-
作为一种新兴的超宽带隙半导体, Ga2O3在开发高性能的日盲紫外光电探测器方面具有独特的优势. 金属-半导体-金属结构因其制备方法简单、集光面积大等优点在Ga2O3日盲紫外光电探测器中得到了广泛的应用. 本文在传统的金属-半导体-金属结构Ga2O3日盲紫外光电探测器的基础上, 利用原子层沉积技术引入高介电性和绝缘性的氧化铪(HfO2)作为绝缘层和钝化层, 制备出带有HfO2插层的金属-绝缘体-半导体结构的Ga2O3日盲紫外光电探测器, 显著降低了暗电流, 提升了光暗电流比, 同时提高了器件的比探测率和响应速度, 为未来Ga2O3在高性能弱光探测器件制备提供了一种新通用策略.
-
关键词:
- 氧化镓 /
- 紫外探测 /
- 金属-绝缘体-半导体 /
- 表面钝化
Solar-blind photodetector (PD) converts 200–280 nm ultraviolet (UV) light into electrical signals, thereby expanding application range from security communication to missile or fire alarms detections. As an emerging ultra-wide bandgap semiconductor, gallium oxide (Ga2O3) has sprung to the forefront of solar blind detection activity due to its key attributes, including suitable optical bandgap, convenient growth procedure, highly temperture/chemical/radiation tolerance, and thus becoming a promising candidate to break the current bottleneck of photomultiplier tubes. The Ga2O3-based solar blind PDs based on various architectures have been realized in the past decade, including photoconductive PDs, Schottky barrier PDs, and avalanche PDs. Till now, the metal-semiconductor-metal (MSM) structure has been widely used in developing photoconductive Ga2O3 solar-blind PDs because of its simple preparation method and large light collection area. Unfortunately, despite unremitting efforts, the performance metric of reported MSM-type Ga2O3 solar-blind PDs still lags behind the benchmark of commercial PMTs. Apparently, lack of solution to the problem has greatly hindered further research and practical applications in this field. One effective strategy for further enhancing the device performance such as detectivity, external quantum efficiency (EQE), and light-to-dark ratio heavily relies on blocking the dark current. In this work, high-quality single crystalline β-Ga2O3 with a uniform thickness of 700 nm is grown by using a metal organic chemical vapor deposition (MOCVD) technique. Then atomic layer deposition (ALD) fabricated ultrathin hafnium oxide (HfO2) films ($ \sim $ 10 nm) are introduced as inserted insulators and passivation layers. The 30 nm/100 nm Ti/Au interdigital electrodes (length: 2800 μm, width: 200 μm, spacing: 200 μm, 4 pairs) are fabricated by sputtering on the top of the film as the Ohmic contacts. Taking advantage of its novel dielectric and insulating properties, the leakage current on Ga2O3 thin film can be effectively inhibited by the inserted ultrathin HfO2 layer, and thus further improving the performance of PDs. Compared with simple MSM structured Ga2O3 PD, the resulting metal-insulator-semiconductor (MIS) device significantly reduces dark current, and thus improving specific detectivity, enhancing light-to-dark current ratio, and increasing response speed. These findings advance a significant step toward the suppressing of dark current in MSM structured photoconductive PDs and provide great opportunities for developing high-performance weak UV signal sensing in the future.-
