ACS Publications. Most Trusted. Most Cited. Most Read
My Activity
CONTENT TYPES

Figure 1Loading Img
RETURN TO ISSUEPREVFunctional Inorganic...Functional Inorganic Materials and DevicesNEXT

Indium Gallium Oxide Alloys: Electronic Structure, Optical Gap, Surface Space Charge, and Chemical Trends within Common-Cation Semiconductors

Cite this: ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2021, 13, 2, 2807–2819
Publication Date (Web):January 11, 2021
https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.0c16021

Copyright © 2021 American Chemical Society. This publication is licensed under

CC-BY 4.0.
  • Open Access

Article Views

8692

Altmetric

-

Citations

LEARN ABOUT THESE METRICS
PDF (5 MB)
Supporting Info (1)»

Abstract

The electronic and optical properties of (InxGa1–x)2O3 alloys are highly tunable, giving rise to a myriad of applications including transparent conductors, transparent electronics, and solar-blind ultraviolet photodetectors. Here, we investigate these properties for a high quality pulsed laser deposited film which possesses a lateral cation composition gradient (0.01 ≤ x ≤ 0.82) and three crystallographic phases (monoclinic, hexagonal, and bixbyite). The optical gaps over this composition range are determined, and only a weak optical gap bowing is found (b = 0.36 eV). The valence band edge evolution along with the change in the fundamental band gap over the composition gradient enables the surface space-charge properties to be probed. This is an important property when considering metal contact formation and heterojunctions for devices. A transition from surface electron accumulation to depletion occurs at x ∼ 0.35 as the film goes from the bixbyite In2O3 phase to the monoclinic β-Ga2O3 phase. The electronic structure of the different phases is investigated by using density functional theory calculations and compared to the valence band X-ray photoemission spectra. Finally, the properties of these alloys, such as the n-type dopability of In2O3 and use of Ga2O3 as a solar-blind UV detector, are understood with respect to other common-cation compound semiconductors in terms of simple chemical trends of the band edge positions and the hydrostatic volume deformation potential.

This publication is licensed under

CC-BY 4.0.
  • cc licence
  • by licence

1. Introduction

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

Indium oxide (In2O3) is the material of choice (most often doped with Sn) for applications requiring transparent conductive electrodes because of its propensity for n-type dopability, providing great electrical performance, and its large energy gap (∼2.9 eV fundamental band gap and ∼3.7 eV for the first dipole-allowed transition (1)), giving high optical transparency. (2) In contrast, β-gallium oxide (β-Ga2O3) is a rapidly emerging semiconductor material, and its fundamental properties have been relatively less explored in comparison. With a high breakdown voltage and very large optical gap (∼4.8 eV), β-Ga2O3 is a promising candidate for applications in high-power electronic devices and solar-blind UV detectors. (3) Indium gallium oxide alloys have generated much research interest in the past, often in the amorphous state used for thin film transistors. (4−7)
Favorable energy alignment when forming heterojunctions and alloys is imperative for optimal device performance. Hence, careful engineering of the optical gap and surface electronic properties of In2O3 and β-Ga2O3 would bring a multitude of new potential applications. Fortunately, alloys formed from In2O3 and β-Ga2O3 possess the potential for such desirable properties and tunability due to the large band gap disparity and different surface space-charge behavior. The potential for band gap tailoring as well as control of the surface space-charge is therefore a very exciting prospect for indium gallium oxide ((InxGa1–x)2O3) alloys. However, In2O3 and β-Ga2O3 possess very different crystal structures as presented in Figure 1. β-Ga2O3 has a monoclinic structure with two inequivalent Ga sites: a distorted tetrahedral site and a distorted octahedral site (Figure 1a). In2O3 has a cubic (bixbyite) unit cell also with two inequivalent cation sites: a distorted and a symmetric octahedron (Figure 1c). In addition, an intermediate hexagonal InGaO3 phase has been reported, which has a symmetric In site and a trigonal-bipyramidal Ga site (Figure 1b). (8−10) It is not yet well explored how these different structures affect the surface electronic properties of these materials. This fundamental understanding is of great importance for the development of new electronic devices and heterostructures. Recent developments in deposition methods and combinatorial material science (materials possessing a composition gradient) (8) give us the ability to quickly and rigorously determine the properties of many new material compositions using one film.

Figure 1

Figure 1. Unit cells of (a) monoclinic β-Ga2O3, (b) hexagonal phase InGaO3, and (c) bixbyite In2O3. Ga atoms are shown in green, In atoms in purple, and O atoms in red. For (a) and (c), the inequivalent cation sites are shown with different color octahedra.

