4.2 Article Proceedings Paper

Monte Carlo strategies for simulations of electron backscattering from surfaces

Journal

SURFACE AND INTERFACE ANALYSIS
Volume 37, Issue 11, Pages 861-874

Publisher

JOHN WILEY & SONS LTD
DOI: 10.1002/sia.2104

Keywords

Monte Carlo simulations; AES; backscattering factor

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Reliable algorithms for simulation of electron trajectories in solids are needed for quantification of Auger-electron spectroscopy, particularly for the determination of the backscattering factor (BF). The computational schemes for this purpose should be universal, i.e. applicable to any solid for energies down to 50 eV. In addition, the algorithms should ideally require simple input parameters, e.g. the stoichiometry of the solid and the experimental configuration. Previous Monte Carlo simulations have often been based on the continuous slowing down approximation (CSDA), a relatively simple and convenient approach. However, this approach requires information on the electron stopping power for a given solid. General expressions for the stopping power are briefly reviewed and discussed. We report results of BF calculations for Cu M3VV, Ag M5VV, and Au N67VV Auger transitions from Monte Carlo simulations based on the CSDA in which stopping powers from optical data and from Tougaard's two-parameter universal inelastic-scattering cross section were employed. The resulting BFs, for primary energies between 500 eV and 10 keV, differed by up to 12% (at an energy of 10 keV). BFs from the Monte Carlo algorithm based on the CSDA were compared with similar results from a more sophisticated code involving simulations of individual elastic- and inelastic-scattering events. Both algorithms yielded equivalent BFs for the same Auger transitions with primary energies exceeding 1000 eV; at lower energies, deviations up to 10% occurred because of an approximation in the evaluation of an integral. Copyright (C) 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available