Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

First-principles characterization of native defects and oxygen impurities in GaAs

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Hybrid-functional calculations argue that the arsenic antisite identified with the EL2 center is not the main electron trap in GaAs; oxygen-related defects are the effective traps.

desk verdict Careful HSE defect study that deserves review; the 'AsGa is not a trap' headline rests on a harmonic 1D PES the authors never stress-test. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.07954 v2 pith:DRVWB4VV submitted 2025-06-09 cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Khang Hoang This is my paper
classification cond-mat.mtrl-sci PACS 71.55.Eq61.72.Bb
keywords galliumarsenidenativepointdefectsEL2centerarsenicantisiteoxygenimpuritiesnonradiativecapturecrosssectionhybridfunctionalcalculationscarriertraps
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper argues that a long-standing explanation for poor electrical behavior in gallium arsenide is wrong. Using hybrid-functional calculations, the author reassesses native point defects and oxygen impurities in GaAs and concludes that the isolated arsenic antisite, As$_{\rm Ga}$, long identified with the EL2 center, has a negligible nonradiative electron capture cross section and therefore cannot be the main electron trap in the material. Instead, oxygen-related defects—the quasi-substitutional O$_{\rm As}$ and its complex O$_{\rm As}$-2As$_{\rm Ga}$—are shown to have large capture cross sections and can act as effective traps or recombination centers. If correct, this would refocus defect engineering in GaAs on oxygen control rather than on the antisite, with implications for devices that rely on controlled carrier lifetimes.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by first-principles total-energy calculations using the screened hybrid functional HSE in 216-atom supercells, which reproduce GaAs's band gap, combined with configuration coordinate diagrams and the multiphonon emission theory of nonradiative capture as implemented in the nonrad code. The key computed quantity is the electron capture cross section $\sigma_n$, obtained from harmonic fits to the potential energy surfaces; for As$_{\rm Ga}$ the fit yields a near-infinite capture barrier and hence $\sigma_n \approx 3.5\times10^{-28}$ cm$^2$, while O$_{\rm As}$ and O$_{\rm As}$-2As$_{\rm Ga}$ have small barriers and large electron-phonon coupling, giving cross sections up to $1.4\times10^{-12}$ cm$^2$.

What would settle it

Measure the electron capture cross section of the isolated As$_{\rm Ga}$ antisite in oxygen-free or ultra-pure GaAs, using deep-level transient spectroscopy on samples where oxygen-related centers are demonstrably absent, and compare with the computed $3.5\times10^{-28}$ cm$^2$ at room temperature; a measured value orders of magnitude larger would falsify the conclusion that EL2 is not the main electron trap.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is quantitative: the nonradiative electron capture cross section of the isolated As antisite As$_{\rm Ga}$, the defect identified with EL2, is computed to be about $3.5\times10^{-28}$ cm$^2$ at room temperature, effectively negligible, because the capture barrier is extremely high (effectively infinite in the configuration coordinate model). The same calculations give oxygen-related defects O$_{\rm As}$ and O$_{\rm As}$-2As$_{\rm Ga}$ cross sections as large as $1.4\times10^{-12}$ cm$^2$, within an order of magnitude of experimental values for dominant traps. The author therefore concludes that the experimentally observed electron trapping attributed to EL2 is actually caused by oxygen-related centers that coexist with As$_{\rm Ga}$, and that O$_{\rm As}$-2As$_{\rm Ga}$, not O$_{\rm As}$, is the Ga–O–Ga 'OX' negative-U center seen in experiments.