In this study, we employ the recent advances in high quality combinatorial growth methods with the rapid development in combinatorial measurement to fully investigate the electronic structure and behavior of (InxGa1–x)2O3 alloys. We use high-resolution scanning X-ray photoemission spectroscopy (XPS) as well as state-of-the-art first-principles calculations to determine the electronic structure of (InxGa1–x)2O3 combinatorial films over nearly the whole composition range (0.01 < x < 0.82). This combined with optical measurements helps us to understand the compositional dependence of the Fermi level with respect to the band edges at the surface of (InxGa1–x)2O3. We explore the surface space-charge transition from electron accumulation in In2O3 to depletion in β-Ga2O3, a property that has implications for the incorporation of these materials in devices in the future. We compare density functional theory (DFT) calculated density-of-states (DOS) for the different phases looking at the constituent orbital contributions and also compare this to the XPS valence band spectra and occupied semicore d levels. From this we observe indicators of p–d repulsion which affects the position of the VBM as well as s–d hybridization in the semicore levels which is associated with materials with similar energy s and d levels and occupied cation d levels. Looking at these orbital contributions, as well as knowledge of the volume deformation potential (how the material’s band gap varies with changing volume), allows us to fully explore the chemical trends of In2O3 and β-Ga2O3. This explains why In2O3 is extremely n-type dopable and why β-Ga2O3 has an extremely large band gap, even for an oxide semiconductor.

2. Methods

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

2.1. Experimental Details

A continuous composition spread (CCS) (InxGa1–x)2O3 film was grown on a 51 mm diameter c-plane sapphire wafer via pulsed laser deposition (PLD) by using a 2-fold azimuthally segmented target for ablation. SiO2 (0.1 wt %) was mixed with the In2O3 and Ga2O3 source powders prior to target fabrication to achieve sufficient conductivity via Si n-type doping to avoid charging when performing XPS measurements. The growth temperature and oxygen background pressure were 650 °C and 3 × 10–4 mbar, respectively. Further information about the deposition process is given by von Wenckstern et al. (8) A 4 mm wide, 51 mm long strip of the wafer with the full composition gradient across it was cut, and all subsequent measurements were performed on this strip. The films’ surface roughness is not assessed here but has been determined previously for this system deposited in the same way. (11) Despite an increase in surface roughness when the cubic bixbyite phase is reached, the films should have sufficiently low surface roughness required for device applications including heterostructure-based devices.
We determined the spatial distribution of In, Ga, and Si content throughout the film by energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX) using an FEI NovaLab 200 equipped with an Ametek EDX detector. The spatially resolved X-ray diffraction patterns (XRD) from the film were recorded by using a PANalytical X’pert PRO MRD X-ray diffractometer equipped with a PIXcel3d detector operating in one-dimensional scanning mode with a monochromated Cu Kα source. The XPS measurements were performed by using a Thermo Scientific K-Alpha instrument with a monochromated microfocused Al Kα X-ray source (1486.6 eV). These measurements were performed under ultrahigh vacuum (UHV) conditions (<10–9 mbar). The scans were measured by focusing the beam width to 400 μm spot size on areas of the film with the film being translated by 1 mm between each measurement. An analyzer pass energy of 50 eV was used, giving a spectrometer resolution of 0.65 eV, enabling peak positions to be determined to within ±0.1 eV. Sample charging was corrected by a dual beam charge compensation system. Optical transmittance determination was performed by using a Shimadzu UV–vis–IR 3700 spectrophotometer with an integrating sphere detector which employs a photomultiplier detector to reach energies up to 6.5 eV. All measurements were performed at room temperature.

