4.8 Article

CdO as the archetypical transparent conducting oxide. Systematics of dopant ionic radius and electronic structure effects on charge transport and band structure

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY
卷 127, 期 24, 页码 8796-8804

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/ja051272a

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A series of yffrium-doped CdO (CYO) thin films have been grown on both amorphous glass and single-crystal MgO(100) substrates at 410 degrees C by metal-organic chemical vapor deposition (MOCVD), and their phase structure, microstructure, electrical, and optical properties have been investigated. XRD data reveal that all as-deposited CYO thin films are phase-pure and polycrystalline, with features assignable to a cubic CdO-type crystal structure. Epitaxial films grown on single-crystal MgO(100) exhibit biaxial, highly textured microstructures. These as-deposited CYO thin films exhibit excellent optical transparency, with an average transmittance of > 80% in the visible range. Y doping widens the optical band gap from 2.86 to 3.27 eV via a Burstein-Moss shift, Room temperature thin film conductivities of 8540 and 17 800 S/cm on glass and MgO(100), respectively, are obtained at an optimum Y doping level of 1.2-1.3%. Finally, electronic band structure calculations are carried out to systematically compare the structural, electronic, and optical properties of the In-, Sc-, and Y-doped CdO systems. Both experimental and theoretical results reveal that dopant ionic radius and electronic structure have a significant influence on the CdO-based TCO crystal and band structure: (1) lattice parameters contract as a function of dopant ionic radii in the order Y (1.09 angstrom) < In (0.94 angstrom) < Sc (0.89 angstrom); (2) the carrier mobilities and doping efficiencies decrease in the order In > Y > Sc; (3) the dopant d state has substantial influence on the position and width of the s-based conduction band, which ultimately determines the intrinsic charge transport characteristics.

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

4.8
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