Load-bearing premise

The paper's central claim rests on the assumption that the potential energy surfaces used to compute capture cross sections are well described by one-dimensional harmonic fits; anharmonicity that could alter the near-zero cross section of As$_{\rm Ga}$ is only partially addressed, for the Ga antisite but not for the As antisite.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • O$_{\rm As}$ and O$_{\rm As}$-2As$_{\rm Ga}$, not As$_{\rm Ga}$, are the effective electron traps or recombination centers, so oxygen content becomes a direct lever on carrier lifetime in GaAs.
  • O$_{\rm As}$-2As$_{\rm Ga}$ is identified as the Ga–O–Ga 'OX' negative-U center, confirming the previously proposed microscopic model; the DLTS-visible process is electron emission from its (0/−) level near $E_c - 0.48$ eV.
  • Multiple oxygen-related centers can coexist in As-rich GaAs, so interpreting experimental oxygen signals requires considering isolated and complexed oxygen together rather than a single center.
  • The computed defect-to-band optical transitions for these centers lie in the near infrared, providing spectral fingerprints that can be used to distinguish the centers experimentally.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If As$_{\rm Ga}$ truly captures electrons this slowly, EL2's known role in making semi-insulating GaAs would come mainly from its deep donor levels pinning the Fermi level, not from recombination; oxygen gettering could then be a powerful knob for controlling carrier lifetimes.
  • The same hybrid-functional plus capture-cross-section methodology applied to other III–V semiconductors might reveal that other canonical 'main trap' assignments are similarly reversed once nonradiative rates are computed explicitly.
  • A direct test of the reassignment: grow GaAs samples with controlled oxygen content (for example, oxygen-isotope doping) and measure the dominant electron trap's cross section; if the trap strength scales with oxygen concentration rather than EL2 density, the paper's conclusion is confirmed.
  • The anharmonicity caveat for As$_{\rm Ga}$ could be resolved by computing the cross section with full multidimensional or anharmonic corrections; until then, the near-zero $\sigma_n$ is the paper's computed claim, not a measured constant.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents a systematic HSE hybrid-functional study of native point defects and oxygen-related defects in GaAs using 216-atom supercells. It reports formation energies, thermodynamic and optical transition levels, structural configurations, and, for selected defects, nonradiative electron capture cross sections computed with the nonrad code. The central claims are: (i) under As-rich conditions the dominant native defects are GaAs, AsGa, and/or VGa, with AsGa and VGa acting as charge-compensating defects; (ii) the isolated AsGa antisite is identified with the EL2 center on the basis of its (2+/+) and (+/0) levels, yet its calculated electron capture cross section is negligible (3.5e-28 cm2) because of a very high capture barrier, so AsGa cannot be the "main electron trap" in GaAs; and (iii) OAs and OAs-2AsGa have large electron capture cross sections, and only OAs-2AsGa, with its Ga-O-Ga structure and negative-U behavior, is identified with the experimentally observed "OX" center.

Significance. If the central claim is correct, the paper challenges a long-standing assignment of EL2 as the dominant nonradiative electron trap in GaAs and redirects attention to unintentional oxygen-related centers as key carrier-capture agents. The study has clear strengths: the HSE mixing parameter is fixed to reproduce only the bulk band gap, so the defect levels, cross sections, and optical peak energies are genuine predictions rather than fitted quantities; the AsGa levels are benchmarked against prior G0W0@HSE calculations; and the multiphonon-capture calculations use a well-established formalism. The predicted optical transitions and DLTS emission rates are falsifiable and should be useful for experimental identification. The practical significance for GaAs device engineering, especially lifetime and recombination control, is substantial.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section III.A and Section III.C] The central claim that isolated AsGa cannot be the main electron trap rests on a single computed quantity, sigma_n = 3.5e-28 cm^2, which is attributed to a "very high electron capture barrier (Delta Eb ~ infinity)". This result is obtained from a one-dimensional harmonic fit of the HSE potential energy surfaces, as the paper explicitly states in Section III.C. The same section acknowledges that the energy curve for GaAs is anharmonic and applies a partial parabolic fit, but no analogous test is reported for AsGa. Given that the defect has a known metastable configuration As*Ga only 0.38 eV higher in energy with a 0.76 eV barrier (Section III.A), the electron-capture branch could be anharmonic or involve a second minimum. If a finite barrier of a few tenths of an eV exists along the true path, sigma_n could increase by many orders of magnitude and the conclusion that AsGa is not a trap would no longer follow. The authors should compute the full one-dimensional PES for the AsGa electron-capture transition (including intermediate configurations beyond the linear-interpolation path) and report the sensitivity of sigma_n to the harmonic approximation.
  2. [Section III.A and Section III.C] The nonradiative capture calculation for AsGa treats only the stable AsGa geometry and does not consider capture through the metastable As*Ga branch, even though the paper itself documents the AsGa-to-As*Ga barrier and energy difference. Because EL2 is known for its metastable and photoquenching behavior, an electron-capture pathway that passes through or terminates in the As*Ga configuration could bypass the near-infinite barrier of the stable branch. The authors should explicitly rule out such a pathway, for example by computing constrained-relaxation or NEB paths in a two-dimensional coordinate that includes the As*Ga displacement, or by justifying with a specific calculation why only the stable-branch geometry contributes to the capture cross section at room temperature.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section III.B] The sentence about O i,tet being "stable in the neural charge state only" contains a typo: "neural" should be "neutral".
  2. [Section II, Eq. (3)] In the expression for the thermal emission rate, the valley degeneracy factor gc and the effective density of states N_c are not defined explicitly. Since these quantities enter the reported emission rates in Fig. S4, the authors should define them or cite the specific expression used.
  3. [Section III.C] The statement that the OAs and OAs-2AsGa capture cross sections are "within an order of magnitude of the range of experimental values for the dominant defect centers" is vague. The authors should identify the specific experimental centers and transitions used for this comparison.
  4. [Figure 4] The AsGa capture barrier Delta Eb ~ infinity is not visible or labeled in the configuration-coordinate diagram. Since this barrier is the reason for the negligible capture cross section, the figure should clearly show that the relevant branches do not cross, or the caption should state this explicitly.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: first-principles HSE calculations produce defect levels and capture cross sections benchmarked against experiment, with only methodological self-citations.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. Defect transition levels (Table I) are computed from formation energies (Eqs. 1–2) with HSE parameters fixed only by the bulk band gap ('These parameters are chosen to reproduce the experimental band gap of GaAs'), not by defect levels or capture cross sections. The AsGa/EL2 assignment and the OAs-2AsGa/OX assignment are tested against independent experimental energies (0.50–0.54 eV and 0.75–0.77 eV above the VBM; DLTS activation 0.55 eV and Hall pinning positions 0.43 or 0.36 eV), so they are genuine benchmarked predictions rather than fits. The nonradiative capture cross sections in Fig. 5 are outputs of the nonrad code (Ref. 78) implementing the first-principles approach of Alkauskas et al. (Ref. 79), with no parameter fitted to the target cross-section values. The paper's self-citations (Refs. 69 and 70) concern methodological practice and do not carry the central claims. The explicit limitation in Section III.C, 'The harmonic approximation is assumed in the fitting of the potential energy surfaces,' with a parabolic patch applied only for GaAs, means the near-zero AsGa cross section rests on a harmonic, one-dimensional configuration-coordinate model and on the resulting statement that the capture barrier is effectively infinite. That is a robustness and correctness risk, not circularity: the result is not equivalent to an input by construction, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. No self-definitional, fitted-input-as-prediction, or self-citation-load-bearing step is present.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are introduced. The only fitted numerical input is the HSE mixing parameter (0.28) chosen to match the bulk band gap. The other assumptions are standard domain assumptions for first-principles defect calculations and multiphonon capture theory.

