MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4243885447 · doi:10.1149/ma2014-01/42/1568

Optically Allowed Photoluminescence from a Direct-Gap Si-Ge Superstructure on Si<sub>0.4</sub>Ge<sub>0.6</sub>

2014· article· en· W4243885447 on OpenAlexaff
D. J. Lockwood, N. L. Rowell, A. Gouyé, Luc Favre, A. Ronda, Isabelle Berbézier

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Meeting Abstracts · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicSilicon Nanostructures and Photoluminescence
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSuperstructureMaterials sciencePhotoluminescenceSiliconBand gapOptoelectronicsMolecular beam epitaxyPhotonicsDirect and indirect band gapsHeterojunctionExcitonEpitaxyNanotechnologyLayer (electronics)Condensed matter physicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Light emission from Si nanostructures has been of great interest for some time now owing to the need for silicon-based light sources for applications in silicon photonics. Both Si and Ge possess indirect band gaps, which makes them very inefficient light emitters. Band gap engineering has been proposed as one way to overcome this limitation and although light emission with greatly improved efficiency has been obtained at low temperatures the emission at room temperature is still very weak, because of exciton dissociation. Recently, through employing novel band gap engineering computations, entirely new Si/Ge [M. d’Avezac, J.-W. Luo, T. Chanier, and A. Zunger, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 027401 (2012)] and Si [H. J. Xiang, B. Huang, E. Kan, S.-H. Wei, and X. G. Gong, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 118702 (2013)] supercell structures possessing direct gaps have been proposed. According to d’Avezac et al., a SiGe2Si2Ge2SiGen superstructure should have a direct and dipole-allowed gap of 0.863 eV, which is ideally suited for optical fiber data transmission applications. Here we report on the growth of such a structure and its optical properties. Two similar samples were prepared by different growth methods: molecular beam epitaxy (MBE) and solid phase epitaxy (SPE). In both samples the superstructure (terminated with n = 12 monolayers of Ge) was grown on a 30-nm thick buffer layer of Si0.4Ge0.6 on a 5 µm thick relaxed buffer layer of Si0.4Ge0.6on a 750 µm thick (001) Si substrate. The photoluminescence (PL) spectra were measured using a Bomem DA3 FTIR spectrometer, with the samples excited at low temperatures with either 70 mW of 405 nm or 35 mW of 458 nm laser light. Photoluminescence (PL) spectra obtained at 6 K with excitation at 405 nm are shown in Fig. 1. Similar spectra were obtained with 458 nm excitation. No PL was detected from the two samples in the energy range 1000-1850 meV or at room temperature. The sharp drop at low energy near 700 meV is due to the cut-off in the instrumental response. A strong low-energy PL doublet is seen, with peaks near 780 and 820 meV, together with a much weaker peak at 872 meV. The ratio of intensities of the strong and weak peaks is the same in both samples. The intensities of all three PL peaks decrease with increasing temperature up to 25 K, but the weak peak decreases in intensity faster than that of the strong peaks. The weak peak at 872 meV is most likely the dipole-allowed direct-gap transition expected at 0.863 eV in the superstructure. The small difference in energy between theory and experiment could be the result of a difference in strain within the layer in the sample compared with the ideal (perfect) modeled structure or from assumptions in parameter values in the model. The strong peaks at 820 and 780 meV are assigned to the no-phonon and transverse-optic-phonon emission lines, respectively, of the Si0.4Ge0.6 buffer layer. The ~40 meV separation between the two strong peaks is characteristic of the phonon energies in SiGe alloys. The energies of the peaks, however, are much lower than that expected for a bulk Si0.4Ge0.6 alloy (~0.97 eV). The energies and general appearance of these peaks is reminiscent of what has been obtained from PL studies of SiGe nanostructures imbedded in Si. It is therefore likely that this PL arises predominately at the Si0.4Ge0.6/superstructure interface where there is type-II band alignment. In conclusion, we have obtained experimental evidence of the predicted direct-gap optically-allowed transition in a special supercell comprised of a number of ultrathin layers of Si and Ge.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECS Meeting AbstractsSame topicSilicon Nanostructures and PhotoluminescenceFrench-language works237,207