2.2. Computational Details

The theoretical calculations were performed by using the HSE06 screened hybrid functional (12) and projector augmented wave (PAW) approach (13) as implemented in the VASP code. (14) We include semicore 3d electrons of Ga and 4d electrons of In as explicit valence states and set the fraction of screened Hartree–Fock exchange to 32% for β-Ga2O3 and InGaO3 and to 28% for In2O3 (to better match the experimental band gaps). All unit cell parameters were optimized by using a plane-wave cutoff of 520 eV, and integrations over the Brillouin zone were performed by using a 6 × 6 × 6 Γ-centered grid of Monkhorst–Pack special k-points for Ga2O3, a 10 × 10 × 4 grid for InGaO3, and a 4 × 4 × 4 grid for In2O3. Densities of states were evaluated by using the relaxed geometries and the tetrahedron method with Blöchl corrections (15) and included scalar-relativistic effects for the In-containing compounds.
For β-Ga2O3, this choice yields a direct band gap of 4.85 eV and optimal lattice constants of 12.21, 3.03, and 5.79 Å for the a, b, and c cell parameters, respectively, in excellent agreement with experimental values. (16−18) Our optimized lattice constants for the hexagonal InGaO3 phase were 3.31 and 12.03 Å for the a and c values, with a calculated direct band gap of 4.13 eV at the Γ-point. The indirect band gap was found to be lower, at 3.91 eV, with the valence band maximum falling nearly midway between the Γ- and M-points in the Brillouin zone. For cubic bixbyite In2O3, our optimized lattice constant was 10.12 Å, with a calculated direct band gap of 2.86 eV at the Γ-point.

3. Results and Discussion

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

3.1. Structure and Composition

Figure 2a shows a total of 45 single 2θ–ω XRD patterns that have been tessellated to form a false-color plot, with lateral distance across the film on the y-axis and 2θ on the x-axis. Solid black lines have been superimposed on the pattern at around ∼6, ∼9, and ∼40 mm to indicate the region of mainly the bixbyite phase (z ≤ 7 mm), the onset of the InGaO3 hexagonal (mixed) phase (∼7–12 mm), and the region of mostly monoclinic phase up until the end of the measurement region (∼50 mm). Figures 2b–d show single patterns corresponding to the top, middle, and bottom solid lines. Figure 2b shows that the β-Ga2O3 phase is (201) oriented. (8,9,19) This holds true for the majority of the film. Figure 2d shows that the In2O3 dominated region of the film grows with (111) orientation, although a small peak just to the left of the 222 peak (∼29°) is also visible which originates from the 0004 reflection from the hexagonal InGaO3 phase, consistent with Figure 2c. (8−10,19) In both plots we also see the 006 and 00 12 peaks due to the sapphire substrate, which have been left unlabeled. It is clear the (InxGa1–x)2O3 material is crystalline across the whole film (and so the whole composition range).

Figure 2

Figure 2. (a) False color representation of wide-angle 2θ–ω XRD patterns, taken at ∼1 mm intervals (55 in total) across the compositionally graded strip in the direction highlighted by a black arrow in Figure 3. Black horizontal lines indicate the point in the film corresponding to the monoclinic phase (top line), the onset of the hexagonal phase (middle line), and the onset of the bixbyite phase (bottom line). (b), (c), and (d) show individual diffraction patterns taken at the horizontal lines at 40, 9, and 6 mm, showing primarily (b) the monoclinic β-Ga2O3 phase, (c) the hexagonal InGaO3 (II), and (d) the bixbyite In2O3 phase, respectively. A small peak corresponding to the 0004 peak of the hexagonal (InxGa1–x)2O3 phase can be seen at ∼29° in (d). Note the intensity scale in (b)–(d) is logarithmic.

We can directly quantify the spatial distribution of Ga, In, and Si content of the film using EDX and correlate these data with the XRD results by taking measurements at the same positions in the film, demonstrating the power of the combinatorial approach. Figure 3a displays an EDX line scan from 3 to 49 mm across the film. The Si content in the film varies minimally, and it is ∼0.6 at. % across the whole composition range.

Figure 3

Figure 3. (a) EDX line scan of Ga and In content along the film. Black dashed lines represent positions of different crystallographic phases (bixbyite to mixed bixbyite–hexagonal–monoclinic to monoclinic). (b) EDX false color map of In content in the as deposited (InxGa1–x)2O3 film (51 mm diameter), the black arrow displaying the position where the line scan was taken, and a 4 mm wide strip was cut for further experiments.

There exists a mirror relationship between Ga and In content from z = 0 to z = 46 mm; that is, as the Ga content increases, the In content decreases by the same amount. This reflects the substitution of Ga for In atoms in the unit cell. Dashed black lines are used to indicate the position in the film where a phase transition occurs in the XRD pattern presented in Figure 2. Between z = 0 and z = 5 mm, the In (Ga) content slowly decreases (increases). Past z = 5 mm, there is a rapid reduction (increase) in In (Ga) content. This is a common feature for combinatorial (In,Ga)2O3 thin films (9,19,20) deposited under oxygen-poor conditions, as detailed in ref (21). The hexagonal InGaO3 phase is seen in the XRD regardless of the substrate chosen. Between z = 5 mm and z = 10 mm, there is a steep decrease (increase) in In (Ga) content which coincides with the phase change from bixbyite to hexagonal (mixed) phase. The atomic concentration of the mixed hexagonal phase is around ∼40–60 at. %, which correlates well with the expected ratios of In to Ga in the hexagonal InGaO3 structure (roughly one-to-one In-to-Ga ratio). Beyond z = 10 mm, the rate of change of In/Ga content across the film lessens, while the film takes on the monoclinic β-Ga2O3 structure. The false-color plot of In content seen in Figure 3b shows this well with a very gradual growth of In content from right to left, until around a third of the distance along the film, when the In content increases rapidly. We also see the great control of In content over the film from the CCS PLD deposition method. The In content varies horizontally across the film, but there is negligible variation vertically in the narrow strip of material investigated by using photoemission spectroscopy.

