4.6 Article

Is Reduced Strontium Titanate a Semiconductor or a Metal?

期刊

CRYSTALS
卷 11, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/cryst11070744

关键词

strontium titanate; thermal reduction; insulator-metal transition; redox reactions; point defect chemistry

资金

  1. Leibniz Association [SAW-2013-IKZ-2]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recent research has found that the behavior of SrTiO3 under reducing conditions differs from traditional understanding, as it can transition from an insulating to a metallic state and remain stable. However, samples that have been oxidized at high temperatures cannot be transformed back to a metallic state through reduction, instead exhibiting semiconducting behavior.
In recent decades, the behavior of SrTiO3 upon annealing in reducing conditions has been under intense academic scrutiny. Classically, its conductivity can be described using point defect chemistry and predicting n-type or p-type semiconducting behavior depending on oxygen activity. In contrast, many examples of metallic behavior induced by thermal reduction have recently appeared in the literature, challenging this established understanding. In this study, we aim to resolve this contradiction by demonstrating that an initially insulating, as-received SrTiO3 single crystal can indeed be reduced to a metallic state, and is even stable against room temperature reoxidation. However, once the sample has been oxidized at a high temperature, subsequent reduction can no longer be used to induce metallic behavior, but semiconducting behavior in agreement with the predictions of point defect chemistry is observed. Our results indicate that the dislocation-rich surface layer plays a decisive role and that its local chemical composition can be changed depending on annealing conditions. This reveals that the prediction of the macroscopic electronic properties of SrTiO3 is a highly complex task, and not only the current temperature and oxygen activity but also the redox history play an important role.

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