Effect of Doped Substrate on GaAs–AlGaAs Interfacial Workfunction IR Detector Response Through Cavity Effect
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, results are reported showing response enhancement in GaAs-AlGaAs IR detectors using a doped substrate to increase reflection, enhancing the resonant cavity effect. Responsivity for heterojunction interfacial workfunction detectors grown on semi-insulating (SI) and doped substrates are compared. For a device grown on an SI substrate, a 9-/spl mu/m resonance peak had a response of 1.5 mA/W while a similar device on an n-doped substrate showed 12 mA/W. Also, the difference between response under forward and reverse bias (3 versus 12 mA/W) for the sample grown on the doped substrate, as well as calculated results confirm that the increased response is due to the resonant enhancement. An optimized design for a 15-/spl mu/m peak (24 /spl mu/m 0 response threshold) detector grown on a doped substrate could expect a peak response of 4 A/W with a 50% quantum efficiency and D/sup */ /spl sim/ 2 /spl times/ 10/sup 10/ Jones at the background limited temperature of 50 K.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".