MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399448771 · doi:10.1063/5.0225999

Spatially resolved luminescence properties of etched quantum well microstructures

2024· article· en· W4399448771 on OpenAlexafffund
Jean-Pierre Landesman, Ethan Diak, Ray LaPierre, Christophe Levallois, Shahram Ghanad-Tavakoli

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Physics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSemiconductor Quantum Structures and Devices
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPhotoluminescenceEtching (microfabrication)Materials scienceMicrostructureQuantum wellReactive-ion etchingLuminescenceMolecular beam epitaxyOptoelectronicsIsotropic etchingDry etchingCathodoluminescenceSemiconductorSpontaneous emissionLaserOpticsEpitaxyNanotechnologyComposite materialPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ridge microstructures were prepared by etching through samples consisting of a series of stacked InAsxP1−x quantum wells (QWs) with step graded composition grown on InP by molecular beam epitaxy. Different etching techniques were used: wet etching with HCl/H2O and reactive ion etching with CH4/H2. These microstructures were characterized by low-temperature micro-photoluminescence. The photoluminescence (PL) emission associated with each QW was clearly identified. The PL was measured in detail across etched ridge stripes of various widths. Variations of the integrated PL intensities across the etched stripes were observed. The PL intensities for all QWs increase gradually from the edge to the center of the ridge microstructures. The PL intensity measured at the ridge center is systematically reduced for ridges which are 10 or 20 μm wide as compared to ridges which are 30 μm wide or larger. On the other hand, the spectral peak position of the PL lines remained constant with high accuracy (0.2–0.4 meV) across the microstructures. These observations are discussed in terms of the different possible mechanisms which determine the PL intensity variations, namely, non-radiative recombination at the etched walls and effects of stray electric fields which result from the etching process. Based on this discussion, we compare quantitatively the different etching processes which we have used. Altogether, this study illustrates the contribution that specially designed test structures, coupled with advanced spectroscopic characterization, can provide to the development of semiconductor photonic devices (e.g., lasers or waveguides) involving etching processes.

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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.625

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.222 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied PhysicsSame topicSemiconductor Quantum Structures and DevicesFrench-language works237,207