free parameters (1)
  • HSE Hartree-Fock mixing parameter alpha = 0.28
    Adjusted to reproduce the experimental GaAs band gap (1.52 eV); this affects the position of defect transition levels relative to the band edges.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Density functional theory with the HSE hybrid functional accurately describes defect energetics and transition levels in GaAs.
    The entire defect-formation-energy framework in Section II relies on this; the mixing parameter is set to reproduce the band gap but the functional form is otherwise assumed adequate.
  • domain assumption The one-dimensional configuration coordinate model with harmonic potentials describes nonradiative multiphonon capture.
    Used for all nonradiative capture cross sections (Section III.C, Table II); the paper explicitly states the harmonic approximation is assumed.
  • domain assumption Defect concentrations in equilibrium are governed by formation energies in the dilute limit.
    The identification of dominant native defects under As-rich or Ga-rich conditions in Section III.A assumes thermodynamic equilibrium and non-interacting defects.
  • domain assumption The oxygen chemical potential is limited by the formation of beta-Ga2O3.
    Set in Section II to determine O-related defect formation energies; a different reservoir would shift absolute formation energies but not transition levels.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of First-principles characterization of native defects and oxygen impurities in GaAs." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DRVWB4VV

@misc{pith2026250607954,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: First-principles characterization of native defects and oxygen impurities in GaAs},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DRVWB4VV}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.07954}
}
abstract

We present a systematic investigation of native point defects and oxygen impurities in GaAs using hybrid functional calculations. Defects are characterized by their structural, electronic, and optical properties. Under thermodynamic equilibrium, dominant native defects are Ga antisites (Ga$_{\rm As}$), As antisites (As$_{\rm Ga}$), and/or Ga vacancies ($V_{\rm Ga}$) in which As$_{\rm Ga}$ and $V_{\rm Ga}$ are charge-compensating defects under As-rich conditions. On the basis of the defect transition levels, the isolated As$_{\rm Ga}$ can be identified with the $EL2$ center reported in experiments. The defect, however, has a negligible nonradiative electron capture cross section and thus cannot be the ``main electron trap'' as commonly believed. We find that GaAs can have multiple O-related defect centers, especially when prepared under As-rich conditions. The quasi-substitutional O impurity (O$_{\rm As}$) and its complex with two As$_{\rm Ga}$ defects (O$_{\rm As}$-2As$_{\rm Ga}$) both have a metastable and paramagnetic middle (neutral) charge state; however, only the latter can be identified with the experimentally observed Ga--O--Ga or ``OX'' center. These two defects have large nonradiative electron capture cross sections and can be effective carrier traps or recombination centers, which has important implications for materials design.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.07954 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Formation energies of native defects in GaAs, plotte [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Formation energies of native defect complexes in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Formation energies of O-related defects in GaAs un [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Nonradiative electron capture cross sections (in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Configuration coordinate diagrams for relevant op [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. First-principles identification of optically efficient erbium centers in GaAs

    cond-mat.mtrl-sci 2026-03 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

    First-principles hybrid DFT plus nonradiative capture calculations show ErGa-2OAs is the most efficient trap-assisted recombination center for Er3+ excitation in GaAs and explain doping and Er/O effects.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