Keywords:
- gallium oxide /
- ultraviolet detection /
- metal-insulator-semiconductor /
- surface passivation
[1] Chen X, Ren F, Gu S, Ye J 2019 Photonics Res. 7 381Google Scholar
[2] Kan H, Zheng W, Fu C, Lin R, Luo J, Huang F 2020 ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 12 6030Google Scholar
[3] 郭道友, 李培刚, 陈政委, 吴真平, 唐为华 2019 68 078501Google Scholar
Guo D Y, Li P G, Chen Z W, Wu Z P, Tang W H 2019 Acta Phys. Sin. 68 078501Google Scholar
[4] Qian L X, Wu Z H, Zhang Y Y, Lai P T, Liu X Z, Li Y R 2017 ACS Photonics 4 2203Google Scholar
[5] Qin Y, Li L, Zhao X, Tompa G S, Dong H, Jian G, He Q, Tan P, Hou X, Zhang Z, Yu S, Sun H, Xu G, Miao X, Xue K, Long S, Liu M 2020 ACS Photonics 7 812Google Scholar
[6] Qin Y, Sun H, Long S, Tompa G S, Salagaj T, Dong H, He Q, Jian G, Liu Q, Lü H, Liu M 2019 IEEE Electron Device Lett. 40 1475Google Scholar
[7] Wang Y H, Tang Y Q, Li H R, Yang Z B, Zhang Q Y, He Z B, Huang X, Wei X H, Tang W H, Huang W, Wu Z P 2021 ACS Photonics 8 2256Google Scholar
[8] Hu D, Wang Y, Wang Y, Huan W, Dong X, Yin J 2022 Mater. Lett. 312 131653Google Scholar
[9] Liu S, Jiao S, Lu H, Nie Y, Gao S, Wang D, Wang J, Zhao L 2022 J. Alloys Compd. 890 161827Google Scholar
[10] Wang Y, Li H, Cao J, Shen J, Zhang Q, Yang Y, Dong Z, Zhou T, Zhang Y, Tang W, Wu Z 2021 ACS Nano 15 16654Google Scholar
[11] Hou X, Zhao X, Zhang Y, Zhang Z, Liu Y, Qin Y, Tan P, Chen C, Yu S, Ding M, Xu G, Hu Q, Long S 2022 Adv. Mater. 34 2106923Google Scholar
[12] Cui S, Mei Z, Zhang Y, Liang H, Du X 2017 Adv. Opt. Mater. 5 1700454Google Scholar
[13] Zhou H, Cong L, Ma J, Chen M, Song D, Wang H, Li P, Li B, Xu H, Liu Y 2020 J. Alloys Compd. 847 156536Google Scholar
[14] Han Z, Liang H, Huo W, Zhu X, Du X, Mei Z 2020 Adv. Opt. Mater. 8 1901833Google Scholar
[15] Chen C H 2013 Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 52 08JF08Google Scholar
[16] Sheoran H, Kumar V, Singh R 2022 ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. 4 2589Google Scholar
[17] Arora K, Goel N, Kumar M, Kumar M 2018 ACS Photonics 5 2391Google Scholar
[18] Qian L X, Gu Z, Huang X, Liu H, Lü Y, Feng Z, Zhang W 2021 ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 13 40837Google Scholar
[19] Ma J, Lee O, Yoo G 2019 IEEE J. Electron Devices Society 7 512Google Scholar
[20] Young S J, Ji L W, Chang S J, Liang S H, Lam K T, Fang T H, Chen K J, Du X L, Xue Q K 2008 Sens. Actuators, A 141 225Google Scholar
[21] Wang W J, Shan C X, Zhu H, Ma F Y, Shen D Z, Fan X W, Choy K L 2010 J. Phys. D:Appl. Phys. 43 045102Google Scholar
[22] Seol J H, Lee G H, Hahm S H 2018 IEEE Sens. J. 18 4477Google Scholar
[23] Yin J, Liu L, Zang Y, Ying A, Hui W, Jiang S, Zhang C, Yang T, Chueh Y L, Li J, Kang J 2021 Light:Sci. Appl. 10 113Google Scholar
[24] Oshima T, Hashikawa M, Tomizawa S, Miki K, Oishi T, Sasaki K, Kuramata A 2018 Appl. Phys. Exp. 11 112202Google Scholar
