Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-s9k8s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-22T03:14:49.883Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Silicide-Silicon Interface States+

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 February 2011

E. S. Yang ,
X. Wu ,
H. L. Evans  and
P. S. Ho
E. S. Yang
Affiliation:
Columbia Radiation Laboratory and Center for Telecommunication Research, Columbia University, New York, NY 10027
X. Wu
Affiliation:
Columbia Radiation Laboratory and Center for Telecommunication Research, Columbia University, New York, NY 10027
H. L. Evans
Affiliation:
Columbia Radiation Laboratory and Center for Telecommunication Research, Columbia University, New York, NY 10027
P. S. Ho
Affiliation:
IBM T.J. Watson Research Center, Yorktown Heights, NY 10598
Get access

Abstract

The existence and nature of localized states at metal-semiconductor interfaces are long-standing scientific issues that have not been resolved. As device dimensions continue to shrink and packing density continues to increase, interfaces at silicide-silicon contacts will be increasingly influential in determining the circuit behavior. Characterization of these interfaces, whether as ohmic contacts or rectifying junctions, is a necessity for microelectronics. Therefore, the study of silicide-silicon interfaces are important both scientifically and technologically. In this talk, we shall review the theoretical models of the Schottky barrier and the importance of interface states. We shall then introduce available experimental tools for interface state studies. In particular, we shall discuss the measurement of silicide-silicon interface states by an accurate-phase capacitance spectroscopy (APCS). Some of the devices were fabricated with standard chemical cleaning before metal evaporation. Others were prepared in an UHV chamber with heat cleaning before metal deposition. For palladium suicide diodes, the behavior of both chemically-cleaned and UHV-prepared samples is similar. The peak position of the capacitance spectrum correlates with the barrier height, and the magnitude of the peak decreases by a factor of three after annealing. In the case of nickel suicide diodes, a comparison between epitaxial and non-epitaxial interfaces shows much lower interface state density for the former. Experimental data indicate that suicide formation and interfacial perfection are important in specifying the Fermi level.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 54: Symposium E – Thin Films–Interfaces and Phenomena , 1985 , 485
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1986

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.)

Footnotes

+

Supported by JSEP and NSF at Columbia and in part by ONR at IBM

References

REFERENCES

1. Schottky, W., Naturwissenschaften 26 843 (1938)Google Scholar
2. Kurtin, S., McGill, T.C., and Mead, C.A., Phys. Rev. Lett. 22 1943 (1969)Google Scholar
3. Schmid, P.E., Helv. Phys. Act. 58 371 (1985)Google Scholar
4. Andrews, J.M. and Phillips, J.C., Phys. Rev. Lett. 35 56 (1975)Google Scholar
5. Ottaviani, G., Tu, K.N., and Mayer, J.W., Phys. Rev. Lett. 44 284 (1980)Google Scholar
6. Freeouf, J.L., Solid St. Comm. 33 1059 (1980)Google Scholar
7. Tung, R., Phys. Rev. Lett. 52 461 (1984)Google Scholar
8. Liehr, M. et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 54 2139 (1985)Google Scholar
9. Bardeen, J., Phys. Rev. 71 717 (1947)Google Scholar
10. Heine, V.A., Phys. Rev. A 138 1689 (1965)Google Scholar
11. Louie, S.G. and Cohen, M.L., Phys. Rev. B 15 2145 (1976)Google Scholar
12. Tersoff, J., Phys. Rev. Lett. 52 465 (1984)Google Scholar
13. Spicer, W.E. et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 44 420 (1980)Google Scholar
14. Woodall, J.M. et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 43(1983)Google Scholar
15. Purtell, R.J. et al., Physica B117 874 (1983)Google Scholar
16. Schmid, P.E. et al., J. Vac. Sci. Technol. 18 937 (1981)Google Scholar
17. Cowley, A.M. and Sze, S.M., J. Appl. Phys. 36 3212 (1965)Google Scholar
18. Card, H.C. and Rhoderick, E.H., J. Phys. D; Appl. Phys. 4 1589 (1971)Google Scholar
19. Fonash, S.O., J. Appl. Phys. 54 1966 (1983)Google Scholar
20. Deneuville, A., J. Appl. Phys. 45 3079 (1974)Google Scholar
21. Barret, C. and Vapaille, A., Solid S. Elec. 18 25 (1975)Google Scholar
Barret, C. et al., J. Phys. C: Solid S. Phys. 16 2421 (1983)Google Scholar
22. Evans, H.L. et al., Appl. Phys. Lett. 46 486 (1985)Google Scholar
23. Evans, H.L., Ph.D. dissertation, Columbia Univ. (1985)Google Scholar
24. Ho, P.S. et al., to be publishedGoogle Scholar
25. Hauenstein, R.J. et al., Appl. Phys. Lett. 47 853 (1985)Google Scholar
26. Wu, X., unpublishedGoogle Scholar