REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 34 references
Study of electronic band alignment in SiGeSn/GeSn quantum well via internal photoemission effect
T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash
Pith's one-line read The paper reports the first internal-photoemission measurement of band alignment in a SiGeSn/GeSn quantum well, finding type-I alignment with effective barriers of 22 and 50 meV.
desk verdict First experimental band offsets in SiGeSn/GeSn, plausible but the type-I conclusion hinges on a single kink assignment that is not uniquely nailed down. read the letter →
The pith
A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.
The reading
What carries the argument
The central object is the internal-photoemission threshold: the photon energy at which photoexcited carriers surmount a heterojunction barrier, seen as a kink in the quantum yield $Y(h\nu) = A(h\nu - \phi)^P$. The paper locates three such kinks by fitting the 77 K quantum-yield curves and assigns them to well absorption, hole IPE, and barrier absorption. The argument's arithmetic is the identity that the valence-band effective barrier is $\phi_{\mathrm{IPE}} - E_{\mathrm{tr,QW}}$ and the conduction-band effective barrier is $E_{\mathrm{tr,barrier}} - \phi_{\mathrm{IPE}}$, with $E_{\mathrm{tr}}$ fixed by temperature-corrected photoluminescence peaks. The ordering of the kinks is what distinguishes type-I from type-II alignment.
What would settle it
Reverse the bias applied to the device so that only electrons, not holes, can be emitted from the well; if the 0.555 eV kink persists or shifts with bias in a way inconsistent with hole emission, the hole-IPE assignment is wrong. A voltage series showing the threshold moving opposite to the expected hole process would settle the question.
Extended reading notes
Core claim
The paper's central claim is that the Si0.024Ge0.892Sn0.084 / Ge0.882Sn0.118 single quantum well has type-I band alignment, so both the conduction-band minimum and the valence-band maximum sit in the GeSn well. The evidence is the appearance of an internal-photoemission kink at 555 ± 1 meV between the well absorption kink at 485 meV and the barrier absorption kink at 601 meV; the paper argues that in a type-II structure no IPE threshold could appear in that interval because one carrier type would have no barrier to cross. Using photoluminescence to locate the well and barrier transition energies, corrected by $E_{\mathrm{tr}} = E_{\mathrm{PL}} - \tfrac{1}{2}kT$, the paper assigns the 555 meV kink to hole internal photoemission and obtains effective barrier heights of $50 \pm 2$ meV in the valence band and $22 \pm 2$ meV in the conduction band.
Load-bearing premise
The load-bearing assumption is that the 0.555 eV kink in the quantum yield is the hole internal-photoemission threshold; if it is instead a defect-related absorption, a subband transition, or an electron process under the same bias, then the 50 meV hole barrier, the 22 meV electron barrier, and the type-I conclusion all collapse together.
Editorial extensions
If this is right
- The GeSn well confines holes more than twice as strongly as electrons, with effective barriers of 50 and 22 meV, respectively.
- Type-I alignment is confirmed for this composition, so SiGeSn barriers can act as carrier-confinement layers around GeSn wells rather than only as strain layers.
- The extracted barriers are effective values between quantized well levels and barrier band edges, which are the numbers directly relevant to device design.
- At room temperature these barriers shrink further, and the paper notes they fall well short of the roughly 100 meV usually required for laser operation.
Reading between the lines
- If the 555 meV kink really is hole IPE, then the two barrier heights are not independent: both are measured against the same kink, so any mis-assignment of that feature would change both numbers and the type-I conclusion at once.
- A straightforward next experiment would vary the bias polarity to favor electron versus hole emission; the paper's Fig. 5 reports a single bias series, so polarity-dependent threshold shifts would test the hole assignment without new growth.
- Because the PL activation energy (50.7 meV) nearly equals the extracted hole barrier (50 meV), some of the observed PL quenching may be carrier escape over the valence-band barrier rather than purely a defect channel; comparing samples with different barrier heights would separate these contributions.
- Extending the same measurement to a series of Si and Sn compositions would map band offsets across the SiGeSn alloy space, which the paper notes has never been done experimentally.
Editorial analysis
A structured set of objections, weighed in public.