88 extracted references · 72 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    del Alamo, Nanometre-scale electronics with III–V compound semiconductors, Nature 479, 317 (2011)

    J. del Alamo, Nanometre-scale electronics with III–V compound semiconductors, Nature 479, 317 (2011)

    2011

  2. [2]

    Krishnamoorthy and D

    A. Krishnamoorthy and D. Miller, Scaling optoelectronic-VLSI circuits into the 21st century: a technology roadmap, IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quantum Electron. 2, 55 (1996)

    1996

  3. [3]

    Yablonovitch, O

    E. Yablonovitch, O. D. Miller, and S. R. Kurtz, The opto- electronic physics that broke the efficiency limit in solar cells, in 2012 38th IEEE Photovoltaic Specialists Confer- ence (2012) pp. 001556–001559

    2012

  4. [4]

    H. J. Queisser and E. E. Haller, Defects in Semiconduc- tors: Some Fatal, Some Vital, Science 281, 945 (1998)

    1998

  5. [5]

    C. P. Dietrich, A. Fiore, M. G. Thompson, M. Kamp, and S. H¨ ofling, GaAs integrated quantum photonics: To- wards compact and multi-functional quantum photonic integrated circuits, Laser Photonics Rev. 10, 870 (2016)

    2016

  6. [6]

    Higashi, M

    R. Higashi, M. Ogawa, J. Tatebayashi, N. Fujioka, D. Timmerman, S. Ichikawa, and Y. Fujiwara, Enhance- ment of Er luminescence in microdisk resonators made of Er,O-codoped GaAs, J. Appl. Phys. 127, 233101 (2020)

    2020

  7. [7]

    Z. Fang, J. Tatebayashi, R. Homi, M. Ogawa, H. Ka- jii, M. Kondow, K. Kitamura, B. Mitchell, S. Ichikawa, and Y. Fujiwara, Enhancement of Er luminescence from bridge-type photonic crystal nanocavities with Er, O-co- doped GaAs, Opt. Continuum 2, 2178 (2023)

    2023

  8. [8]

    Z. Fang, H. Kajii, M. Kondow, Y. Fujiwara, and J. Tate- bayashi, Demonstration of enhanced Er luminescence in nanobeam photonic crystal nanocavities based on Er,O- codoped GaAs, Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 64, 025001 (2025)

    2025

Show all 88 references
  1. [9]

    J. S. Blakemore, Semiconducting and other major prop- erties of gallium arsenide, J. Appl. Phys. 53, R123 (1982)

    1982

  2. [10]

    J. C. Bourgoin, H. J. von Bardeleben, and D. Sti´ evenard , Native defects in gallium arsenide, J. Appl. Phys. 64, R65 (1988)

    1988

  3. [11]

    D. T. J. Hurle, A comprehensive thermodynamic analysis of native point defect and dopant solubilities in gallium arsenide, J. Appl. Phys. 85, 6957 (1999)

    1999

  4. [12]

    Coutinho, V

    J. Coutinho, V. P. Markevich, and A. R. Peaker, Char- acterisation of negative-U defects in semiconductors, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 32, 323001 (2020)

    2020

  5. [13]

    X.-Y. Liu, C. N. Singh, E. R. Kennedy, S. Huang, S. P. Fluckey, C. Matthews, and B. P. Uberuaga, Review of radiation-induced defects in GaAs, J. Appl. Phys. 138, 070701 (2025)

    2025

  6. [14]

    C. H. Henry and D. V. Lang, Nonradiative capture and recombination by multiphonon emission in GaAs and GaP, Phys. Rev. B 15, 989 (1977)

    1977

  7. [15]

    Mitonneau, A

    A. Mitonneau, A. Mircea, G. Martin, and D. Pons, Electron and hole capture cross-sections at deep centers in gallium arsenide, Rev. Phys. Appl. (Paris) 14, 853 (1979)

    1979

  8. [16]

