MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3186220976 · doi:10.1149/ma2021-0114670mtgabs

(Invited) Spectroscopic Properties of Black Phosphorus Crystals and Layers

2021· article· en· W3186220976 on OpenAlexaff
Étienne Gaufrès, Etienne Carré, Lorenzo Sponza, Frédéric Fossard, A. Lusson, Ingrid Stenger, Richard Martel, Michel Côté, Julien Barjon, Annick Loiseau

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Meeting Abstracts · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
Topic2D Materials and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExcitonPhotoluminescenceMaterials scienceMonolayerBand gapAnisotropyCondensed matter physicsBlack phosphorusDielectricIndiumQuenching (fluorescence)OptoelectronicsMolecular physicsChemistryNanotechnologyPhysicsOpticsFluorescence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Black Phosphorus stands out in the 2D-materials panorama by its unique semiconducting properties: direct bandgap which can be tuned by the layer number in a wide range of wavelengths from visible (monolayer) to midinfrared (bulk) [1]. This tunability combined the anisotropy of the structure therefore offers promising perspectives in various fields such as electronics and photonics. However, the fast photooxidation in ambient condition, coupled to a high sensitivity to quantum confinement and dielectric environment in ultrathin BP, make very difficult the investigations on its intrinsic optical properties [2]. Further, as screening effects may strongly affect electronic and spectroscopic properties of 2D materials, it is highly desirable to investigate intrinsic properties of free-standing layers as well the ones of the bulk material which remain poorly known. To start with, we have investigated the infrared photoluminescence of BP single crystals at very low temperature [3]. Near-band-edge recombinations are observed at 2 K, including dominant excitonic transitions at 0.276 eV and a weaker one at 0.278 eV. The free-exciton binding energy is calculated with an anisotropic Wannier-Mott model and found equal to 9.1 meV. On the contrary, the PL intensity quenching of the 0.276 eV peak at high temperature is found with a much smaller activation energy, attributed to the localization of free excitons on a shallow impurity. This analysis leads us to attribute respectively the 0.276 eV and 0.278 eV PL lines to bound excitons (I°X) and free excitons (X) in BP. As a result, the value of bulk BP electronic bandgap is refined to 0.287 eV at 2K, to serve as reference for future work on thin BP layers [3]. As far as the thinnest layers are concerned, which cannot manipulated in air, we have shown that Angular resolved Electron energy loss spectroscopy implemented in Transmission Electron Microscopy (Ar-EELS-TEM) offers a unique way to investigate dielectric response of free-standing layers related to valence band and plasmon excitations with the advantage to get access to their q dispersion and their symmetry properties [4]. By combining this technique with suitable ab initio calculations, we have studied the dielectric response of free-standing BP layers as a function of the number of layers. We found optical bandgap values of 1.9 eV, 1.4 eV and 1.1 eV for the mono- bi- and trilayer respectively. Moreover, by combining our results with a simple variational model, we correlate the exciton energy with the dielectric screening. We hence demonstrate that the variations of the electronic gap are sizeably larger than the variations of the binding energy. Finally, we probe and analyze the volume and surface plasmons dispersion as a function of momentum for the 1-3 BP layers and bulk and highlight a deviation and linearization of the parabolic dispersion with strong anisotropic fingerprints [5]. [1] G. Zhang et al., Nat. Com., 8, 14071, (2017) [2] A. Favron, E. Gaufres et al Nature Mat. 14 (2015) 826. [3] E. Carré et al, 2D Materials (2020) :doi.org/10.1088/2053-1583/abca81 [4] F. Fossard et al, Phys. Rev. B 96, 115304 (2017) [5] E. Gaufres et al, Nanoletters 19, 8303 (2019); DOI: 10.1021/acs.nanolett.9b03928

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.381

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.219 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECS Meeting AbstractsSame topic2D Materials and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207