[0] [C] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [D] [A] [R] [T] [F]

Appendix A

Al, Ga, In and Sn/Si{111}

The discussion of the Si-rt3-B phase in Chapter 3 should be prefaced by information on the Si-rt3-Al, -Ga, -In, and -Sn phases, which is summarized here.

  1. It has been known for some time that the adsorption and heat treatment of group-III and -IV elements on Si{111} produces rt3 LEED patterns [122,123], and it was thought that these adsorbates occupied the H_3 site.
  2. Research by Northrup [124-127] renewed interest; his total-energy calculations showed that the T_4-site was more stable than the H_3 site, if the surface was allowed to relax, for Al, In, and Si adsorbates.
  3. Photoemission [128,129] and x-ray photoelectron-diffraction [130,131] studies could not conclusively rule out either the H_3 or T_4 site.
  4. Inverse photoemission analyses [131,132], showed, however, that the calculated unoccupied bands for the T_4-model agree well with the experimentally determined bands for the Si-rt3-Al, -Ga, and -In phases.
  5. Nogami et.al.[133] then verified, using STM, the T_4 site for the Si-rt3-Ga phase by comparing the registry of the rt3 unit cell with the bulk and with that of the now known 7*7 unit-cell.
  6. Zegenhagen et.al.[134] determined the T_4 structure for the Si-rt3-Ga phase using STM, TEC and XSWM, and found relaxations occurring down to the fourth layer.
  7. SXD work [135] determined the T_4 structure for the Si-rt3-Sn phase, with Si-atom relaxations occurring down to the fourth layer.
  8. The Si-rt3-In structure was confirmed by ion scattering [136,137] to be a T_4-phase, although all of the structural parameters were not determined.
  9. Huang et.al.[32] and Kawazu et.al.[138,139] reported dynamical LEED analyses for Si{111}rt3*rt3-30-Al and -Ga showing similar conclusions.

Appendix B


The properties of Pb on Si{111} and on Ge{111} surfaces are similar, and they are interesting for several reasons [140]:

  1. Pb is a large atom to study stress effects with [141].
  2. Pb is both immiscible in and nonreactive with Si and Ge [142].
  3. Pb has a low Debye temperature, which can be exploited in the study of temperature-related surface-effects [143],
  4. Pb atoms occupy the T_4 site and the surface relaxes for both the 1/3 ml phases of Si-rt3-Pb and Ge-rt3-Pb [144]-[149].
  5. A 4/3 ml Si-rt3-Pb phase exists which is an incommensurate close-packed Pb layer [123,150,151,152]. This incommensurate rt3 is different from the high-coverage commensurate Ge-rt3-Pb phase [144,145,146] see Figures 4.2 and 4.3. These structures form the basis for subsequent Pb{111} overlayers. .
  6. The epitaxial growth of Pb on Si{111}7*7-Pb and Si-rt3-Pb surfaces yields Schottky barrier-heights which differ by 0.2 eV [153]. Hence, the interface structure of metal/semiconductor systems can be dominant over bulk-properties.

Appendix C

Sb and Bi/Si{111}

The group-V elements are of great interest as bulk dopants, delta-dopants, and surfactants [154] on semiconductor surfaces [155]. Additionally, it is interesting to compare the rt3 phases of group-V elements on Si{111} with those of group III, group IV, and Au, because similar models have been proposed for all of them.

  1. While As forms a 1*1 structure on Si{111} [156], Bi and Sb form rt3 phases on Si and Ge{111} surfaces.
  2. Initial research by Kawazu et.al.[157, 158] reported the formation of a 1/3-ml Si-rt3-Bi structure and the epitaxial growth of Bi(0001) at higher coverages.
  3. Studies using X-ray diffraction [159,160], XPS [161], X-ray photoelectron diffraction [162,163], and ARUPS [164,165] concluded that a 1-ml rt3 phase exists for both Sb and Bi. These phases contained trimers of the adsorbent, but the trimer's registration to the Si lattice was not determined.
  4. Martensson et.al.[166], using STM and total energy calculations, confirmed the Si-rt3-Sb structure to contain a trimer centered on T_4-sites of Sb atoms on off-T_1 sites (T_4-T_1 model), see Figure 4.6.
  5. Elswijk et.al.[167], also using STM, found the Si-rt3-Sb trimer was registered to the Si bulk in the H_3-T_1 configuration.
  6. X-ray diffraction and SEXAFS results confirmed the T_4-T_1 registration for the 1-ml Si-rt3-Sb phase [168,169].
  7. Dynamical LEED studies determined the T_4-T_1 structure for 1-ml Si-rt3-Bi, plus additional substrate relaxations [75].
  8. Total energy calculations [170] confirmed the stability of the 1-ml trimer structures.
  9. Our own Keating-energy analysis confirms the elastic stability of the simple-trimer structures for Bi and Sb on Si and Ge{111}, see Tables C.1, C.2, C.3, and C.4. This stability arises from the ability of the adsorbate to saturate the Si dangling-bonds with only minor substrate bond-bending. It should be noted, however, that the elastic-energy analysis cannot distinguish between a H_3 and a T_4 trimer-center.
  10. Apart from the determination of a unique structure for both Sb and Bi on Si and Ge{111}, great significance lies in the confirmation of a trimer-based structure. This is because similar models have been proposed for the Si{111}rt3-Ag and -Au surfaces, but they have not been widely accepted.
  11. Finally, two additional simple-adatom 1/3 ml T_4-structures were also determined for Bi on Si{111} and Ge{111} by LEED [74,171].

Appendix D


The structure of Si{111}rt3-rt3-30-Ag has been controversial for several years. One of the uncontested facts is that when Ag is deposited on a Si{111}7*7 surface which is heated during or after deposition to several hundred degrees, a Si-rt3-Ag phase is formed. Models have been proposed which are similar to those proposed for the Si{111}rt3*rt3-Au surface, see Chapter 5, but it appears now that Au and Ag have different effects on Si{111}.

Various models have been proposed for the Si-rt3-Ag phase. Most contain Ag but no Ag-Ag bonds, and are consistent with the seemingly honeycomb structure seen in STM images [172]. The models have either a Si-honeycomb layer above a Ag-trimer layer above the Si double-layer [173,174,175]; or a Si trimer-layer above a Ag-honeycomb layer above the Si double-layer [176,177,178]; or a simple Ag-honeycomb layer (H_3 sites) [179,180,181]; or a Si-honeycomb layer above a honeycomb chained-trimer (HCT) Ag-layer above a Si-trimer layer above the Si double-layer [110,182,-192]. The last model (HCT) has been sported with and without the overlying Si-honeycomb layer and is most widely accepted. However, LEED I(V) calculations of the HCT model do not agree with published experimental-spectra [193].

LEED dynamical analysis has proposed a different model and demonstrated its validity. Fan et.al.[31] noted the creation of an ``all Si-rt3''structure by rapid anneal and quench of an ion-bombarded Si{111} sample (with no Ag) before a 7*7 structure developed. LEED spectra of this ``all Si-rt3'' and of the Si-rt3-Ag are identical. Previously, Yang et.al.[70] had noted the striking similarity between LEED spectra of the Si-rt3-Ta and of the Si-rt3-Ag surfaces. If the Si-rt3-Si, -Ag, -Ta have identical spectra, then neither Ag nor Ta can be part of the long-range order of the system. Similar results have been reported for the ``all Ge-rt3'', Ge-rt3-Ag, and Ge-rt3-Li surfaces. Therefore, these metals must produce impurity-induced rt3 surfaces [194]. Fan et.al.[31] have determined the ``all Si-rt3'' surface to have one top-layer Si atom missing, to be relaxed, and to feature no Ag atoms in the unit-cell.

The present state of affairs is obviously confusing, but the five major-models proposed contain similarities. The necessity for Si vacancies in several of the proposed models, the lack of agreement on the Ag coverage, the lack of agreement on Si coverage [195,196], and conflicting information about where Ag resides leads one to believe that any one of the proposed models maybe correct. They also may all be incorrect.

Back to the Table of Contents

Back to the Conclusion

The "content" has not been modified, but the HTML code was last modified on 05/24/2009, by me.

Please notice the copyright and disclaimer.