    J. C. Bourgoin and N. D. Angelis, The defect responsi- ble for non-radiative recombination in GaAs materials, Semicond. Sci. Technol. 16, 497 (2001)

    2001

  9. [17]

    Martin, A

    G. Martin, A. Mitonneau, and A. Mircea, Electron traps in bulk and epitaxial GaAs crystals, Electron. Lett. 13, 191 (1977)

    1977

  10. [18]

    E. R. Weber, H. Ennen, U. Kaufmann, J. Windscheif, J. Schneider, and T. Wosinski, Identification of As Ga an- tisites in plastically deformed GaAs, J. Appl. Phys. 53, 6140 (1982). 9 TABLE S1. Stable charge states of defect complexes, their co nstituents, and binding energies ( ...

    1982

  11. [19]

    Lagowski, D

    J. Lagowski, D. G. Lin, T. Chen, M. Skowronski, and H. C. Gatos, Native hole trap in bulk GaAs and its as- sociation with the double-charge state of the arsenic an- tisite defect, Appl. Phys. Lett. 47, 929 (1985)

    1985

  12. [20]

    Omling, P

    P. Omling, P. Silverberg, and L. Samuelson, Identifica- tion of a second energy level of EL2 in n-type GaAs, Phys. Rev. B 38, 3606 (1988)

    1988

  13. [21]

    W. E. Spicer, Z. Liliental-Weber, E. Weber, N. New- man, T. Kendelewicz, R. Cao, C. McCants, P. Mahowald, K. Miyano, and I. Lindau, The advanced unified defect model for Schottky barrier formation, J. Vac. Sci. Tech. B: Microelectron. Proc. Phenom. 6, 1245 (1988)

    1988

  14. [22]

    C. Song, W. Ge, D. Jiang, and C. Hsu, Pair of local vi- bration mode absorption bands related to EL2 defects in semi-insulating GaAs, Appl. Phys. Lett. 50, 1666 (1987)

    1987

  15. [23]

    D. E. Bliss, W. Walukiewicz, I. Ager, J. W., E. E. Haller, K. T. Chan, and S. Tanigawa, Annealing studies of low- temperature-grown GaAs:Be, J. Appl. Phys. 71, 1699 (1992)

    1992

  16. [24]

    X. Liu, A. Prasad, W. M. Chen, A. Kurpiewski, A. Stoschek, Z. Liliental-Weber, and E. R. Weber, Mech- anism responsible for the semi-insulating properties of low-temperature-grown GaAs, Appl. Phys. Lett. 65, 3002 (1994)

    1994

  17. [25]

    Luysberg, H

    M. Luysberg, H. Sohn, A. Prasad, P. Specht, Z. Liliental - Weber, E. R. Weber, J. Gebauer, and R. Krause- Rehberg, Effects of the growth temperature and As/Ga flux ratio on the incorporation of excess As into low tem- perature grown GaAs, J. Appl. Phys. 83, 561 (1998)

    1998

  18. [26]

    Dabrowski and M

    J. Dabrowski and M. Scheffler, Isolated arsenic-antisit e defect in GaAs and the properties of EL2, Phys. Rev. B 40, 10391 (1989)

    1989

  19. [27]

    Pons and J

    D. Pons and J. C. Bourgoin, Irradiation-induced defect s in GaAs, J. Phys. C: Solid Stat. Phys. 18, 3839 (1985)

    1985

  20. [28]

    Taghizadeh, P

    F. Taghizadeh, P. Janse van Rensburg, W. Meyer, and F. Auret, Laplace DLTS study of defects introduced in GaAs during sputter deposition of Au Schottky contacts, Mat. Sci. Semicon. Proc. 152, 107015 (2022)

    2022

  21. [29]

    Zhong, D

    X. Zhong, D. Jiang, W. Ge, and C. Song, Model study of the local vibration center related to EL2 levels in GaAs, Appl. Phys. Lett. 52, 628 (1988)

    1988

  22. [30]

    Schneider, B

    J. Schneider, B. Dischler, H. Seelewind, P. M. Mooney, J. Lagowski, M. Matsui, D. R. Beard, and R. C. Newman, Assessment of oxygen in gallium arsenide by infrared lo- cal vibrational mode spectroscopy, Appl. Phys. Lett. 54, 1442 (1989)

    1989

  23. [31]

    H. C. Alt, Photosensitivity of the 714 and 730 cm −1 ab- sorption bands in semi-insulating GaAs: Evidence for a deep donor involving oxygen, Appl. Phys. Lett. 54, 1445 (1989)

    1989

  24. [32]

    H. C. Alt, Experimental evidence for a negative-U cente r in gallium arsenide related to oxygen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65, 3421 (1990)

