Jian H. Zhao, T. E. Schlesinger, and A. G. Milnes Citation: J. Appl. Phys. 62, 2865 (1987); doi: 10.1063/1.339395 View online: http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.339395 View Table of Contents: http://jap.aip.org/resource/1/JAPIAU/v62/i7 Published by the American Institute of Physics.
Related Articles
Lateral electrical transport and photocurrent in single and multilayers of twodimensional arrays of Si nanocrystals J. Appl. Phys. 112, 043704 (2012) Instrumentation for dualprobe scanning nearfield optical microscopy Rev. Sci. Instrum. 83, 083709 (2012) The bulk generationrecombination processes and the carrier lifetime in midwave infrared and longwave infrared liquid nitrogen cooled HgCdTe alloys J. Appl. Phys. 112, 033718 (2012) Nonthermal carrier distributions in the subbands of 2phonon resonance midinfrared quantum cascade laser Appl. Phys. Lett. 101, 061110 (2012) Conduction band caused by oxygen vacancies in aluminum oxide for resistance random access memory J. Appl. Phys. 112, 033711 (2012)
Downloaded 03 Sep 2012 to 117.239.83.193. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://jap.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions
Determination of carrier capture cross sections of traps by deep level transient spectroscopy of semiconductors
Jian H. Zhao, T. E. Schlesinger, and A. G. Milnes
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213
(Received 6 April 1987; accepted for publication 10 June 1987) The conventional method of determining trap capture cross sections by deep level transient spectroscopy (DLTS) of semiconductors involves observing the DLTS peak amplitude as a function of filling pulse duration. Pulses that are inconveniently short and timeconsuming experimental measurements may be required. A method is proposed that involves observing the DLTS peak amplitude change as the observation rate window (t2  t I) is varied for a fixedduration filling pulse. This gives consistent results for the capture cross section and its dependence on temperature. Analysis of the technique is given and a comparison between theory and experiment is presented for two electron traps in bulk nGaAs. For the trap at Ec 0.215 eV, a"" is 2.3 X 10 15 cm 2 and the activation energy from a( T) = a"" exp(  Ea/kT) is 0.116 0.003 eV. For the trap at EcO.35 eV, the cross section a"" is l.OX 10 13 cm 2 and the activation energy is 0.200 0.025 eV. Large variations of cross section with temperature such as these have been reported in other studies, and are a consequence of lattice relaxation effects.
I. INTRODUCTION
An important part of the signature of a deep level trap in a semiconductor is the thermal capture cross section, and this can be quite temperature dependent for traps associated with large lattice relaxation effects. I  8 A commonly used technique for capture crosssection measurements was introduced by Lang in 1974. 9 The measurements are made by observing the variation in the heights of the deep level transient spectroscopy (DLTS) signal peak versus the time duration of the filling pulse tp' However, quite often a nonlinear result is obtained for the plot of In{~C( 00 )/ [ ~C( 00)  ~C( tp ) ] } vs t p , which makes it difficult to determine the crosssection activation energy. Also, the duration of the filling pulse normally should be short with respect to 7. (where 7. is the reciprocal of en' the thermal emission rate), and this is not always convenient in practice. The nonlineal: pTOblem associated with large deep trap concentrations has been discussed recently, 10 and has been performed in other simulation work of trap filling in the slow region. 11 These studies propose methods that require no short filling pulses, but require timeconsuming experimental measurements. In DLTS measurements, when the rate window is varied a shift in the temperature location of the peak is expected. For certain traps, an unexpectedly large variation in peak amplitude is also observed. A small peak height variation is expected because at higher temperatures, the Debye tail penetration into the spacecharge region is greater. 12 However, the large D LTS signal peak heigh t variations sometimes seen with a change of rate window must be explained in some other way. It may be noted that large peak height variations are observed for both large and small reverse bias conditions, which suggests that fieldenhanced emission effects are not
dependence of the carrier capture cross section. Equations are developed from which the peak height variation in the DLTS signal can be readily used to determine the capture crosssection variation with temperature. Hence, the problems of time consuming experimental measurements or short filling pulse durations are solved. The equations show why the commonly used technique of pulse duration variation often fails, and modification of the technique involving rate window variation for a fixed pulse duration is proposed. A general model is developed for both low and high trap concentrations, and two commonly observed electron traps in bulk nGaAs with low and relatively high trap concentrations are studied. The results suggest that this new method is a promising one for capture crosssection activation energy determination.
