Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-5g6vh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T22:34:31.335Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

B Diffusion in Low Energy B/BF2 Implants with Pre-Amorphization of Different Species

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 2011

Hong-Jyh Li
Affiliation:
International SEMATECH, 2706 Montopolis Drive, Austin, TX 78741
Todd Rhoad
Affiliation:
International SEMATECH, 2706 Montopolis Drive, Austin, TX 78741
Peter Zeitzoff
Affiliation:
International SEMATECH, 2706 Montopolis Drive, Austin, TX 78741
Robin Tichy
Affiliation:
International SEMATECH, 2706 Montopolis Drive, Austin, TX 78741
Larry Larson
Affiliation:
International SEMATECH, 2706 Montopolis Drive, Austin, TX 78741
Sanjay Banerjee
Affiliation:
Microelectronics Research Center, 10100 Burnet Road, MER 1.108, R9900, University of Texas at Austin, TX 78712
Get access

Abstract

The formation of an amorphous layer is needed to prevent channeling effect of B in the subsequent implant and hence, shallower as-implanted and annealed profiles could be expected. B diffusion in the pre-amorphization (PAI) Si has been studied extensively by many research groups and the diffusion has been explained by the interaction of B and defects generated by the PAI and B implant processes. In our previous study, we found that B diffusion can also be affected by the immobile B clustering caused by the incorporated species and therefore, B diffusion in the PAI Si should be expected to be different with different PAI species due to their different effect on the B clustering. In this paper, we reported different B diffusion behavior in bulk Si with respective to different PAI species. The species include GeF2, Ge, F, BF2, and In and the immobile B clustering plays an important role in the B diffusion reduction.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2003

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

[1] Agarwal, A., Gossmann, H.-J., Eaglesham, D. J., Pelaz, L., Jacobson, D. C., Haynes, T. E., and Erokhin, Y. E., “Reduction of transient diffusion from 1–5 keV Si 1 ion implantation due to surface annihilation of interstitials,” Appl. Phys. Lett., vol. 71, pp. 3141, 1997.Google Scholar
[2] Downey, D. F., Chow, J. W., Ishida, E., and Jones, K. S., “Effect of fluorine on the diffusion of boron in ion implanted Si,” Applied Physics Letters, vol. 73, pp. 1263–5, 1998.Google Scholar
[3] Robertson, L.S., Warnes, P. N., Jones, K.S., Earles, S.K., Law, M.E., Downey, D.F., Falk, S., and Liu, J., “Junction depth reduction of ion implanted boron in silicon through fluorine ion implantation,” presented at Si Front-End Processing - Physics and Technology of Dopant-Defect Interactions II. Symposium, Warrendale, PA, USA, 2001.Google Scholar
[4] Li, H.-J., Kohli, P., Ganguly, S., Kirichenko, T. A., Banerjee, S., and Zeitzoff, P., “Boron diffusion in silicon in the presence of other species,” Appl. Phys. Lett., vol. 77, pp. 2683, 2000.Google Scholar
[5] Li, H.-J., Kirichenko, T. A., Kohli, P., Banerjee, S., Graetz, E., Tichy, R., and Zeitzoff, P., “Boron Retarded Diffusion in the Presence of Indium or Germanium,” IEEE Elect. Device Lett., vol. 23, pp. 646648, 2002.Google Scholar
[6] Meyssen, V., Stolk, P., Zijl, J. v., Berkum, J. v., Wijgert, W. v. d., Lindsay, R., Dachs, C., Mannino, G., and Cowern, N., “Shallow Junctions For Sub-100 Nm Cmos Technology,” presented at Materials Research Society, San Francisco, 2001.Google Scholar
[7] “TSUPREM-4,” 2001.4 ed: Synopsis, Inc.Google Scholar
[8] Robertson, L. S., Law, M. E., Jones, K. S., Rubin, L. M., Jackson, J., Chi, P., and Simon, D. S., “Correlation of end-of-range damage evolution and transient enhanced diffusion of boron in regrown silicon,” Appl. Phys. Lett., vol. 75, pp. 38443846, 1999.Google Scholar