Premium
Observation of the Stacking Faults in In 0.53 Ga 0.47 As by Electron Channeling Contrast Imaging
Author(s) -
Hsu Po-Chun Brent,
Han Han,
Simoen Eddy,
Merckling Clement,
Eneman Geert,
Mols Yves,
Collaert Nadine,
Heyns Marc
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
physica status solidi (a)
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.532
H-Index - 104
eISSN - 1862-6319
pISSN - 1862-6300
DOI - 10.1002/pssa.201900293
Subject(s) - stacking , transmission electron microscopy , nucleation , diffraction , crystallography , materials science , stacking fault , condensed matter physics , electron microscope , line (geometry) , surface (topology) , electron diffraction , contrast (vision) , homogeneous , burgers vector , electron , image contrast , optics , geometry , physics , chemistry , nuclear magnetic resonance , nanotechnology , mathematics , quantum mechanics , thermodynamics
The observation and interpretation of Frank stacking faults, Shockley stacking faults, Lomer dislocations, and 60° misfit dislocations, which have similar line shapes in the (001) In 0.53 Ga 0.47 As crystalline surface, are performed with the electron channeling contrast imaging (ECCI) technique. To minimize the backscattered electron (BSE) contrast that resulted from the surface morphology, a relatively flat region is first selected and compared with an atomic force microscopy (AFM) image and then, subsequently, examining ECCI with transmission electron microscopy (TEM)‐like invisibility criteria. By orthogonally choosing the diffraction vector g between (220) and (2‐20), misfit dislocations seem to be always visible but partially faint in the g parallel to the line direction on the surface. With respect to the image contrast, Frank stacking faults and Lomer dislocations are likely to be completely invisible for parallel g . The criteria are further confirmed by cross‐sectional TEM analysis, which shows a preferred homogeneous surface nucleation.