    1990

  25. [33]

    C. Song, B. Pajot, and F. Gendron, Local mode spec- troscopy and photo-induced effects of oxygen-related cen- ters in semi-insulating gallium arsenide, J. Appl. Phys. 67, 7307 (1990)

    1990

  26. [34]

    Skowronski, S

    M. Skowronski, S. T. Neild, and R. E. Kremer, Loca- tion of energy levels of oxygen-vacancy complex in GaAs, Appl. Phys. Lett. 57, 902 (1990)

    1990

  27. [35]

    S. T. Neild, M. Skowronski, and J. Lagowski, Signature o f the gallium-oxygen-gallium defect in GaAs by deep level transient spectroscopy measurements, Appl. Phys. Lett. 58, 859 (1991). 10 FIG. S1. Local structures of select native and oxygen-relat ed defects in GaAs: V 3− Ga ...

    1991

  28. [36]

    Skowronski, S

    M. Skowronski, S. T. Neild, and R. E. Kremer, Calibra- tion of the isolated oxygen interstitial localized vibra- tional mode absorption line in GaAs, Appl. Phys. Lett. 58, 1545 (1991)

    1991

  29. [37]

    Skowronski and R

    M. Skowronski and R. E. Kremer, Effects of thermal an- nealing on oxygen related centers in GaAs, J. Appl. Phys. 69, 7825 (1991)

    1991

  30. [38]

    Skowronski, Complexes of oxygen and native defects in GaAs, Phys

    M. Skowronski, Complexes of oxygen and native defects in GaAs, Phys. Rev. B 46, 9476 (1992)

    1992

  31. [39]

    Jordan, M

    M. Jordan, M. Linde, T. Hangleiter, and J. Spaeth, Deep- level defects in high-resistivity GaAs grown by the hor- izontal Bridgman technique, Semicond. Sci. Technol. 7, 11 FIG. S2. Migration barrier for the transition between the stable and metastable defect configurations. 731 (1992)

    1992

  32. [40]

    Linde, J

    M. Linde, J. Spaeth, and H. C. Alt, The paramagnetic charge state of substitutional oxygen in GaAs, Appl. Phys. Lett. 67, 662 (1995)

    1995

  33. [41]

    H. C. Alt, Y. V. Gomeniuk, and U. Kretzer, Charge states and quantitative infrared spectroscopy of electrically ac - tive oxygen centers in gallium arsenide, J. Appl. Phys. 101, 073516 (2007)

    2007

  34. [42]

    Dabrowski and M

    J. Dabrowski and M. Scheffler, Theoretical Evidence for an Optically Inducible Structural Transition of the Iso- lated As Antisite in GaAs: Identification and Explana- tion of EL2?, Phys. Rev. Lett. 60, 2183 (1988)

    1988

  35. [43]

    D. J. Chadi and K. J. Chang, Metastability of the Iso- lated Arsenic-Antisite Defect in GaAs, Phys. Rev. Lett. 60, 2187 (1988)

    1988

  36. [44]

    S. B. Zhang and D. J. Chadi, Cation antisite defects and antisite-interstitial complexes in gallium arsenide, Phy s. Rev. Lett. 64, 1789 (1990)

    1990

  37. [45]

    Mattila and R

    T. Mattila and R. M. Nieminen, Ab initio study of oxygen point defects in GaAs, GaN, and AlN, Phys. Rev. B 54, 16676 (1996)

    1996

  38. [46]

    P¨ oykk¨ o, M

    S. P¨ oykk¨ o, M. J. Puska, and R. M. Nieminen, Ab initio study of fully relaxed divacancies in GaAs, Phys. Rev. B 53, 3813 (1996)

    1996

  39. [47]

    Taguchi and H

    A. Taguchi and H. Kageshima, First-principles investi ga- tion of the oxygen negative- U center in GaAs, Phys. Rev. B 57, R6779 (1998)

    1998

  40. [48]

    Pesola, J

    M. Pesola, J. v. Boehm, V. Sammalkorpi, T. Mattila, and R. M. Nieminen, Microscopic structure of oxygen defects in gallium arsenide, Phys. Rev. B 60, R16267 (1999)

    1999

  41. [49]

    Overhof and J.-M

    H. Overhof and J.-M. Spaeth, Defect identification in th e AsGa family in GaAs, Phys. Rev. B 72, 115205 (2005)

    2005

  42. [50]

    Malouin, F

    M.-A. Malouin, F. El-Mellouhi, and N. Mousseau, Gal- lium self-interstitial relaxation in GaAs: An ab initio characterization, Phys. Rev. B 76, 045211 (2007)