Referee Report
Summary. The manuscript reports internal photoemission (IPE) measurements on a Si0.024Ge0.892Sn0.084/Ge0.882Sn0.118 single quantum well grown pseudomorphically on a GeSn/Ge-buffered Si substrate. The quantum yield as a function of photon energy exhibits three thresholds at 0.485, 0.555, and 0.601 eV, which the authors assign to band-to-band absorption in the GeSn well, hole IPE from the well to the SiGeSn barrier, and band-to-band absorption in the barrier, respectively. Using temperature-dependent photoluminescence to obtain transition energies (with a kT/2 line-shape correction), the authors derive effective barrier heights of 50±2 meV in the valence band and 22±2 meV in the conduction band, and conclude that the structure has type-I band alignment with the hole IPE threshold at 555±1 meV serving as the key evidence. The paper also includes detailed sample characterization by SIMS, XRD, and RSM.
Significance. If the assignments and conclusions are correct, this work provides the first experimental determination of band offsets in the SiGeSn/GeSn heterostructure system, a parameter of direct importance for the design of GeSn-based lasers, photodetectors, and other optoelectronic devices. The study benefits from careful structural characterization, a standard IPE measurement protocol, and an internally consistent sum rule: the extracted barriers (22+50 meV) equal the measured difference in transition energies between barrier and well (72 meV). The quantitative barrier heights, however, rest entirely on the classification of the 0.555 eV kink as hole IPE; if that assignment is wrong, both barrier heights and the type-I conclusion collapse. The paper's 'unambiguous' claim is stronger than the evidence supports, as the authors themselves acknowledge the difficulty of distinguishing band-offset types from quantum yield data alone. The work is potentially important, but the central interpretive step needs additional experimental support before the quantitative conclusions can be accepted.
major comments (3)
- [IPE characterization, Fig. 5(b) and Fig. 6] The assignment of the 0.555 eV kink (feature ❷) to hole internal photoemission is not experimentally established. The manuscript does not specify the bias polarity used in the 1–5 V quantum yield measurements of Fig. 5(b), nor does it present measurements under reversed bias. In IPE, the polarity selects which carrier type (electrons or holes) is emitted over the barrier; without this information, the attribution to holes rather than electrons is unsupported. Furthermore, alternative sources of a photocurrent kink at this energy, such as defect-related absorption, subband transitions within the well, or phonon-assisted absorption, are not experimentally excluded. The authors should report the bias polarity and provide a control experiment (e.g., opposite polarity or a reference sample) that confirms the feature is carrier emission rather than absorption, or they should explicitly temper the assignment.
- [Type-I identification, paragraph beginning 'If the band alignment were to be type-II'] The logical argument that a type-II alignment would place all IPE thresholds above the SiGeSn barrier absorption energy is not correct. In a type-II quantum well, spatially indirect transitions between confined states in the well and barrier can have photon energies below the barrier bandgap, and the carrier confined in the well can undergo IPE at energies below the barrier absorption edge. Therefore, the observation of a kink at 0.555 eV between processes ① and ③ does not uniquely prove type-I alignment. The claim of 'unambiguous' confirmation is further undercut by the authors' own statement in the final paragraph that 'it is very difficult to distinguish each type of band offset based solely on the measured quantum yield.' The authors should either supply additional evidence for the hole-IPE assignment (e.g., bias-polarity dependence of the threshold) or revise the claim to a consistency argument rather than a unique proof.
- [PL line-shape correction, Eq. for I(hν) and E_tr] The derivation of E_tr = E_PL - (1/2)kT assumes a PL line shape I(hν) ∝ (hν - E_tr)^{1/2} exp[-(hν - E_tr)/kT], which is appropriate for direct band-to-band transitions with a parabolic joint density of states. This model is applied to the SiGeSn barrier, whose emission the authors attribute to an indirect transition (PL peak at 580 meV). For indirect transitions, the emission line shape differs and the peak correction may not equal kT/2. Since E_tr,barrier = 577±2 meV enters directly into the electron barrier height (22±2 meV = 577 - 555 meV), the validity of the kT/2 correction for the barrier should be justified, or the sensitivity of the extracted electron barrier to this correction should be quantified.
minor comments (5)
- [Urbach tail paragraph] In the paragraph discussing the Urbach tail, the photon energies are misstated as '0.508 meV', '0.580 meV', and '0.485 meV'; these should be '0.508 eV', '0.580 eV', and '0.485 eV'.
- [References] The reference list contains a duplicate number: [28] is used for both Afanas'ev and Stesmans and for Rowe and Ibach. The references should be renumbered sequentially.