[25] 刘增, 李磊, 支钰崧, 都灵, 方君鹏, 李山, 余建刚, 张茂林, 杨莉莉, 张少辉, 郭宇锋, 唐为华 2022 71 208501Google Scholar
Liu Z, Li L, Zhi Y S, Du L, Fang J P, Li S, Yu J G, Zhang M L, Yang L L, Zhang S H, Guo Y F, Tang W H 2022 Acta Phys. Sin. 71 208501Google Scholar
[26] Li S, Guo D, Li P, Wang X, Wang Y, Yan Z, Liu Z, Zhi Y, Huang Y, Wu Z, Tang W 2019 ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 11 35105Google Scholar
[27] Wang Y, Yang Z, Li H, Li S, Zhi Y, Yan Z, Huang X, Wei X, Tang W, Wu Z 2020 ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 12 47714Google Scholar
[28] Dou L T, Yang Y (Micheal), You J B, Hong Z R, Chang W H, Li Ga, Yang Y 2014 Nat. Commun. 5 5404Google Scholar
[29] 雷挺, 吕伟明, 吕文星, 崔博垚, 胡瑞, 时文华, 曾中明 2021 70 027801Google Scholar
Lei T, Lü W M, Lü W X, Cui B Y, Hu R, Shi W H, Zeng Z M 2021 Acta Phys. Sin. 70 027801Google Scholar
[30] 李秀华, 张敏, 杨佳, 邢爽, 高悦, 李亚泽, 李思雨, 王崇杰 2022 71 048501Google Scholar
Li X H, Zhang M, Yang J, Xing S, Gao Y, Li Y Z, Li S Y, Wang C J 2022 Acta Phys. Sin. 71 048501Google Scholar
[31] 周树仁, 张红, 莫慧兰, 刘浩文, 熊元强, 李泓霖, 孔春阳, 叶利娟, 李万俊 2021 70 178503Google Scholar
Zhou S R, Zhang H, Mo H L, Liu H W, Xiong Y Q, Li H L, Kong C Y, Ye L J, Li W J 2021 Acta Phys. Sin. 70 178503Google Scholar
-
图 10 光电探测器在外加偏置电压下的能带结构及载流子转移过程 (a) 黑暗条件下的MSM结构探测器; (b) 254 nm紫外光照下的MSM结构探测器; (c) 黑暗条件下的MIS结构探测器; (d) 254 nm紫外光照下的MIS结构探测器. (e) 钝化前β-Ga2O3薄膜表面状态示意图; (f) 钝化后β-Ga2O3薄膜表面状态示意图
Fig. 10. Band structures and carriers transfer processes of photodetectors under applied bias voltage: (a) MSM photodetector in the dark; (b) MSM photodetector under 254 nm light; (c) MIS photodetector in the dark; (d) MIS photodetector under 254 nm light. The schematic diagrams in (e) and (f) show the surface states of a β-Ga2O3 film before and after passivation, respectively.
-
[1] Chen X, Ren F, Gu S, Ye J 2019 Photonics Res. 7 381Google Scholar
[2] Kan H, Zheng W, Fu C, Lin R, Luo J, Huang F 2020 ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 12 6030Google Scholar
[3] 郭道友, 李培刚, 陈政委, 吴真平, 唐为华 2019 68 078501Google Scholar
Guo D Y, Li P G, Chen Z W, Wu Z P, Tang W H 2019 Acta Phys. Sin. 68 078501Google Scholar
[4] Qian L X, Wu Z H, Zhang Y Y, Lai P T, Liu X Z, Li Y R 2017 ACS Photonics 4 2203Google Scholar
[5] Qin Y, Li L, Zhao X, Tompa G S, Dong H, Jian G, He Q, Tan P, Hou X, Zhang Z, Yu S, Sun H, Xu G, Miao X, Xue K, Long S, Liu M 2020 ACS Photonics 7 812Google Scholar
[6] Qin Y, Sun H, Long S, Tompa G S, Salagaj T, Dong H, He Q, Jian G, Liu Q, Lü H, Liu M 2019 IEEE Electron Device Lett. 40 1475Google Scholar
[7] Wang Y H, Tang Y Q, Li H R, Yang Z B, Zhang Q Y, He Z B, Huang X, Wei X H, Tang W H, Huang W, Wu Z P 2021 ACS Photonics 8 2256Google Scholar
[8] Hu D, Wang Y, Wang Y, Huan W, Dong X, Yin J 2022 Mater. Lett. 312 131653Google Scholar
[9] Liu S, Jiao S, Lu H, Nie Y, Gao S, Wang D, Wang J, Zhao L 2022 J. Alloys Compd. 890 161827Google Scholar