    2007

  43. [51]

    P. A. Schultz and O. Anatole von Lilienfeld, Simple in- trinsic defects in gallium arsenide, Model. Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng. 17, 084007 (2009)

    2009

  44. [52]

    Komsa and A

    H.-P. Komsa and A. Pasquarello, Assessing the accuracy of hybrid functionals in the determination of defect levels : Application to the As antisite in GaAs, Phys. Rev. B 84, 075207 (2011)

    2011

  45. [53]

    Komsa and A

    H.-P. Komsa and A. Pasquarello, Comparison of vacancy and antisite defects in GaAs and InGaAs through hybrid functionals, J. Condens. Matter Phys. 24, 045801 (2012)

    2012

  46. [54]

    Colleoni and A

    D. Colleoni and A. Pasquarello, Amphoteric defects in GaAs leading to Fermi-level pinning: A hybrid functional study, Microelectron. Eng. 109, 50 (2013)

    2013

  47. [55]

    Chen and A

    W. Chen and A. Pasquarello, Accuracy of GW for cal- culating defect energy levels in solids, Phys. Rev. B 96, 020101 (2017)

    2017

  48. [56]

    Colleoni and A

    D. Colleoni and A. Pasquarello, Assignment of Fermi- level pinning and optical transitions to the (As Ga)2-OAs center in oxygen-doped GaAs, Appl. Phys. Lett. 103, 142108 (2013)

    2013

  49. [57]

    Colleoni and A

    D. Colleoni and A. Pasquarello, Oxygen defects in GaAs: A hybrid functional study, Phys. Rev. B 93, 125208 (2016)

    2016

  50. [58]

    A. F. Wright and N. A. Modine, Application of the bounds-analysis approach to arsenic and gallium anti- site defects in gallium arsenide, Phys. Rev. B 91, 014110 (2015)

    2015

  51. [59]

    P. A. Schultz, Discriminating a deep gallium antisite d e- fect from shallow acceptors in GaAs using supercell cal- culations, Phys. Rev. B 93, 125201 (2016)

    2016

  52. [60]

    S. P. Fluckey, C. N. Sterling, B. P. Uberuaga, and X.- Y. Liu, Point defect energetics in gallium arsenide, a comprehensive density functional theory study, Comput. Mater. Sci. 264, 114474 (2026)

    2026

  53. [61]

    Hohenberg and W

    P. Hohenberg and W. Kohn, Inhomogeneous Electron Gas, Phys. Rev. 136, B864 (1964)

    1964

  54. [62]

    Kohn and L

    W. Kohn and L. J. Sham, Self-Consistent Equations In- cluding Exchange and Correlation Effects, Phys. Rev. 140, A1133 (1965)

    1965

  55. [63]

    D. M. Ceperley and B. J. Alder, Ground State of the Electron Gas by a Stochastic Method, Phys. Rev. Lett. 45, 566 (1980)

    1980

  56. [64]

    J. P. Perdew, K. Burke, and M. Ernzerhof, Generalized gradient approximation made simple, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 3865 (1996)

    1996

  57. [65]

    J. P. Perdew, M. Ernzerhof, and K. Burke, Rationale for mixing exact exchange with density functional approxi- mations, J. Chem. Phys. 105, 9982 (1996)

    1996

  58. [66]

    Hedin, New Method for Calculating the One-Particle Green’s Function with Application to the Electron-Gas Problem, Phys

    L. Hedin, New Method for Calculating the One-Particle Green’s Function with Application to the Electron-Gas Problem, Phys. Rev. 139, A796 (1965)

    1965

  59. [67]

    Freysoldt, B

    C. Freysoldt, B. Grabowski, T. Hickel, J. Neugebauer, G. Kresse, A. Janotti, and C. G. Van de Walle, First- principles calculations for point defects in solids, Rev. Mod. Phys. 86, 253 (2014)

    2014

  60. [68]

    J. L. Lyons, A. Alkauskas, A. Janotti, and C. G. Van de Walle, First-principles theory of acceptors in nitride sem i- conductors, phys. status solidi (b) 252, 900 (2015)

    2015

  61. [69]

    Hoang, Tuning the valence and concentration of eu- ropium and luminescence centers in GaN through co- doping and defect association, Phys

    K. Hoang, Tuning the valence and concentration of eu- ropium and luminescence centers in GaN through co- doping and defect association, Phys. Rev. Materials 5, 034601 (2021)

    2021

  62. [70]

    Hoang and M

    K. Hoang and M. D. Johannes, Defect physics in complex energy materials, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 30, 293001 (2018)

    2018

  63. [71]

    J. Heyd, G. E. Scuseria, and M. Ernzerhof, Hybrid func- tionals based on a screened Coulomb potential, J. Chem. Phys. 118, 8207 (2003)

    2003

  64. [72]

    Kresse and D

    G. Kresse and D. Joubert, From ultrasoft pseudopoten- tials to the projector augmented-wave method, Phys. Rev. B 59, 1758 (1999). 12 FIG. S3. Formation energies of (a) isolated native defects, (b) native defect complexes, and (c) O-related defects in Ga As, calculated at midpo...