3.2. Valence Band X-ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy (XPS)

XPS is an extremely powerful tool for probing the electronic structure of materials. It is made even more informative when used as a combinatorial characterization method. Figure 4 shows the XPS valence band (VB) spectra of the material, with the leading edge enlarged in the right-hand panel. The topmost data set, which is colored in red, is taken from the Ga-rich end of the film, with subsequent spectra fading to black as more In content is incorporated. This is supported by the XPS peak intensities in Figure S1 where the Ga 2p peaks slowly diminish in intensity, while the In 3d intensity grows relatively moving down the plot. A very clear change in shape of the valence band can be seen in Figure 4, going from the broad β-Ga2O3 valence spectra to the narrower In2O3 spectra. This directly reflects the changes in structure seen in Figure 2. There is also a larger valence band maximum (VBM) to Fermi level (EF) separation for β-Ga2O3 than for In2O3 (ref (22)) as is clearly seen in Figure 4, as the VBM slowly moves from left to right as the In content increases.

Figure 4

Figure 4. High-resolution XPS plots of the valence band of (InxGa1–x)2O3 film. A total of 46 spectra were recorded across the film at 1 mm intervals, matching the EDX measurement in Figure 3. The spectra recorded from the Ga-rich end of the film are at the top, with increasing In content down the plot.

The VBM position from each spectrum could be estimated by a linear extrapolation method to the leading edge of the valence spectra. However, because of the effects of instrumental broadening of the spectra, this is not an accurate method for determining the VBM position, especially for systems with a very high DOS at the VBM such as the flat bands of In2O3 and β-Ga2O3. Instead, it is best practice to fit DFT-calculated valence spectra to the data and determine the energy distance from zero. This particular case is complicated further by the fact that we have many phases contributing to our spectra, making true calculated representation of the spectra very difficult (many calculations would be required). Instead, we acknowledge an ∼0.6 eV shift determined here and elsewhere from XPS of single-phase In2O3 (23) and β-Ga2O3 (24) and perform a rigid 0.6 eV shift to the linearly extrapolated edges to higher binding energy.
Figure 5 shows the VBM to EF separation as a function of EDX In content. Also shown are dashed lines corresponding to the In contents where phase transitions are seen. There is a slow decrease in the VBM to EF separation from ∼4.3 eV on the low In(x) content end to around ∼4 eV at In(x) ∼ 0.5, followed by a large decrease to ∼3.5 eV when the bixbyite phase is reached. This reflects that β-Ga2O3 has a much larger band gap than In2O3. This would indicate a valence band offset of around 0.8 eV between Ga2O3 and In2O3 with respect to EF. Interestingly, the hexagonal (mixed) phase is much closer in energy to the monoclinic β-Ga2O3, possibly because its atomic coordination is closer to that of β-Ga2O3 than In2O3.

Figure 5

Figure 5. Energy positions of the VBM from XPS referenced to EF as a function of EDX indium content. Black dashed lines separate the region of different crystallographic phases.

A similar qualitative trend in the VBM to Fermi level separation as a function of composition has very recently been reported for combinatorial (InxGa1–x)2O3 films grown on both yttria-stabilized cubic zirconia and c-plane sapphire. (25) However, the values differ due to the use of raw values from linear extrapolation of the leading edge of the valence band.