- [Abstract and final paragraph] The order of the barrier heights is inconsistent: the abstract states '22±2 and 50±2 meV for electrons and holes,' while the final paragraph says 'effective barrier heights in VB and CB as 22±2 and 50±2 meV.' The ordering should be aligned with the definitions of CB and VB throughout.
- [Fig. 5(b) caption] The caption lists 'various bias voltages' but does not enumerate them; the figure would be clearer if the specific bias values (1–5 V) were listed in the caption or in the text.
- [Strain values in RSM paragraph] The text states that the GeSn well experiences 'in-plane compressive strain of 8.2% and out-of-plane tensile strain of 6.2%.' For pseudomorphic growth on a GeSn buffer with ~9% Sn, the expected in-plane strain is on the order of -0.4% (based on the lattice mismatch between Ge0.882Sn0.118 and Ge0.91Sn0.09). The values 8.2% and 6.2% appear to be typographical errors, likely 0.82% and 0.62%. These should be corrected, as large strain values would substantially affect the band structure interpretation.
Circularity Check
The 22/50 meV barriers are honest differences of measured spectral features, but the type-I 'confirmation' re-imports a type-I-assuming band diagram to classify the pivotal 0.555 eV kink as hole IPE.
-
other
[Fig. 6 kink ❷ assignment ('To identify the responsible IPE process...') and the type-I confirmation paragraph ('The existence of 0.555 eV threshold between ① and ③ unambiguously confirms the type-I…]
"To identify the responsible IPE process, the band diagram was plotted in Fig. 6 according to device fabrication procedure. The kink at 0.555 eV (labeled as ❷) corresponds to the hole IPE process… The existence of 0.555 eV threshold between ① and ③ unambiguously confirms the type-I band alignment."
The 0.555 eV kink is the sole pivot for both barrier values (VB = 0.555 - 0.505 = 50 meV; CB = 0.577 - 0.555 = 22 meV) and for the type-I verdict. Its classification as 'hole IPE' is justified by Fig. 6, a type-I band diagram 'plotted according to device fabrication procedure' that already encodes the lineup under test (holes confined in the GeSn well, flowing to the SiGeSn barrier). The confirmation then runs the loop backward: the kink between ① and ③ 'unambiguously confirms' type-I only because it was already assumed to be an IPE threshold rather than an optical or defect transition.
full rationale
The quantitative extraction is self-contained: E_tr,QW = 505±2 meV and E_tr,barrier = 577±2 meV follow from measured PL peaks (508 and 580 meV) with an explicit lineshape correction ((1/2)kT = 3.3 meV at 77 K), and the barrier heights are plain differences among three measured quantities (VB = 555−505 = 50 meV; CB = 577−555 = 22 meV). No target value is fed into the extraction, so there is no algebraic or by-construction circularity in the numbers themselves. Self-citations [22]-[25] cover growth and Ohmic-contact characterization and are not load-bearing for the barrier claim; the PL lineshape model cited to own prior work [33] shifts both transition energies by only ~3 meV, within the stated ±2 meV error bars, and is a standard near-edge form. The one genuine weakness is interpretive and mildly circular: the 0.555 eV kink is classified as hole IPE by consulting Fig. 6, which depicts the type-I alignment under test, and that same classification is then presented as 'unambiguous' confirmation of type-I. The paper's own concession that 'it is very difficult to distinguish each type of band offset based solely on the measured quantum yield' underscores that the 22 meV CB barrier and the type-I verdict hinge on an assumption-laden identification rather than an independent threshold measurement. This is an interpretive circularity, not an equation-level equivalence, so the score is low.
