4.7 Article

Interface Formation during the Growth of Phase Change Material Heterostructures Based on Ge-Rich Ge-Sb-Te Alloys

Journal

NANOMATERIALS
Volume 12, Issue 6, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/nano12061007

Keywords

PCM; Ge-rich Ge-Sb-Te alloys; heterostructures; electronic properties

Funding

  1. EU [824957]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this study, the electronic properties of PCM double-layered heterostructures deposited on silicon substrates were characterized. The composition evolution and interdiffusion of the heterostructure interface were obtained using XPS and UPS. The final composition of the GGST layer was found to be close to GST212, and the density of states calculated by density functional theory was in agreement with experimental results. Differences in the crystallization process were discussed based on the photoemission results.
In this study, we present a full characterization of the electronic properties of phase change material (PCM) double-layered heterostructures deposited on silicon substrates. Thin films of amorphous Ge-rich Ge-Sb-Te (GGST) alloys were grown by physical vapor deposition on Sb2Te3 and on Ge2Sb2Te5 layers. The two heterostructures were characterized in situ by X-ray and ultraviolet photoemission spectroscopies (XPS and UPS) during the formation of the interface between the first and the second layer (top GGST film). The evolution of the composition across the heterostructure interface and information on interdiffusion were obtained. We found that, for both cases, the final composition of the GGST layer was close to Ge2SbTe2 (GST212), which is a thermodynamically favorable off-stoichiometry GeSbTe alloy in the Sb-GeTe pseudobinary of the ternary phase diagram. Density functional theory calculations allowed us to calculate the density of states for the valence band of the amorphous phase of GST212, which was in good agreement with the experimental valence bands measured in situ by UPS. The same heterostructures were characterized by X-ray diffraction as a function of the annealing temperature. Differences in the crystallization process are discussed on the basis of the photoemission results.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available