4.6 Article

Analysis of the indium insertions in non-stoichiometric copper sulfide roxbyte, and their effect on the localized surface plasmon resonance of the nanocrystals

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00339-020-04266-y

关键词

Plasmonics analysis; Nanomaterials; Copper Sulfide

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study presents a new counterdoping method for synthesizing copper sulfide quantum dots using a catalyst-assisted growth of copper indium sulfides. By utilizing indium to reduce the carrier density of copper sulfide, the semiconductor becomes suitable for multiple applications, while also providing an original method to estimate carrier density.
After operating what is thought to be an incomplete catalyst-assisted growth of copper indium sulfides, we obtain roxbyite (indium hole-filled non-stoichiometric copper sulfide, Cu7S4, CuxS, x = 1.75-1.78) with a higher Cu:S ratio in view of its carrier density. This apparent increase of Cu:S ratio and decrease of carrier density is due to the counterdoping of the non-stoichiometric copper sulfides by indium atoms. Here, we propose a relatively easy way to synthesize copper sulfides quantum dots with low carrier densities. We rely on the well-known indium as way to decrease the carrier density of the copper sulfide Cu7S4, making the semiconductor suitable for multiple applications (reducing the indium and easily preventing the secondary phase formation). Moreover, we provide an original and practical way to estimate the carrier density of our particles using their localized plasmon resonance. In this paper, we conduct comparative quantitative analyses of the localized surface plasmon resonance (LSPR) of counterdoped roxbyite and doped roxbyite synthesized in similar conditions to gauge the effectiveness of the counterdoping. Finally, we hope to propose a picture of and focus on a phenomenon that is overlooked in the growth of copper indium sulfide and to offer a pathway for the proposed doping (counterdoping) of the copper sulfides.

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