4.6 Article

Charge Transfer Dynamics and Auger Recombination of CdTe/CdS Core/Shell Quantum Dots

期刊

JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY C
卷 119, 期 31, 页码 17971-17978

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jpcc.5b05254

关键词

-

资金

  1. [26107005]
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [15H03773, 26107005] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Core/shell semiconductor nanocrystals can be designed to afford type I, quasi-type II, or type II energy-band alignments, differing in the nature of the carrierrelaxation processes. In this study, we synthesized CdTe/CdS core/shell quantum dots (Q_Ds) from four differently sized Cdte core QDs by a hydrotherthal method, and we examined their exciton-relaxation dynamics by time-resolved luminescence and transient absorption (TA) spectroscopies. We performed core/shell-selective excitation experiments on large CdTe/CdS core/shell QDs with tetrahedral structures. The relative bleach TA intensities at the IS state against the lowest exciton state of the CdS shell are different for the,core and the shell excitations. We interpret this phenomenon in terms of a small potential barrier in the conduction band, induced by grain boundaries at the core/shell interface of CdTe/CdS core/shell QDs. The evolution of the band alignment from type I to quasi-type II is confirmed by increased luminescence lifetimes; hole localization in the core, and electron delocalization throughout the QD. Moreover, the biextiton Auger recombination lifetime (T-Auger) of CdTe/CdS core/shell QDs represents a luminescence wavelength dependence that is similar to that of CdTe QDs, which is further support for the quasi-type IT band alignment. In the present of potential energy barrier, S-Auger of the large CdTe/CdS core/shell QDs becomes elongated. This study offers a useful guideline for determining the energy-band alignment of semiconductor natioheterostructures according to not only luminescence lifetimes and exciton-relaxation kinetics but also tau(Auger).

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