Assumptions & free parameters
free parameters (3)
- Quantum yield kink at 0.485 eV =
0.485 eV
- Quantum yield kink at 0.555 eV =
0.555 eV
- Quantum yield kink at 0.601 eV =
0.601 eV
assumptions (6)
- domain assumption Quantum yield follows Y = A(hv - phi)^P with P=3 for electron excitation out of the valence band
- domain assumption PL peak energy converts to optical transition energy as E_tr = E_PL - (1/2)kT
- domain assumption Bias-induced band bending is negligible compared with the band offsets
- domain assumption In type-II alignment, both carrier IPE thresholds would lie above barrier absorption, so a kink between well and barrier absorption implies type-I
- domain assumption The 0.601 eV kink is direct bandgap absorption while the 0.580 eV PL is indirect emission from the same barrier
- standard math Composition determined by Vegard's law and XRD/RSM simulation
Cite this review
Pith. "Pith review of Study of electronic band alignment in SiGeSn/GeSn quantum well via internal photoemission effect." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/VKLRJQOT
@misc{pith2026250606976,
author = {Pith},
title = {Pith review of: Study of electronic band alignment in SiGeSn/GeSn quantum well via internal photoemission effect},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/VKLRJQOT}},
note = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.06976}
}
read the original abstract
SiGeSn-based optoelectronic devices, which operate across a broad infrared wavelength range, have attracted significant attention, particularly heterostructures utilizing quantum wells are widely utilized. In these structures, band alignment type and barrier height are crucial for carrier confinement, making them highly desirable information to obtain. This work leverages the internal photoemission effect to extract effective barrier heights from a Si0.024Ge0.892Sn0.084 / Ge0.882Sn0.118 single quantum well structure, which was pseudomorphically grown on Ge0.9Sn0.1 and Ge buffered Si substrate. The extracted effective barrier heights are approximately 22{plus minus}2 and 50{plus minus}2 meV for electrons and holes, respectively. Moreover, we have identified the type-I band alignment between GeSn well and SiGeSn barrier, as indicated by an internal photoemission threshold of 555 {plus minus} 1 meV.
Figures
Reference graph
Works this paper leans on
-
[28]
Internal photoemission at interfaces of high-κ insulators with semiconductors and metals,
V. V. Afanas’ev and A. Stesmans, “Internal photoemission at interfaces of high-κ insulators with semiconductors and metals,” J. Appl. Phys., vol. 102, no. 8, p. 081301, Oct. 2007, doi: 10.1063/1.2799091
-
[1]
K. P. Homewood and M. A. Lourenço, “The rise of the GeSn laser,” Nat. Photonics, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 78–79, Feb. 2015, doi: 10.1038/nphoton.2015.1
-
[2]
Si–Ge–Sn alloys: From growth to applications,
S. Wirths, D. Buca, and S. Mantl, “Si–Ge–Sn alloys: From growth to applications,” Prog. Cryst. Growth Charact. Mater., vol. 62, no. 1, pp. 1–39, Mar. 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.pcrysgrow.2015.11.001
-
[3]
Monolithic infrared silicon photonics: The rise of (Si)GeSn semiconductors,
O. Moutanabbir et al., “Monolithic infrared silicon photonics: The rise of (Si)GeSn semiconductors,” Appl. Phys. Lett., vol. 118, no. 11, p. 110502, Mar. 2021, doi: 10.1063/5.0043511
-
[4]
Lasing in direct-bandgap GeSn alloy grown on Si,
S. Wirths et al., “Lasing in direct-bandgap GeSn alloy grown on Si,” Nat. Photonics, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 88–92, Feb. 2015, doi: 10.1038/nphoton.2014.321
-
[5]
Group IV Photonics: Driving Integrated Optoelectronics,
R. Soref, D. Buca, and S.-Q. Yu, “Group IV Photonics: Driving Integrated Optoelectronics,” Opt. Photonics News, vol. 27, no. 1, p. 32, Jan. 2016, doi: 10.1364/OPN.27.1.000032
-
[6]
Advances in GeSn alloys for MIR applications,
V. Reboud et al., “Advances in GeSn alloys for MIR applications,” Photonics Nanostructures - Fundam. Appl., vol. 58, p. 101233, Feb. 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.photonics.2024.101233
-
[7]
Direct-bandgap GeSn grown on silicon with 2230 nm photoluminescence,
S. A. Ghetmiri et al., “Direct-bandgap GeSn grown on silicon with 2230 nm photoluminescence,” Appl. Phys. Lett., vol. 105, no. 15, p. 151109, Oct. 2014, doi: 10.1063/1.4898597
