journal article·2021-02-24

Low-Temperature As-Grown Crystalline β-Ga2O3 Films via Plasma-Enhanced Atomic Layer Deposition

Saidjafarzoda Ilhom, Adnan Mohammad, Deepa Shukla, John Grasso, Brian G. Willis, Ali Kemal Okyay, Necmi Biyikli

Publisher page

Abstract

We report on the low-temperature growth of crystalline Ga2O3 films on Si, sapphire, and glass substrates using plasma-enhanced atomic layer deposition (PEALD) featuring a hollow-cathode plasma source. Films were deposited by using triethylgallium (TEG) and Ar/O2 plasma as metal precursor and oxygen co-reactant, respectively. Growth experiments have been performed within 150–240 °C substrate temperature and 30–300 W radio-frequency (rf) plasma power ranges. Additionally, each unit AB-type ALD cycle was followed by an in situ Ar plasma annealing treatment, which consisted of an extra (50–300 W) Ar plasma exposure for 20 s ending just before the next TEG pulse. The growth per cycle (GPC) of the films without Ar plasma annealing step ranged between 0.69 and 1.31 Å/cycle, and as-grown refractive indices were between 1.67 and 1.75 within the scanned plasma power range. X-ray diffraction (XRD) measurements showed that Ga2O3 films grown without in situ Ar plasma annealing exhibited amorphous character irrespective of substrate temperature and rf power values. With the incorporation of the in situ Ar plasma annealing process, the GPC of Ga2O3 films ranged between 0.76 and 1.03 Å/cycle along with higher refractive index values of 1.75–1.79. The increased refractive index (1.79) and slightly reduced GPC (1.03 Å/cycle) at 250 W plasma annealing indicated possible densification and crystallization of the films. Indeed, X-ray measurements confirmed that in situ plasma annealed films grow in a monoclinic β-Ga2O3 crystal phase. The film crystallinity and density further enhance (from 5.11 to 5.60 g/cm3) by increasing the rf power value used during in situ Ar plasma annealing process. X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) measurement of the β-Ga2O3 sample grown under optimal in situ plasma annealing power (250 W) revealed near-ideal film stoichiometry (O/Ga of ∼1.44) with relatively low carbon content (∼5 at. %), whereas 50 W rf power treated film was highly non-stoichiometric (O/Ga of ∼2.31) with considerably elevated carbon content. Our results demonstrate the effectiveness of in situ Ar plasma annealing process to transform amorphous wide bandgap oxide semiconductors into crystalline films without needing high-temperature post-deposition annealing treatment.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Ga2O3 and related materials · ZnO doping and properties · Advanced Photocatalysis Techniques

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering, University of Connecticut, 371 Fairfield Way, Storrs, Connecticut 06269, United States

Department of Materials Science & Engineering, University of Connecticut, 97 North Eagleville Road, Storrs, Connecticut 06269, United States

Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, University of Connecticut, 191 Auditorium Road, Storrs, Connecticut 06269, United States

Department of Electrical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305, United States

Funding

Division of Chemical, Bioengineering, Environmental, and Transport Systems · School of Engineering, University of Connecticut

