4.7 Article

Nanometer-thick copper films with low resistivity grown on 2D material surfaces

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 12, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-05874-9

关键词

-

资金

  1. Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan [MOST 108-2221-E-001-017-MY3, MOST 110-2622-8002-014]
  2. iMATE project - Academia Sinica, Taiwan [ASiMATE-109-41]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Thin copper films were deposited on 2D material surfaces through e-beam deposition, exhibiting preferential planar growth on both MoS2 and WSe2 surfaces. The films showed low resistivity values and the ability of WSe2 to prevent diffusion of copper. WSe2 is a promising candidate for replacing liner/barrier stack in interconnects due to its low resistivity, thin body nature, and unique van der Waals epitaxy growth mode.
Thin Copper (Cu) films (15 nm) are deposited on different 2D material surfaces through e-beam deposition. With the assist of van der Waals epitaxy growth mode on 2D material surfaces, preferential planar growth is observed for Cu films on both MoS2 and WSe2 surfaces at room temperature, which will induce a polycrystalline and continuous Cu film formation. Relative low resistivity values 6.07 (MoS2) and 6.66 (WSe2) mu omega-cm are observed for the thin Cu films. At higher growth temperature 200 degrees C, Cu diffusion into the MoS2 layers is observed while the non-sulfur 2D material WSe2 can prevent Cu diffusion at the same growth temperature. By further increasing the deposition rates, a record-low resistivity value 4.62 mu omega-cm for thin Cu films is observed for the sample grown on the WSe2 surface. The low resistivity values and the continuous Cu films suggest a good wettability of Cu films on 2D material surfaces. The thin body nature, the capability to prevent Cu diffusion and the unique van der Waals epitaxy growth mode of 2D materials will make non-sulfur 2D materials such as WSe2 a promising candidate to replace the liner/barrier stack in interconnects with reducing linewidths.

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

4.7
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