    1999

  65. [73]

    Kresse and J

    G. Kresse and J. Furthm¨ uller, Efficient iterative schem es for ab initio total-energy calculations using a plane-wave basis set, Phys. Rev. B 54, 11169 (1996)

    1996

  66. [74]

    C. G. Van de Walle and J. Neugebauer, First-principles calculations for defects and impurities: Applications to III-nitrides, J. Appl. Phys. 95, 3851 (2004)

    2004

  67. [75]

    Freysoldt, J

    C. Freysoldt, J. Neugebauer, and C. G. Van de Walle, Fully Ab Initio Finite-Size Corrections for Charged- Defect Supercell Calculations, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 016402 (2009)

    2009

  68. [76]

    Freysoldt, J

    C. Freysoldt, J. Neugebauer, and C. G. Van de Walle, Electrostatic interactions between charged defects in su- percells, phys. status solidi (b) 248, 1067 (2011)

    2011

  69. [77]

    D. D. Wagman, W. H. Evans, V. B. Parker, R. H. Schumm, I. Halow, S. M. Bailey, K. L. Churney, and R. L. Nutall, The NBS tables of chemical thermodynamic properties, J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data 11 (Suppl. 2) , 1 (1982)

    1982

  70. [78]

    M. E. Turiansky, A. Alkauskas, M. Engel, G. Kresse, D. Wickramaratne, J.-X. Shen, C. E. Dreyer, and C. G. Van de Walle, Nonrad: Computing nonradiative capture coefficients from first principles, Comput. Phys. Com- mun. 267, 108056 (2021)

    2021

  71. [79]

    Alkauskas, Q

    A. Alkauskas, Q. Yan, and C. G. Van de Walle, First- principles theory of nonradiative carrier capture via mul- tiphonon emission, Phys. Rev. B 90, 075202 (2014)

    2014

  72. [80]

    V. Wang, N. Xu, J.-C. Liu, G. Tang, and W.-T. Geng, V ASPKIT: A user-friendly interface facilitating high- throughput computing and analysis using V ASP code, Comput. Phys. Commun. 267, 108033 (2021)

    2021

  73. [81]

    D. V. Lang, Deep-level transient spectroscopy: A new method to characterize traps in semiconductors, J. Appl. Phys. 45, 3023 (1974)

    1974

  74. [82]

    Wickramaratne, C

    D. Wickramaratne, C. E. Dreyer, B. Monserrat, J.-X. Shen, J. L. Lyons, A. Alkauskas, and C. G. Van de Walle, Defect identification based on first-principles calculatio ns for deep level transient spectroscopy, Appl. Phys. Lett. 113, 192106 (2018)

    2018

  75. [83]

    Henkelman, B

    G. Henkelman, B. P. Uberuaga, and H. J´ onsson, A climb- ing image nudged elastic band method for finding saddle points and minimum energy paths, J. Chem. Phys. 113, 9901 (2000)

    2000

  76. [84]

    Tersoff, Reference levels for heterojunctions and Sc hot- tky barriers, Phys

    J. Tersoff, Reference levels for heterojunctions and Sc hot- tky barriers, Phys. Rev. Lett. 56, 675 (1986)

    1986

  77. [85]

    Walukiewicz, Mechanism of Schottky barrier forma- tion: The role of amphoteric native defects, J

    W. Walukiewicz, Mechanism of Schottky barrier forma- tion: The role of amphoteric native defects, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B: Microelectron. Process. Phenom. 5, 1062 (1987)

    1987

  78. [86]

    Mitonneau and A

    A. Mitonneau and A. Mircea, Auger de-excitation of a metastable state in GaAs, Solid Stat. Commun. 30, 157 (1979)

    1979

  79. [87]

    Vincent, D

    G. Vincent, D. Bois, and A. Chantre, Photoelectric mem- ory effect in GaAs, J. Appl. Phys. 53, 3643 (1982)

    1982

  80. [88]

    Bracht and S

    H. Bracht and S. Brotzmann, Zinc diffusion in gallium arsenide and the properties of gallium interstitials, Phys . Rev. B 71, 115216 (2005)

    2005

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.