II. THEORY
The band diagrams for a Schottky barrier on an ntype semiconductor with a deep level ET present under various conditions of bias voltage are shown in Figs. 1(a), 1(b), and I (c). From Poisson's equation we have
Vbi
+ VR
1
= E
SoW(l)
xp(x,t)dx,
0
(I)
where Vbi is the builtin voltage, W( t) is the position of the depletion edge at time t, and p (x,t) is the charge density at position x. A forward filling pulse superimposed on the reverse bias VR results in reduction of the reverse bias to Vp as shown in Fig. (1), and this allows the depletion region between x r ( 00) and x p to capture electrons. We consider x(tp) to be where half of the traps are filled by Debye tail
00218979/87/19286506$02.40
Downloaded 03 Sep 2012 to 117.239.83.193. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://jap.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions
and
W(t)
x(N if  NT)dx
)'
(2)
the straightline plot of In [flC( 00)1.:lC( 00 )  flC(tp)] versus the filling pulse duration tp. However, frequently a straight line is not obtained for this plot, and the reason is that NT [x (tp ) ] in Eq. (5) is not strictly proportional to the peak height flC(tp) because of the tp dependence of the term
x(tp ).
X,(t)
W(t+dt)
x(N if  NT)dx ,
+
dt)
(3)
X,(t
where n T (t) is the concentration of traps which have captured electrons, NT is the total trap concentration, and N if is the ionized shallow donor density. All three of these are functions of x. For an acceptorlike trap,
(4)
where'Te is the reciprocal of the thermal emission rate en'
A. The commonly used DLTS technique for capture crosssection determination
We now propose a new model which is shown to be useful in determination of a capture cross section and its behavior with temperature. The capture cross section is obtained from the dependence of the D LTS peak height on the rate window for a fixed pulse duration tp' The important role of the x (tp) term is taken into account. The model also includes the temperature dependence of parameters such as N if, N e , and thermal velocity V,h' The depletionwidth time relaxation after a filling pulse can be obtained from Eqs. (2) and (3), and DLTS signals for different initial delays, and rate windows, follow directly from this time relaxation relation. Subtracting Eq. (2) from Eq. (3) gives
x,(t+ dt)
X [
N if  n T (t
+ dt) ] dx
x(tp)
When Eqs. (2) and (3) are evaluated at time t N D 't> NT> the following equation is obtained:'
Ndx(tp)] =  =        E
= 0
with
l
l l
x,(t)
x[Nif nT(t)]dx
W(t+ dt)
x(tp)
+

x(NifNT)dx
dt)
qW 2 (0)N if [W(O)] N if
Wp
xr(t+
W(t)
8Vp x(tp)
x(Nif NT)dx=O.
(9)
xr(t)
X8 (flC(tp)
C(O) ,
(5)
where a small term has been neglected. The quantity in the large parentheses is the increment of the DLTS signal corresponding to the increment in filling pulse 8Vp. Equation (5) differs from that for deep trap concentrationprofiling 13 in that the effect of the filling pulse duration tp is now taken into account. This expression is not quite the same as that of standard DLTS equations, since these neglect the fact that the distance x(tp) may significantly depend on the filling pulse duration tp. It is this tp dependence of x that often causes the failure of the usual crosssection activation energy determination method. The usual equations for calculating trap capture cross section aby DLTS are
NT(tp) = N T (
x,(t)
X [
N if  n T (t
+ dt) ] dx
x(tp)
from the first integral in Eq. (9) and addition of the same term to the second integral allows the first two terms of Eq. (9) to be written as
X,(t
dt)
x[Nif nT(t+dt)]dx
xr(t) x,(t)
x[nT(t+dt) nT(t)]dx,
(9a)
x(tp)
tphc
)],
(6) (7)
J}   d t
. dt
(10)
dx, (t)
where
 tir, lx,(t) + _e_ _ dt xNT (x )dx.
