4.7 Article

Strain and Defect Evolution of Si1-xGex/Si Heterostructures Grown by Pulsed Laser Induced Epitaxy

期刊

SURFACES AND INTERFACES
卷 32, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.surfin.2022.102149

关键词

SiGe; Strain; Laser Annealing; Segregation; Defects

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the relaxation mechanism of Si1-xGex/Si heterostructures under pulsed laser melting and identified surface dislocation half-loops as the primary strain relieving defects. The findings have implications for understanding the potential applications of pulsed laser melting in pMOS source/drain contact engineering.
The relaxation mechanism of Si1-xGex/Si heterostructures subjected to pulsed laser melting was investigated by probing the pulsed laser induced epitaxy (PLIE) regime of undoped 20 nm Si0.5Ge0.5/Si thin films. The pseudomorphic critical thickness and evolution of bi-layer formation was determined as a function of average Ge concentration of the films via quantitative analysis of (004) HRXRD rocking curves. Comparison of pseudomorphic thicknesses alongside SIMS analysis reveals a dynamic critical Ge concentration of 27-30% Ge as the PLIE limit for pseudomorphic growth that is independent of average Ge concentration of the films. Plan-view weak-beam dark-field imaging revealed that surface dislocation half-loops are the primary strain relieving defects that reach concentrations on the order of 1010 cm-2. It is theorized that quasi-cellular solidification leads to lateral Ge segregation, creating nm scale localized regions of Ge pile-up and stress concentration. The morphology of the liquid/solid interface along with stress localization is what allows for the dislocation half-loop to be the primary strain relieving defect, with <110> edge defects acting as secondary. These results are important for understanding the conditions and strategies necessary to utilize pulsed laser melting to its fullest potential in applications towards pMOS source/drain contact engineering.

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