Show all 34 references
-
[8]
Advances in SiGeSn technology,
R. Soref, J. Kouvetakis, J. Tolle, J. Menendez, and V. D’Costa, “Advances in SiGeSn technology,” J. Mater. Res., vol. 22, no. 12, pp. 3281–3291, Dec. 2007, doi: 10.1557/JMR.2007.0415
2007
-
[9]
The history and future of semiconductor heterostructures,
Zh. I. Alferov, “The history and future of semiconductor heterostructures,” Semiconductors, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 1–14, Jan. 1998, doi: 10.1134/1.1187350
1998 doi
-
[10]
V. V. Afanasʹev, Internal photoemission spectroscopy: fundamentals and recent advances, 2nd ed. in Elsevier insights. London: Elsevier, 2014
2014
-
[11]
Theory of Internal Photoemission,
J. S. Helman and F. Sánchez-Sinencio, “Theory of Internal Photoemission,” Phys. Rev. B, vol. 7, no. 8, pp. 3702–3706, Apr. 1973, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.7.3702
1973 doi
-
[12]
Band discontinuities at heterojunctions between crystalline and amorphous silicon,
Chris G. Van de Walle, L. H. Yang, "Band discontinuities at heterojunctions between crystalline and amorphous silicon," J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 13(4), 1635-1638 (1995)
1995
-
[13]
SiGe/Si heterojunction internal photoemission long-wavelength infrared detectors fabricated by molecular beam epitaxy,
T. -L. Lin et al., "SiGe/Si heterojunction internal photoemission long-wavelength infrared detectors fabricated by molecular beam epitaxy," IEEE Transactions on Electron Devices, vol. 38, no. 5, pp. 1141-1144, (1991)
1991
-
[14]
Energy band discontinuities in heterojunctions measured by internal photoemission,
M. Heiblum, M. I. Nathan, and M. Eizenberg, “Energy band discontinuities in heterojunctions measured by internal photoemission,” Appl. Phys. Lett., vol. 47, no. 5, pp. 503–505, Sep. 1985, doi: 10.1063/1.96107
1985 doi
-
[15]
Interface measurements of heterojunction band lineups with the Vanderbilt free-electron laser,
C. Coluzza et al., “Interface measurements of heterojunction band lineups with the Vanderbilt free-electron laser,” Phys. Rev. B, vol. 46, no. 19, pp. 12834–12836, Nov. 1992, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.46.12834
1992 doi
-
[16]
Electron Band Alignment at Interfaces of Semiconductors with Insulating Oxides: An Internal Photoemission Study,
V. V. Afanas’ev, “Electron Band Alignment at Interfaces of Semiconductors with Insulating Oxides: An Internal Photoemission Study,” Adv. Condens. Matter Phys., vol. 2014, pp. 1–30, 2014, doi: 10.1155/2014/301302
2014 doi
-
[17]
Physics of Internal Photoemission and Its Infrared Applications in the Low-Energy Limit,
Y. F. Lao and A. G. U. Perera, “Physics of Internal Photoemission and Its Infrared Applications in the Low-Energy Limit,” Adv. Optoelectron., vol. 2016, pp. 1–18, Jan. 2016, doi: 10.1155/2016/1832097
2016 doi
-
[18]
Band Offsets of III–V and II–VI Materials Studied by Temperature-Dependent Internal Photoemission Spectroscopy,
A. G. U. Perera, Y. F. Lao, P. S. Wijewarnasuriya, and S. S. Krishna, “Band Offsets of III–V and II–VI Materials Studied by Temperature-Dependent Internal Photoemission Spectroscopy,” J. Electron. Mater., vol. 45, no. 9, pp. 4626–4630, Sep. 2016, doi: 10.1007/s11664-016-4729-5
2016 doi
-
[19]
Direct-gap Ge/GeSn/Si and GeSn/Ge/Si heterostructures,
R. A. Soref and L. Friedman, “Direct-gap Ge/GeSn/Si and GeSn/Ge/Si heterostructures,” Superlattices Microstruct., vol. 14, no. 2–3, pp. 189–193, Sep. 1993, doi: 10.1006/spmi.1993.1122
1993
-
[20]
Weisbuch and B
C. Weisbuch and B. Vinter, Quantum semiconductor structures: fundamentals and applications. Boston San Diego New York [etc.]: Academic press, 1991
1991
-
[21]
Internal photoemission of electrons and holes from (100)Si into HfO2,
V. V. Afanas’ev, A. Stesmans, F. Chen, X. Shi, and S. A. Campbell, “Internal photoemission of electrons and holes from (100)Si into HfO2,” Appl. Phys. Lett., vol. 81, no. 6, pp. 1053–1055, Aug. 2002, doi: 10.1063/1.1495088
2002 doi
-
[22]
Growth and Characterization of Epitaxial Ge1-xSnx Alloys and Heterostructures Using a Commercial CVD System,
Joe Margetis, Seyed Amir Ghetmiri, Wei Du, Benjamin R Conley, Aboozar Mosleh, Richard Soref, Greg Sun, Lucas Domulevicz, Hameed A Naseem, Shui-Qing Yu, "Growth and Characterization of Epitaxial Ge1-xSnx Alloys and Heterostructures Using a Commercial CVD System,” ECS Trans., vo...