'Te x(tp)
and vth is the thermal velocity of the carriers. If NT (tp) is considered from Eq. (5) to be proportional to the D LTS signal peak height flC(tp)' the result is
'T
=t
c
In _fl,C(,oo)~) ,
flC(
00) 
flC(tp)
(8)
From Eqs. (7) and (8), the capture cross section an is usually estimated by the measurement of 7c from the slope of
2866
Downloaded 03 Sep 2012 to 117.239.83.193. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://jap.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions
tIT dW(t) +x,(t)Nd x ,(t)](1e e);;r  t Ite t) + _e__ xNT(x)dx = 'Te x(tp )
iX,(
a
dx, (t)
(12)
(a)
or
{N t [W(t)]  NT [W(t) ]}[x, (t) +Ndx,(t)](le
+ Ao] ;;r
(b)
+ Ndx,(t)]
2'Te
x, t =
2()
(c)
where W(t) has been replaced by x, (t) + Ao, as shown in Fig. (1), and the approximation is made that the deep trap concentration does not change too much in the region between x(tp) and x, (t). Equation (13) is a firstorder nonlinear differential equation. If arranged to have the form
M(x,t)dx
FIG. I. Energy band diagram for a Schottky diode on an ntype semiconductor. (a) The band diagram under a steadystate reverse bias V,; (b) during a filling pulse (V,  Vp); and (c) after the filling pulse at time t.
+ N(x,t)dt =
0,
(14)
(19)
it follows that
aM(x,t) aN(x,t) (15) at ax Therefore, Eq. (13) is a total differential and has the solution x,(t) =(aA(tp) + {a 2A2(tp) _2[a+b(1_e tITe )]
This analytical expression makes simulation of DLTS signals for different initial delays possible. The necessary input data can be easily obtained from experimental conditions, and the DLTS signals are given by
flC(T) = {[lIW(t2)]  [lIW(tI)]}E. (20)
tlTe)],
The model will now be used to determine the temperature variation of cross section of two traps in GaAs. (16)
III. APPLICATION OF THE ANALYSIS TO EXPERIMENTAL DETERMINATION OF CAPTURE CROSS SECTION AND ITS ACTIVATION ENERGY
b=Ndx,(t)],
and A(tp) is shown in Fig. 1. The constant k is determined from the boundary condition that as t approaches infinity, x, (t) goes to W( 00)  Ao. It is straightfoward to show that
Ao = {[2dq2(N t  NT)] (EF

ET  2kT)}1/2,
(17)
where (2kT) comes from Debye tail free carriers. The dependence of A (Ip ) on the filling pulse duration (tp ) has been widely studied. 10.1 1.1418 If the temperature dependence and high trap concentration condition are considered, the expression is
A(tp) =,fiL D [In(Cn(Nt NT)lp/
(18)
where LD is the Debye length, g = exp(  enll ), where II is the filling pulse repetition period, h = exp [  Cn (N t  NT )tp J, and is the thermal capture coefficient. From the above study, the depletionwidth time relaxation relationship is of the form
en
The analytical treatment given implies that there should be a significant change ofDLTS peak amplitude, and change of its location on the temperature scale, when the rate window is varied and when the filling pulse repetition rate is changed. To verify this experimentally, a Schottky barrier junctionofAu on bulk nGaAs (doped3X 10 16 cm 3 ) wasfabricated, and two electron traps that we have labeled EC6 (believed to be EL14 in other work) and EC5 (often labeled EL6) were studied. They have concentrations of 2.6 X 10 15 and 4.5 X 10 \3 cm  3 and capture cross sections of a = 2.3 X 10 15 and a = l.OX 10 \3 cm 2 , respectively, determined by standard DLTS technique. The diode parasitic resistance has been carefully examined as a function oftemperature to make sure it does not affect our DLTS signal.)9 The DLTS system used was a MRI Electronics system operating at 1 MHz with the ratio of the sample times 12/1) fixed at 11.5, where I I is the initial delay (i.e., the time from termination of the filling pulse to the first measurement of capacitance). The DLTS signals both at large reverse bias (  11 V) and small reverse bias (  2 V) were measured, and both showed similar peak height variations with change of the
00 00
2867
2867
Downloaded 03 Sep 2012 to 117.239.83.193. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://jap.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions
(0)
(b)
::>
<i.
o
en
Cf)
0>
c::
o c::
Cf) Cf)
0>
~ o
I....J
tl = 20 ms
ILl
o c::
'" E ... ., a.