References (70)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.1002/aelm.20160050110.1002/aelm.201600501 ↗
2. Cooke, M. Trends toward low-cost, high-power, high-frequency devices on silicon and more. Compounds & Advanced Silicon IEDM Conference Report, 2019–2020, 14. Available online at http://www.semiconductor-today.com.
3. 10.1063/1.500694110.1063/1.5006941 ↗
4. 10.1063/1.506284110.1063/1.5062841 ↗
5. 10.1016/j.jcrysgro.2004.06.02710.1016/j.jcrysgro.2004.06.027 ↗
6. 10.1063/1.501784510.1063/1.5017845 ↗
7. 10.1063/1.367428710.1063/1.3674287 ↗
8. 10.1016/j.jallcom.2014.01.02910.1016/j.jallcom.2014.01.029 ↗
9. 10.1007/s11664-016-5121-110.1007/s11664-016-5121-1 ↗
10. Stepanov S. · Rev. Adv. Mater. Sci. · 2016 · 44 · 63
11. 10.1063/1.302966110.1063/1.3029661 ↗
12. 10.1016/j.tsf.2013.03.06610.1016/j.tsf.2013.03.066 ↗
13. 10.1063/1.198053510.1063/1.1980535 ↗
14. Fujita S. · 7041 · 70410M10.1117/12.796141 ↗
15. 10.1016/S0169-4332(03)00122-310.1016/S0169-4332(03)00122-3 ↗
16. 10.1021/ja01123a03910.1021/ja01123a039 ↗
17. 10.1016/j.physb.2011.05.01110.1016/j.physb.2011.05.011 ↗
18. 10.1063/1.237480610.1063/1.2374806 ↗
19. 10.1063/1.243294610.1063/1.2432946 ↗
20. 10.1143/JJAP.46.721710.1143/JJAP.46.7217 ↗
21. Bierwagen, O.; White, M. E.; Tsai, M. Y.; Speck, J. S. Molecular Beam Epitaxy: From Research to Mass Production; Henini, M., Ed. Elsevier Science: 2012; p 347.10.1016/B978-0-12-387839-7.00015-4 ↗
22. 10.1023/B:JMSC.0000026951.53297.e810.1023/B:JMSC.0000026951.53297.e8 ↗
23. 10.1116/1.475878210.1116/1.4758782 ↗
24. 10.1039/C4TA05007J10.1039/C4TA05007J ↗
25. 10.1116/1.487593510.1116/1.4875935 ↗
26. 10.1002/pssr.20151005610.1002/pssr.201510056 ↗
27. 10.1587/transele.E98.C.38210.1587/transele.E98.C.382 ↗
28. 10.1186/s11671-016-1448-z10.1186/s11671-016-1448-z ↗
29. 10.1039/C7DT03427J10.1039/C7DT03427J ↗
30. 10.1088/1757-899X/170/1/01200910.1088/1757-899X/170/1/012009 ↗
31. 10.1016/j.jcrysgro.2018.02.01410.1016/j.jcrysgro.2018.02.014 ↗
32. 10.1039/C8TC04335C10.1039/C8TC04335C ↗
33. 10.1016/j.apsusc.2019.01.17710.1016/j.apsusc.2019.01.177 ↗
34. 10.1016/j.cap.2018.11.01310.1016/j.cap.2018.11.013 ↗
35. 10.1021/acsami.8b1424410.1021/acsami.8b14244 ↗
36. 10.1116/1.513480010.1116/1.5134800 ↗
37. 10.1016/j.jcrysgro.2019.12525410.1016/j.jcrysgro.2019.125254 ↗
38. 10.1088/1674-4926/40/1/01280610.1088/1674-4926/40/1/012806 ↗
39. 10.1021/acs.chemmater.9b0392610.1021/acs.chemmater.9b03926 ↗
40. 10.1021/acsami.0c0847710.1021/acsami.0c08477 ↗
41. 10.1021/cr900056b10.1021/cr900056b ↗
42. 10.1038/srep3971710.1038/srep39717 ↗
43. 10.1016/j.jcrysgro.2011.09.00310.1016/j.jcrysgro.2011.09.003 ↗
44. 10.1002/pssa.20112743010.1002/pssa.201127430 ↗
45. 10.1039/C3TC32418D10.1039/C3TC32418D ↗
46. 10.1021/acsami.6b1181510.1021/acsami.6b11815 ↗
47. 10.1038/srep4006110.1038/srep40061 ↗
48. 10.1088/2058-8585/aa6add10.1088/2058-8585/aa6add ↗
49. 10.1116/1.508534110.1116/1.5085341 ↗
50. 10.1116/1.512866310.1116/1.5128663 ↗
51. 10.1088/0022-3727/42/7/07300110.1088/0022-3727/42/7/073001 ↗
52. 10.1002/admi.20170005810.1002/admi.201700058 ↗
53. 10.1039/D0RA04567E10.1039/D0RA04567E ↗
54. 10.1116/1.362556510.1116/1.3625565 ↗
55. 10.1063/1.492636610.1063/1.4926366 ↗
56. 10.1063/1.221443810.1063/1.2214438 ↗
57. 10.3788/COL201008S1.006710.3788/COL201008S1.0067 ↗
58. 10.1063/1.34556310.1063/1.345563 ↗
59. 10.12693/APhysPolA.116.S-9210.12693/APhysPolA.116.S-92 ↗
60. 10.1039/C9RA00008A10.1039/C9RA00008A ↗
61. 10.1021/acssuschemeng.9b0512610.1021/acssuschemeng.9b05126 ↗
62. 10.1021/acsaelm.9b0081910.1021/acsaelm.9b00819 ↗
63. 10.1021/acsaelm.9b0008010.1021/acsaelm.9b00080 ↗
64. 10.1016/j.mssp.2020.10493310.1016/j.mssp.2020.104933 ↗
65. 10.1021/acsaelm.0c0038810.1021/acsaelm.0c00388 ↗
66. 10.1039/C9TC04801D10.1039/C9TC04801D ↗
67. 10.1016/j.apsusc.2020.14661510.1016/j.apsusc.2020.146615 ↗
68. 10.1116/1.475690610.1116/1.4756906 ↗
69. 10.1016/j.tsf.2015.02.06610.1016/j.tsf.2015.02.066 ↗
70. Yasaka M. · Rigaku J. · 2010 · 26 · 1