- Page 1 and 2: Damage formation and annealing stud
- Page 3 and 4: 3.2.2.6 Other models 40 3.2.3 Other
- Page 5 and 6: Chapter 7 Interaction between Xe, F
- Page 7 and 8: List of Figures Figure 1.1 a) Schem
- Page 9 and 10: Figure 4.13 Variation in the kinema
- Page 11 and 12: Figure 6.10 MEIS energy spectra for
- Page 13 and 14: Figure 7.8 Combined MEIS Xe depth p
- Page 15 and 16: Abbreviations and Symbols a/c amorp
- Page 17 and 18: Abstract The work described in this
- Page 19 and 20: Chapter 7 5 M. Werner, J.A. van den
- Page 21 and 22: terminal (Vg), current cannot flow
- Page 23 and 24: This is an approximate average leve
- Page 25 and 26: the active channel, adjacent to the
- Page 27 and 28: To continue to improve devices ther
- Page 29 and 30: produces a device quality regrown l
- Page 31 and 32: technique of channelling Rutherford
- Page 33 and 34: 22 J.S Williams. Solid Phase Recrys
- Page 35 and 36: and the probability of scattering t
- Page 37 and 38: importance for many atomic collisio
- Page 39 and 40: M1, V0, E0 Figure 2.2 Elastic scatt
- Page 41 and 42: 2.3.1 Models for inelastic energy l
- Page 43: dE/dx (ev/Ang) 10 1 Inelastic Energ
- Page 47 and 48: Figure 2.5 Results of TRIM simulati
- Page 49 and 50: Chapter 3 Damage and Annealing proc
- Page 51 and 52: the Si/SiO2 interface, consuming th
- Page 53 and 54: On the basis that by creating an in
- Page 55 and 56: Figure 3.4 Structure of crystalline
- Page 57 and 58: a Si atom will suffer little angula
- Page 59 and 60: 3.2.2.5 Homogeneous model (Critical
- Page 61 and 62: Sputtering and atomic mixing play a
- Page 63 and 64: and is approximately 25 times faste
- Page 65 and 66: elevant dopants later. For equal co
- Page 67 and 68: nearest neighbour distance (52). By
- Page 69 and 70: Category I defects are produced whe
- Page 71 and 72: thermal annealing (600 - 700 °C an
- Page 73 and 74: Figure 3.11 Relationship between im
- Page 75 and 76: defect pairs due to Coulomb attract
- Page 77 and 78: ⎛ 〈 C ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ I 〉 〈 C V
- Page 79 and 80: 27 R.D. Goldberg, J. S. Williams, a
- Page 81 and 82: 67 H. Bracht. Diffusion Mechanism a
- Page 83 and 84: Hall effect measurements were carri
- Page 85 and 86: energy than one scattered from an a
- Page 87 and 88: epresents a small improvement over
- Page 89 and 90: (dE/dx)out multiplied by the path l
- Page 91 and 92: they are small compared to the diff
- Page 93 and 94: ackscattering (27). This fact forms
- Page 95 and 96:
Figure 4.7 a) Plot of a Gaussian di
- Page 97 and 98:
similar to the width of the error f
- Page 99 and 100:
UP Ion Beam SPIN Rotation Sample Sc
- Page 101 and 102:
Kinematic factor (K) 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.
- Page 103 and 104:
Figure 4.14 Illustration of the dou
- Page 105 and 106:
4.2.2.4 Interpretation of spectra A
- Page 107 and 108:
with are comparatively small, ~ 0.5
- Page 109 and 110:
Inelastic energy loss (eV/Ang) 32 2
- Page 111 and 112:
iterative procedure is carried out
- Page 113 and 114:
Yield (couts per 5µC) 300 250 200
- Page 115 and 116:
SIMS experiments were also carried
- Page 117 and 118:
MEIS, using the scattering conditio
- Page 119 and 120:
4.5 Sample production Samples have
- Page 121 and 122:
an N2/O2 environment to maintain an
- Page 123 and 124:
38 M. Anderle, M. Barozzi, M. Bersa
- Page 125 and 126:
damage evolution behaviour observed
- Page 127 and 128:
Yield (counts per 5 µC) 250 200 15
- Page 129 and 130:
essentially a “zero dose” profi
- Page 131 and 132:
no longer “visible” in MEIS has
- Page 133 and 134:
yield (cts / 5µC) 500 400 300 200
- Page 135 and 136:
5.4 Conclusion MEIS analysis with a
- Page 137 and 138:
Chapter 6 Annealing studies 6.1 Int
- Page 139 and 140:
6.2.2.2 Results and Discussion Figu
- Page 141 and 142:
theory predictions and X-ray fluore
- Page 143 and 144:
implantation conditions are those u
- Page 145 and 146:
a) b) c) Yield (counts per 5 µC) Y
- Page 147 and 148:
greater than MEIS. SIMS is not sens
- Page 149 and 150:
attributed to the interference betw
- Page 151 and 152:
The as-implanted sample, with a bro
- Page 153 and 154:
a) b) Yield (counts per 5 µC) Yiel
- Page 155 and 156:
interface, as evidenced by the high
- Page 157 and 158:
duration, is observed. MEIS results
- Page 159 and 160:
Yield (counts per 5µC) 500 400 300
- Page 161 and 162:
ack edges of the Si peaks are very
- Page 163 and 164:
underneath the SiO2 layer, iii) it
- Page 165 and 166:
R s (Ω/sq) 950 900 850 800 750 60
- Page 167 and 168:
As concentration (at/cm 3 ) 1E22 1E
- Page 169 and 170:
R s (Ω/sq) 950 900 850 800 750 70
- Page 171 and 172:
Following annealing it was observed
- Page 173 and 174:
∆a/a (x 10 -3 ) 4,0 epi550 3,5 3,
- Page 175 and 176:
Yield (counts per 5 uC) 350 300 250
- Page 177 and 178:
(FWHM). Concomitantly, As in the re
- Page 179 and 180:
Yield (counts per 5 µC) 450 400 35
- Page 181 and 182:
The higher temperature anneals carr
- Page 183 and 184:
ecomes steeper for the sample annea
- Page 185 and 186:
Figure 6.28 Schematic illustrations
- Page 187 and 188:
and the 2D picture in Figure 6.31b)
- Page 189 and 190:
6.5 Conclusion In summary, in this
- Page 191 and 192:
20 L. Capello, T. H. Metzger, M. We
- Page 193 and 194:
egarding B profiles relevant to the
- Page 195 and 196:
Yield (counts per 5 µC) 400 300 20
- Page 197 and 198:
TRIM AU 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 TRIM si
- Page 199 and 200:
a) F profile PAI 3 keV BF2 b) F pro
- Page 201 and 202:
Yield (counts per 5 µC) 20 15 10 5
- Page 203 and 204:
the corresponding PAI sample, yield
- Page 205 and 206:
amorphous matrix, (16) i.e. local c
- Page 207 and 208:
21 M. Anderle, M. Bersani, D. Giube
- Page 209 and 210:
stopped at depths beyond the observ
- Page 211:
the role of each individual element