ILl
c::
><
44
106
150
186
217
246
273
44
106
150
186
217
246
273
300
Temperature (Kl
Temperature (Kl
FIG. 2. Measured DLTS signals for (a) EC6 and (b) EC5 for the test conditions given in Table I. The large dependence of peak amplitude on temperature can be used to extract the capture crosssection activation energy E".
initial delay. As remarked earlier, this indicates that high field effects are not primarily responsible for the observed large peak height variation. A 2V reverse bias was chosen for our study, and D LTS signals for EC6 and EC5 are shown in Figs. 2(a) and 2(b), respectively, for the test conditions given in Table I, where trap energy levels are determined over temperature ranges from 125 to 169 K for EC6, and from 167 to 216 K for EC5. A systematic decrease ofDLTS peak amplitude is seen as the initial delay is varied in the range 0.0520 ms. Since t2/t 1 is fixed for our system, variation of the initial delay tl changes the rate window and allows the determination of the trap energy ET from the slope of the plot oftemperature corrected emission rate en/T2 versus inverse peak temperature according to
filling pulse duration. The activation energy EO" is then determined by plotting In a( T) vs liT from the expression
an (T)
= an (00 )exp(
 EO"/kT).
(22)
en/T2
= a", vthNcexp
[  (Ec  ET )/kT].
(21)
The conventional DLTS procedure gives a set of en which corresponds to a set of peak temperatures. an (T) is determined for each temperature by observing peak height versus
TABLE I. Trap characteristics and DLTS test conditions.
Unfortunately, an (T) determination may not be possible since nonlinearity of the plot is often observed as a consequence of the x(tp) effect explained in connection with Eq. (5). Therefore a simple EO" activation energy determination presents difficulties, and the determination of capture crosssection values for a wide range of temperature may become necessary by timeconsuming experimentation. The difficulty may be overcome by application of the analysis presented earlier that focuses attention on the change of the DLTS peak amplitude in addition to its shift in temperature when the initial delay and rate window are changed. To establish that the new analysis provides simulated DLTS peak variations similar to those of the experimental results of Figs. 2(a) and 2(b), we apply to Eqs. (16)(20) the energy levels and test conditions of Table I and the shallow donor and trap concentrations N D (3 X 10 16
DLTS test conditions used Apparent trap level EcET (eV) Trap Fixed concentration reverse bias NT (cm 3 ) (V) Filling pulse width (ms) Initial delay (ms)
Capture cross section detennined by the technique described Cross section Activation energy of the (a~ em') cross section E u
Filling pulse
(V)
Name
0.1 0.2 0.5 1.0 2.0 2.0 5.0 10.020.0 50.0 0.1 0.2 0.5 1.0 2.0 SO.O 50.0 SO.O SO.O SO.O
2.0
2.0
0.003 eV)
ECS
0.3S (170220 K)
4.SX 1013
2.0
2.0
( 0.025 eV)
2868
2868
Downloaded 03 Sep 2012 to 117.239.83.193. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://jap.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions
cm 3 with activation energy 0.006 eV) and NT (2.6x 10 15 or 4.5 X 1013 cm 3 ). Other quantities that were used in the simulation included en values determined for the range of temperatures that give the peaks in Fig. 2. The calculated DLTS peaks are presented in Figs. 3(a) and 3(b) and it is seen that there is good agreement between simulated and actual peak positions and peak heights for all initial delays. In Fig. 4 the calculated normalized D LTS peak height is shown plotted against the initial delay t I for the conditions
(0 )
o
c
0>
iii
<f)
~ o
"0
OJ
0
:::I
E
<f)
t =0.05 ms
