Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-42gr6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T14:55:55.327Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Electron Emission Properties of the Negative Electron Affinity (111)2×1 Diamond-Tio Interface

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 February 2011

C. Bandis ,
D. Haggerty  and
B.B Pate
C. Bandis
Affiliation:
Physics Department, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99164–2814.
D. Haggerty
Affiliation:
Physics Department, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99164–2814.
B.B Pate
Affiliation:
Physics Department, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99164–2814.
Get access

Abstract

We report photoemission measurements from the (111)2×1 diamond-titanium monoxide (TiO) interface. Submonolayer deposition of TiO on the (111)2×1 diamond surface modifies the electron affinity of the surface from positive to negative. No change in the band bending was observed as a result of the TiO deposition. Total electron yield measurements from the diamond-TiO interface were also performed. The yield spectra, as expected for a negative electron affinity (NEA) surface, have emission thresholds that are in good agreement with the absorption coefficient of diamond. To further understand the emission properties of NEA (111) diamond surfaces we also compare the electron yield photo-excitation spectra of the diamond-TiO interface with the yield spectra of hydrogenated (111)1×1:H diamond surfaces.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 339: Symposium D – Diamond, Silicon Carbide and Nitride Wide Bandgap Semiconductors , 1994 , 75
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1994

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. Bell, R.L., Negative Electron Affinity Devices. (Clarendon Press - Oxford, 1973).Google Scholar
2. Waclawski, B.J., Pierce, D.T., Swanson, N. and Celotta, R.J., J. Vac. Sci. Technol. 21(2), 268 (1982).Google Scholar
3. Pate, B.B., Hecht, M.H., Binns, C., Lindau, I. and Spicer, W.E., J. Vac. Sci. Technol. 21(2), 268 (1982).Google Scholar
4. Hamza, A.V., Kubiak, G.D. and Stulen, R.H., Surface Sci. 206, L833, (1988).Google Scholar
5. Himpsel, F.J., Knapp, J.A., Van Vechten, J.A. and Eastman, D.E., Phys. Rev. B20, 624 (1979).Google Scholar
6. Pate, B.B., Stefan, P.M., Binns, C., Jupiter, P.J., Shek, M.L., Lindau, I. and Spicer, W.E., J. Vac. Sci. 19(3), 349 (1981).Google Scholar
7. van der Weide, J. and Nemanich, R.J., J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 1O (4), 1940 (1992).Google Scholar
8. Pate, B.B., Lindau, I., and Spicer, W.E., Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on the Physics of Semiconductors, edited by Chadi, J.D. and Harrison, W.A. (Springer Verlag 1985), p. 1201.Google Scholar
9. Bandis, C. and Pate, B.B. (in preparation).Google Scholar
10. Fan, H.Y., Radiat. Eff. 4, 7 (1970).Google Scholar
11. Pate, B.B., Surf. Science 165, 83 (1986), and references therein.Google Scholar
12. The diamond single crystal, our sample D5, was provided on loan by DrRaal, F.A. from DeBeers Diamond Laboratory, Johannesburg.Google Scholar
13. Samson, J., Techniques of Vacuum Ultraviolet Spectroscopy (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1967), pp. 214–216.Google Scholar
14. Dean, P.J., Lightowlers, E.C. and Wight, D.R., Phys. Rev. 140, A352 (1965).Google Scholar
15. Pate, B.B., Oshima, M., Silberman, J.A., Rossi, G., Lindau, I. and Spicer, W.E., J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A 2(2), 957 (1984).Google Scholar
16. Clark, C.D., Dean, P.J. and Harris, P.V., Proc. Roy. Soc. (London) A 277, 312 (1964).Google Scholar