[10] Wang Y, Li H, Cao J, Shen J, Zhang Q, Yang Y, Dong Z, Zhou T, Zhang Y, Tang W, Wu Z 2021 ACS Nano 15 16654Google Scholar
[11] Hou X, Zhao X, Zhang Y, Zhang Z, Liu Y, Qin Y, Tan P, Chen C, Yu S, Ding M, Xu G, Hu Q, Long S 2022 Adv. Mater. 34 2106923Google Scholar
[12] Cui S, Mei Z, Zhang Y, Liang H, Du X 2017 Adv. Opt. Mater. 5 1700454Google Scholar
[13] Zhou H, Cong L, Ma J, Chen M, Song D, Wang H, Li P, Li B, Xu H, Liu Y 2020 J. Alloys Compd. 847 156536Google Scholar
[14] Han Z, Liang H, Huo W, Zhu X, Du X, Mei Z 2020 Adv. Opt. Mater. 8 1901833Google Scholar
[15] Chen C H 2013 Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 52 08JF08Google Scholar
[16] Sheoran H, Kumar V, Singh R 2022 ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. 4 2589Google Scholar
[17] Arora K, Goel N, Kumar M, Kumar M 2018 ACS Photonics 5 2391Google Scholar
[18] Qian L X, Gu Z, Huang X, Liu H, Lü Y, Feng Z, Zhang W 2021 ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 13 40837Google Scholar
[19] Ma J, Lee O, Yoo G 2019 IEEE J. Electron Devices Society 7 512Google Scholar
[20] Young S J, Ji L W, Chang S J, Liang S H, Lam K T, Fang T H, Chen K J, Du X L, Xue Q K 2008 Sens. Actuators, A 141 225Google Scholar
[21] Wang W J, Shan C X, Zhu H, Ma F Y, Shen D Z, Fan X W, Choy K L 2010 J. Phys. D:Appl. Phys. 43 045102Google Scholar
[22] Seol J H, Lee G H, Hahm S H 2018 IEEE Sens. J. 18 4477Google Scholar
[23] Yin J, Liu L, Zang Y, Ying A, Hui W, Jiang S, Zhang C, Yang T, Chueh Y L, Li J, Kang J 2021 Light:Sci. Appl. 10 113Google Scholar
[24] Oshima T, Hashikawa M, Tomizawa S, Miki K, Oishi T, Sasaki K, Kuramata A 2018 Appl. Phys. Exp. 11 112202Google Scholar
[25] 刘增, 李磊, 支钰崧, 都灵, 方君鹏, 李山, 余建刚, 张茂林, 杨莉莉, 张少辉, 郭宇锋, 唐为华 2022 71 208501Google Scholar
Liu Z, Li L, Zhi Y S, Du L, Fang J P, Li S, Yu J G, Zhang M L, Yang L L, Zhang S H, Guo Y F, Tang W H 2022 Acta Phys. Sin. 71 208501Google Scholar
[26] Li S, Guo D, Li P, Wang X, Wang Y, Yan Z, Liu Z, Zhi Y, Huang Y, Wu Z, Tang W 2019 ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 11 35105Google Scholar
[27] Wang Y, Yang Z, Li H, Li S, Zhi Y, Yan Z, Huang X, Wei X, Tang W, Wu Z 2020 ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 12 47714Google Scholar
[28] Dou L T, Yang Y (Micheal), You J B, Hong Z R, Chang W H, Li Ga, Yang Y 2014 Nat. Commun. 5 5404Google Scholar
[29] 雷挺, 吕伟明, 吕文星, 崔博垚, 胡瑞, 时文华, 曾中明 2021 70 027801Google Scholar
Lei T, Lü W M, Lü W X, Cui B Y, Hu R, Shi W H, Zeng Z M 2021 Acta Phys. Sin. 70 027801Google Scholar
[30] 李秀华, 张敏, 杨佳, 邢爽, 高悦, 李亚泽, 李思雨, 王崇杰 2022 71 048501Google Scholar
Li X H, Zhang M, Yang J, Xing S, Gao Y, Li Y Z, Li S Y, Wang C J 2022 Acta Phys. Sin. 71 048501Google Scholar
[31] 周树仁, 张红, 莫慧兰, 刘浩文, 熊元强, 李泓霖, 孔春阳, 叶利娟, 李万俊 2021 70 178503Google Scholar
Zhou S R, Zhang H, Mo H L, Liu H W, Xiong Y Q, Li H L, Kong C Y, Ye L J, Li W J 2021 Acta Phys. Sin. 70 178503Google Scholar
计量
- 文章访问数: 4553
- PDF下载量: 198
- 被引次数: 0