E T , NT' tZ/t l = 11.5 and (J'n from Eq. (22), but with the capture crosssection's activation energy Eu as the free parameter. It is seen that the normalized signal height is very sensitive to E u ' and it is this sensitivity that provides a new method for activation energy determination and crosssection determination as a function of temperature for traps with large lattice relaxation. The points are the experimental results [from Fig. 2(a)] and are seen to be well represented by the curve for an activation energy Eu = 0.116 eV with a possible error bar of 0.003 eV. A trap labeled M2' with similar energy level (but different (J' '" ) has been reported in asgrown MBE nGaAs with the capture crosssection activation energy Eu equal to 0.12 0.02 eV.zo Since M; appears to be closely similar to EC6 in energy level and crosssection activation energy, it is possible that they have the same physical origin, and the difference in (J' '" is a consequence of the long extrapolation involved in capture crosssection estimation. The normalized DLTS peak height versus initial delay for EC5 is shown in Fig. 5. The experimental points do not lie clearly on anyone of the Eu curves. This may be due to the somewhat nonuniform nonidentical temperature scan rate for different initial delay scans since the cryostat used was a simple one not accurately controlled in the temperature scan rate. However, we can conclude that Eu = 0.200 to 0.025 eV as we see that experimental data lies well between Eu = 0.175 and 0.225 eV lines for various initial delays. The trap EC5 is quite often found in bulk nGaAs but its physical nature is still unclear, although one speculation is that it could be VGa VAS ZI In general, because of the kT dependence in Eq. (22), the agreement for deep energy levels stud1.00
50
90
130
170
210
250
L)
Temperature (K)
to
w
0
(b)
a.
~
~
"0
... .,
E
0
0.90
a. O.SO
"0
., ....
c
~
<f)
o c
t, =20ms
... 0
0.70
tl
"0
.!:!
:::I
.~
<f)
~
0.60
E
<f)
a..
OJ
0.50
<f)
t, = 0.05 ms
~
0
"0
E
<>
0
:::I
OJ
0.40
L)
220
260
300
Temperature (K)
FIG. 4. Comparison between the normalized DLTS signal peaks of the simThe simulated DLTS signals for (a) EC6 and (b) EC5 with test conditions given in Table I as input. Good agreement with Figs. 2(a) and 2(b) in the peak positions and peak shapes exists for all initial delays.
2869
FrG. 1
ulation (solid curves) and experimental points for EC6. The sensitive dependence of the normalized signal on Ea provides a new method for easy E a determination for traps with large lattice relaxation.
Zhao, Schlesinger, and Milnes 2869
Downloaded 03 Sep 2012 to 117.239.83.193. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://jap.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions
LO
1.00 0.90 0.80 0.70 0.60 0.50 0040 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 0.00
U W
Cl.
'" t!:
~
.E
"t>
.=
..
..
N
Ci.
E
"t>
'"
'" E
c: c: '" ""
(;
C/)
.><
a.
0
.'"
0
C/)
~
~
"t>
NT determination on the Ea measurement has been examined. Even a factor of 2 inaccuracy in NT has a negligibly small effect on calculated normalized curves of DLTS peak amplitUde versus initial delay, such as shown in Fig. 4, and therefore a negligible effect on the Ea determination. (iii) The calculation of curves such as Fig. 4 follows from Eqs . (16)(20), where NT' N d , I), 12 , Ip' If' V r , and Vp in the equations are chosen to match the values used in the experiments of procedures (i) and (ii). The temperature dependence of Nc(T), vth (T), and shallow impurity ionization energy Ed must be included from standard information. Then, the normalized DLTS peak amplitude signals from the experiment are fitted to the theoretical curves as in Fig. 4 to provide the experimental value orEa The computer program for the calculation of curves such as those in Figs. 3 and 4 has been prepared in C language for use on a DEC Vax and will be made available on request.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
.!:!
:::>
4.00
8.00
12.00
16.00
20.00
FIG. 5. Comparison between the normalized DLTS signals of the simulation (solid curves) and experimental points for EC5.
