Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-9pm4c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T11:54:14.423Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Growth Evolution of (Zn,Cd)Se Quantum Dots Deduced from Spatially Resolved Structural and Optical Characterization

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 February 2011

K. Leonard ,
D. Hommel ,
A. Stockmann ,
H. Selke ,
J. Seufert ,
R. Weigand ,
G. Bacher  and
A. Forchel
K. Leonard
Affiliation:
Institute of Solid State Physics, University of Bremen, Germany
D. Hommel
Affiliation:
Institute of Solid State Physics, University of Bremen, Germany
A. Stockmann
Affiliation:
Institute of Materials Physics and Structural Research, University of Bremen, Germany
H. Selke
Affiliation:
Institute of Materials Physics and Structural Research, University of Bremen, Germany
J. Seufert
Affiliation:
Technical Physics, University of Wtirzburg, Germany
R. Weigand
Affiliation:
Technical Physics, University of Wtirzburg, Germany
G. Bacher
Affiliation:
Technical Physics, University of Wtirzburg, Germany
A. Forchel
Affiliation:
Technical Physics, University of Wtirzburg, Germany
Get access

Abstract

The growth mode of CdSe layers grown by migration enhanced epitaxy between ZnSe barriers has been investigated. In situ reflection high-energy electron diffraction shows a gradual transition to a three-dimensional growth mode which, however, is not accompanied by a change of the surface lattice constant. High-resolution transmission electron micrographs reveal a strong Cd diffusion, leading to ternary ZnCdSe quantum wells. Furthermore. composition fluctuations perpendicular to the growth direction on a nanometer scale are found already prior to the beginning of the growth mode transition. In the case of heterostructures containing a CdSe layer that has undergone the growth mode transition, micrographs show Cd-rich quantum dots with diameters of around 8 nm and heights of around 1.5 nm within a ternary quantum well. By spatially resolved photoluminescence the emission from single quantum dots could be observed. The polarization dependence of the emission from single dots indicates an asymmetric shape of the dots with certain preferential orientations along the [110] and [110] directions.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 571: Symposium W – Semiconductor Quantum Dots , 1999 , 325
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2000

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Flack, F. S., Hunt, A.. Hennessey, H., Samarth, N., Levy, J., Nikitin, V., Crooker, S. A., Awschalom, D. D.. Jassim, M. Al, Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 417, 169 (1996).10.1557/PROC-417-169Google Scholar
2. Xin, S. H., Wang, P. D., Yin, A., Kim, C., Dobrowolska, M., Merz, J. L., Furdyna, J. K., Appl. Phys. Lett. 69, 3884 (1996).10.1063/1.117558Google Scholar
3. Leonardi, K., Heinke, H.. Ohkawa, K.. Hommel, D., Selke, H.. Gindele, F.. Woggon, U., Appl. Phys. Lett. 71, 1510 (1997).10.1063/1.119951Google Scholar
4. Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on II-VI Compounds, ed.: Cox, R. T., Cibert, J., Destefanis, G., Mariette, H.. J. Cryst. Growth 184/185, 228–397 (1998).Google Scholar
5. Ivanov, S. V., Toropov, A. A., S. V. Sorokin. Shubina, T. V., Sedova, I. V., Sitnikova, A. A.. Kop'ev, P. S., Alferov, Zh. I., Lugauer, H.-J.. Reuscher, G.. Keim, M., Fischer, F., Waag, A.. Landwehr, G., Appl. Phys. Lett. 74, 498 (1999).10.1063/1.123167Google Scholar
6. Shen, M. Y., Goto, T., Kurtz, E., Zhu, Z., Yao, T., J. Phys.: Cond. Matter 10, L171 (1998).Google Scholar
7. Rabe, M., Lowisch, M., Henneberger, F., J. Cryst. Growth. 184/185, 248 (1998).10.1016/S0022-0248(97)00658-1Google Scholar
8. Ivanov, S. V., Toropov, A. A., Shubina, T. V., Sorokin, S. V., Lebedev, A. V.. Sedova, I. V.. Pozina, G. R., Bergman, J. P., Monemar, B., J. Appl. Phys. 83, 3168 (1998).10.1063/1.367130Google Scholar
9. Kümmell, T., Weigand, R., Bacher, G., Forchel, A., K. Leonardi. D. Hommel. Selke, H., Appl. Phys. Lett. 73, 3105 (1998).10.1063/1.122687Google Scholar
10. Leonardi, K., Hommel, D., Meyne, C.. and Zettler, J.-T.. Richter, W., J. Cryst. Growth 201/202, 1222 (1999).10.1016/S0022-0248(99)00027-5Google Scholar
11. Snyder, C. W., Orr, B. G., Muekata, H., Appl. Phys. Lett. 62, 46 (1993).10.1063/1.108814Google Scholar
12. Rosenauer, A., Kaiser, S., Reisinger, T., Zweck, J., Gebhardt, W., Optik (Stuttgart) 102, 63 (1996).Google Scholar
13. Behringer, M., Ohkawa, K., GroBmann, V., Heinke, H., Leonardi, K., Fehrer, M., Hommel, D., Kuttler, M., Strassburg, M., and Bimberg, D.. J. Cryst. Growth 184/185, 580 (1998).Google Scholar
14. Strassburg, M., Kutzer, V., Pohl, U. W., Hoffmann, A., Broser, I.. Ledentsov, N. N.. Bimberg, D., Rosenauer, A., Fischer, U., Gerthsen, D., Krestnikov, I. L.. Maximov, M. V., Kop'ev, P. S., Alferov, Zh. I.. Appl. Phys. Lett. 72. 942 (1998).10.1063/1.120880Google Scholar
15. Kulakovskii, V. D., Bacher, G., Weigand, R., Kümmell, T.. Forchel, A., Borovitskaya, E., Leonardi, K., Hommel, D., Phys. Rev. Lett. 82. 1780 (1999).10.1103/PhysRevLett.82.1780Google Scholar