2014
-
[23]
Strain engineering in epitaxial Ge1−xSnx: a path towards low-defect and high Sn-content layers
Joe Margetis, Shui-Qing Yu, Nupur Bhargava, Baohua Li, Wei Du and John Tolle, "Strain engineering in epitaxial Ge1−xSnx: a path towards low-defect and high Sn-content layers", Semicond. Sci. Technol. 32 124006. DOI: 10.1088/1361-6641/aa7fc7
-
[24]
Systematic study of Si-based GeSn light- emitting diodes towards mid-infrared applications,
Yiyin Zhou, Wei Dou, Wei Du, Thach Pham, Seyed Amir Ghetmiri, Sattar Al-Kabi, Aboozar Mosleh, Joe Margetis, John Tolle, Greg Sun, Richard Soref, Baohua Li, Mansour Mortazavi, Hameed Naseem, and Shui-Qing Yu, "Systematic study of Si-based GeSn light- emitting diodes towards mid...
2016
-
[25]
Si-based GeSn photodetectors towards mid- infrared imaging applications,
Huong Tran, Thach Pham, Joe Margetis, Yiyin Zhou, Wei Dou, Perry C. Grant, Joshua M. Grant, Sattar Alkabi, Wei Du, Greg Sun, Richard A. Soref, John Tolle, Baohua Li, Mansour Mortazavi, and Shui-Qing Yu, "Si-based GeSn photodetectors towards mid- infrared imaging applications,"...
2019
-
[26]
Low temperature epitaxy of high-quality Ge buffer using plasma enhancement via UHV-CVD system for photonic device applications,
B. Alharthi et al., “Low temperature epitaxy of high-quality Ge buffer using plasma enhancement via UHV-CVD system for photonic device applications,” Appl. Surf. Sci., vol. 481, pp. 246–254, Jul. 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.apsusc.2019.03.062
2019 doi
-
[27]
Pseudomorphic GeSn/Ge(001) quantum wells: Examining indirect band gap bowing,
A. A. Tonkikh et al., “Pseudomorphic GeSn/Ge(001) quantum wells: Examining indirect band gap bowing,” Appl. Phys. Lett., vol. 103, no. 3, p. 032106, Jul. 2013, doi: 10.1063/1.4813913
2013 doi
-
[29]
Interface barrier energy determination from voltage dependence of photoinjected currents,
R. J. Powell, “Interface barrier energy determination from voltage dependence of photoinjected currents,” Journal of Applied Physics, vol. 41, no. 6, pp. 2424–2432, 1970
1970
-
[30]
Surface and bulk contributions to ultraviolet photoemission spectra of silicon,
J. E. Rowe and H. Ibach, “Surface and bulk contributions to ultraviolet photoemission spectra of silicon,” Physical Review Letters, vol. 32, no. 8, pp. 421–424, 1974
1974
-
[31]
Disorder and the Optical- Absorption Edge of Hydrogenated Amorphous Silicon
G.D. Cody, T. Tiedje, B. Areles, B. Brooks, and Y. Goldstein, "Disorder and the Optical- Absorption Edge of Hydrogenated Amorphous Silicon", Phys. Rev. Lett. 47, 1487 (1982)
1982
-
[32]
Near-Bandgap Infrared Absorption Properties of HgCdTe
Y. Chang, G. Badano, J. Zhao, Y. D. Zhou, R. Ashokan, C. H. Grein & V. Nathan, "Near-Bandgap Infrared Absorption Properties of HgCdTe", J. Electron. Mater. 33, 709-713, (2004)
2004
-
[33]
Photoluminescence investigation of the indirect band gap and shallow impurities in icosahedral B12As2
P. B. Klein; Ugochukwu Nwagwu; J. H. Edgar; J. A. Freitas, Jr., "Photoluminescence investigation of the indirect band gap and shallow impurities in icosahedral B12As2", J. Appl. Phys. 112, 013508 (2012)
2012
-
[34]
Design of a Si-based lattice-matched room- temperature GeSn/GeSiSn multi-quantum-well mid-infrared laser diode,
G. Sun, R. A. Soref, and H. H. Cheng, “Design of a Si-based lattice-matched room- temperature GeSn/GeSiSn multi-quantum-well mid-infrared laser diode,” Opt. Express, vol. 18, no. 19, p. 19957, Sep. 2010, doi: 10.1364/OE.18.019957
2010 doi
Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.