS
Volume 252, Issue 8, Pages 1700-1710

Publisher

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/pssb.201552007

Keywords

band gaps; near-edge absorptivity ratio; optical absorption; polycrystalline semiconductors; Tauc plots; thin films; ZnO

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation [0903661]
  2. Corning/Saint-Gobain/McLaren Endowment
  3. Direct For Education and Human Resources
  4. Division Of Graduate Education [0903661] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

One of the most frequently used methods for characterizing thin films is UV-Vis absorption. The near-edge region can be fitted to a simple expression in which the intercept gives the band-gap and the fitting exponent identifies the electronic transition as direct or indirect (see Tauc et al., Phys. Status Solidi 15, 627 (1966); these are often called Tauc plots). While the technique is powerful and simple, the accuracy of the fitted band-gap result is seldom stated or known. We tackle this question by refitting a large number of Tauc plots from the literature and look for trends. Nominally pure zinc oxide (ZnO) was chosen as a material with limited intrinsic deviation from stoichiometry and which has been widely studied. Our examination of the band gap values and their distribution leads to a discussion of some experimental factors that can bias the data and lead to either smaller or larger apparent values than would be expected. Finally, an easily evaluated figure-of-merit is defined that may help guide more accurate Tauc fitting. For samples with relatively sharper Tauc plot shapes, the population yields E-g(ZnO) as 3.276 +/- 0.033 eV, in good agreement with data for single crystalline material. (C) 2015 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available