This work was supported by NSF Grant No. ECS8521139. The authors profited from discussions with Z.q. Fang on DLTS techniques and on the nature of the traps EC5 and EC6. One of us (T.E.S.) would like to acknowledge the support of an IBM Faculty Development Award.
10. V. Lang and C. H. Henry, Phys. Rev. Lett. 35,1525 (1975); see also C. H. Henry and D. V. Lang, Phys. Rev. B IS, 989 (1977). 2H. Groto, Y. Adachi, and T. Ikoma, J. Appl. Phys. 54,1909 (1983). 3D. V. Lang and R. A. Logan, J. Electron. Mater. 4, 1053 (1975). 's. Dhar, W. P. Hong, P. K. Bhattacharya, Y. Nashimoto, and F. Y. Juang, IEEE Trans. Electron Devices ED33, 698 (1986). 'G. Vincent and D. Bois, Solid State Commun. 27, 431 (1978). 60. V. Lang and R. A. Logan, Phys. Rev. Lett. 39, 635 (1977). 70. V. Lang, R. A. Logan, and M. Jaros, Phys. Rev. B 19, 1015 (1979). 8R. A. Craven and O. Finn, J. Appl. Phys. 50, 6334 (1979). 90. V. Lang,J. Appl. Phys. 45, 3023 (1974). JOJ. R. Morante, J. Samitier, A. Cornet, A. Herms, and P. Cartujo, J. Appl. Phys. 59, 1562 (1986). 110. Stievenard, J. C. Bourgoin, and M. Lannoo, J. Appl. Phys. 55, 1477 (1984 ). 12p. I. Rockett and A. R. Peaker, Electron. Lett. 17, 838 (1981). 13J. H. Zhao, J. C. Lee, Z. Q. Fang, T. E. Schlesinger, and A. G. Milnes, J. Appl. Phys. 61, 1063 (1987). 14 0. Pons, J. Appl. Phys. 55, 3644 (1983). I5E. Meijer, M. G. Grimmeiss, and L. A. Ledebo, J. Appl. Phys. 55,4266 (1984 ). 16S. D. Brotherton, SolidState Electron. 26, 987 (1983). 17J. M. Noras, J. Phys. C 14, 2341 (1981). I"G. P. Li and K. L. Wang, SolidState Electron. 26, .825 (1983). 19E. V. Astrova, A. A. Lebedev, and A. A. Lebedev, Sov. Phys. Semicond. 19,850 (1985). 20p. Blood and J. J. Harris, J. Appl. Phys. 56, 993 (1984). 21Z. Q. Fang, T. E. Schlesinger, and A. G. Milnes, J. Appl. Phys. 61, 5047 (1987). 22A. Chantre, G. Vincent, and D. Bois; Phys. Rev. B 23,5335 (1981).
ied at high temperatures may be affected and the effectiveness of the procedure slightly reduced. The large Ea value that we have found for EC5 (EL6) implies that carrier capture is dominated by multiphoton emission and a large lattice relaxation associated with carrier capture, which is often observed for deep traps in GaAs or in ternary compound semiconductors. Chantre, Vincent, and Bois22 studied the optical properties of EC5 (EL6) by deep level optical spectroscopy (DLOS) and concluded that EC5 must be classified as a defect with large lattice relaxation comparable to that for the DX center in Alo.29 GaO.71 As (Ref. 4) (Ea=0.38 eV) or S in GaAs O.6S PO.3S 8 (Ea =0.18eV).
IV. SUMMARY
The general procedure for the determination of Ea is as follows: (i) Make the standard DLTS measurement of ET and (J" by changing the rate window for a suitable range of experimental conditions II' 12 , Ip, If' V r , and Vp. (ii) Determine the trap concentration NT at Wp with standard DLTS by changing the filling pulse amplitude. A single value NT at Wp is enough because in the experiments of procedure (i) Vp and therefore Wp is fixed. The effect of the accuracy of the
00
2870
2870
Downloaded 03 Sep 2012 to 117.239.83.193. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://jap.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions