Keyword Suggestions

Account Login

Library Navigation


Browse Meetings

BB1.01 - Al2O3/InGaAs Interface and Bulk Oxide Defect Passivation 
April 22, 2014   8:00am - 8:15am

In0.53Ga0.47As and atomic layer deposited (ALD) Al2O3 are among the candidates channel and dielectric materials, respectively, for future high performance III-V n-channel MOS devices. In particular, the ability to achieve large band offsets and a thermally stable interface with Al2O3 makes it an interesting choice for an interlayer dielectric between an InGaAs channel and higher-k materials. Achieving a low density of electrically active defects at the interface has been a long-standing challenge for all deposited dielectrics on III-V arsenide channels. Moreover, traps in the oxide layer may also reduce the charge in the channel and thus degrade the on-state performance of InGaAs MOSFET devices. In this presentation, we describe approaches to passivate the interface and bulk oxide defects with various treatments, like large-dose exposure of the InGaAs surface to trimethyl-aluminum (TMA) prior to ALD, atomic hydrogen dosing, and either post-ALD or post-gate metal forming gas (5% H2/95% N2) anneals (FGA). Experimental methods employed include quantitative interface trap and oxide trap modeling[1, 2] of MOS capacitor data obtained over a range of frequencies and temperatures. We also perform x-ray photoelectron spectroscopy to characterize possible film stoichiometry changes during annealing and the oxidation state of In, Ga and As at the dielectric/channel interface. These ex-situ data will be compared with the results of in-situ scanning tunneling microscopy/spectroscopy for certain passivation schemes[3, 4]. The effects of pre- and post-dielectric defect passivation schemes will be examined for ALD-Al2O3 samples prepared on both initially-clean and well-ordered As2-decapped In0.53Ga0.47As substrates and on initially air-exposed substrates. Relevant comparisons to low-temperature ALD-grown HfO2 films on InGaAs substrates will also be reported. References1. H. Chen, Y. Yuan, B. Yu, J. Ahn, P.C. Mcintyre, P.M. Asbeck, M.J.W. Rodwell, and Y. Taur, IEEE Transactions on Electron Devices 59, 2383 (2012).2. Y. Yuan, B. Yu, J. Ahn, P.C. Mcintyre, P.M. Asbeck, M.J.W. Rodwell, and Y. Taur, IEEE Transactions on Electron Devices 59, 2100 (2012).3. W. Melitz, T. Kent, A.C. Kummel, R. Droopad, M. Holland, and I. Thayne, The Journal of Chemical Physics 136, 154706 (2012).4. W. Melitz, J. Shen, T. Kent, R. Droopad, P. Hurley and A. C. Kummel, ESCS Transactions, 35(4) 175-189 (2011)

Average Rating: (No Ratings)
  Was great, surpassed expectations, and I would recommend this
  Was good, met expectations, and I would recommend this
  Was okay, met most expectations
  Was okay but did not meet expectations
  Was bad and I would not recommend this

Keynote Address
Panel Discussion - Different Approaches to Commercializing Materials Research
Business Challenges to Starting a Materials-Based Company
Fred Kavli Distinguished Lectureship in Nanoscience
Application of In-situ X-ray Absorption, Emission and Powder Diffraction Studies in Nanomaterials Research - From the Design of an In-situ Experiment to Data Analysis