4.6 Article

Surface and Bulk Oxygen Vacancy Defect States near the Fermi Level in 125 nm WO3-δ/TiO2 (110) Films: A Resonant Valence Band Photoemission Spectroscopy Study

期刊

JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY C
卷 115, 期 33, 页码 16411-16417

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/jp202375h

关键词

-

资金

  1. European Community [042095]
  2. Seventh Framework Program Novel Materials for Energy Applications grant [227179]
  3. Swiss National Science Foundation [200021116688, 200021-132126, 206021-121306, IZK0Z2-133944]
  4. Swiss Federal Office of Energy [152316-101883, 153613-102809, 153476-102691]
  5. Empa Board of Directors 7th RD Grant
  6. Office of Science/BES, of the U.S. DoE [DE-AC02-05CH11231]
  7. Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) [206021_121306, IZK0Z2_133944, 200021_132126] Funding Source: Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

An approximately 125 nm thick pulsed laser deposited blue, nonstoichiometric WO3-delta film grows on TiO2 (110) in the [220] direction. Oxidative treatment at 400 degrees C turns the film color from blue to yellow and improves the film quality considerably, as shown by improvement of the Kiessig oscillations in the X-ray reflectometry curves. Detailed analysis of resonant valence band photoemission spectra of the as-deposited nonstoichiometric blue film and oxidized yellow film suggests that a transition near the Fermi energy originates from the nonstoichiometry, i.e., oxygen deficiency, and insofar poses electronic defect states that partially can be eliminated by heat treatment in oxygen. The defects of the as-deposited blue film seem to be located throughout the film, except for the top surface due to exposure to oxygen in ambient air. Thermal after-treatment under oxygen heals the defects in the bulk, whereas residual defect states appear to remain near the film-substrate interface. Potential strain at the substrate-film interface due to lattice mismatch may be one origin for the remanence of the defect states in the bulk.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据