3.3. Surface Space Charge

The surface of In2O3 has previously been shown to display electron accumulation (23,26) while β-Ga2O3 displays electron depletion. (24,27,28) This is vital information for surface and interface sensitive devices such as chemical sensors and heterostructures. Naturally then we ask how the surface space charge evolves over the alloy composition range, with the vision of tuning the surface electronic properties to specific device needs. To determine this, we find the barrier height ΦB (analogous to the Schottky barrier height of a metal/semiconductor contact), which is given as the separation between the conduction band minimum (CBM) and EF. Optical transmission measurements and derived absorption spectra (see Figure S4) were used to determine the bulk VBM to EF separation (once the dipole-forbidden transition from the topmost valence band in In2O3-like alloys is accounted for) at different composition points of the material. Figure 6 displays the optical gaps extracted from transmission measurements. The intervals between measurements across the film were greater than for the XPS results, but the positions were again translated into indium content via the EDX results. Optical gaps for end-point compositions (In(x) = 0 and In(x) = 1) were also added to the plot from the literature. (1,24,29) An optical gap bowing curve is fitted to the data and shown in Figure 6.

Figure 6

Figure 6. Optical gap vs indium content as determined via transmission spectroscopy. A fit to the data points was performed by using the bowing equation, (30,31) with the fitted parameters displayed in the equation. Importantly, for x > 0.6, because of transitions from the topmost valence bands being dipole forbidden, these values do not correspond to the fundamental band gap.

The optical gap bowing is described by
(1)
where b is the bowing parameter. (30,31)Equation 1 was used to fit the data, resulting in a bowing parameter of b = 0.36 eV. The optical gaps of the end-point binary compounds determined from the fit are found to be 3.62 eV for In2O3 and 4.71 eV for Ga2O3. Equation 1 is normally used to describe fundamental band gap bowing in ternary alloys where no phase change occurs, but we apply it here to the optical gaps that exhibit a smooth variation across the composition range. There is quite a widespread of reported band gaps for Ga2O3 in the literature, often ranging from ∼4.6 to 4.9 eV3 or even higher. We believe that our results are consistent with other extensive studies of the optical properties of Ga2O3; see for example ref (20). The fundamental band gap of In2O3 can be estimated from Figure 6 by accounting for the dipole-forbidden transitions from the topmost valence bands on the In-rich side of the data set (x > 0.6). The bulk VBM to EF separation is very close to the band gap of the material (see for example ref (20) and references therein), and so we make this approximation here. This, coupled with our XPS determined surface VBM positions relative to EF (ξ), allows us to determine ΦB = Eg – ξ. When ΦB is positive (negative), this corresponds to the EF lying below (above) the CBM at the surface.
Figure 7a shows Eg and ΦB as a function of In(x) alloy composition, where Eg is accompanied by data from the literature to better visualize the trend. (32−36) The highest VB to lowest CB transition in In2O3 is known to have minimal dipole intensity, (1) and so to achieve the real Eg value, an energy of 0.8 eV was subtracted from the measured absorption onsets (as this is the energy difference between the first allowed transition and dipole-forbidden transitions (1)). Here, we set an In content of x = 0.6 for the phase transition from bixbyite to hexagonal (mixed) phase, as no data points exist in this region. This estimated value is informed by previous literature (31) as well as the data presented in Figures 2 and 3. The band gap smoothly decreases from ∼4.7 eV at low In content and abruptly alters when the phase changes to bixbyite before decreasing further to ∼2.9 eV at high In content. ΦB is plotted below Eg in Figure 5a and displays a very similar trend to the band gap. For the In-poor compositions, a positive value of ΦB is observed corresponding to upward band bending (schematically shown in Figure 7b) and surface electron depletion. ΦB then gradually decreases and is nearly zero at x = 0.35, indicating a flat bands regime with the VBM to Fermi level separation being constant as a function of depth. This then switches to downward band bending and electron accumulation in the In-rich composition range (Figure 7c). A guide to the eye is plotted in green through ΦB, with a discontinuity at the composition where the phase changes abruptly. In the context of electronic devices, the electron accumulation layer in bixybyite (InxGa1–x)2O3 helps explain the relative difficulty in fabricating devices such as normally off transistors and Schottky diodes (37) compared to monoclinic (InxGa1–x)2O3, which displays upward band bending. Conversely, it is rather challenging to obtain Ohmic contacts with low specific contact resistance with monoclinic (InxGa1–x)2O3 unlike for bixbiyte (InxGa1–x)2O3. Additionally, the surface electron accumulation layer of bixbiyte (InxGa1–x)2O3 may also be useful for gas sensing applications, (38) whereas the surface depletion layer of monoclinic (InxGa1–x)2O3 is beneficial for photodetector applications.

Figure 7

Figure 7. (a) Variation of band gap (Eg) and barrier height (ΦB) at the (InxGa1–x)2O3 surface with respect to varying indium content (x). Energy gaps were determined in this study by transmission measurements (○) as well as values being taken from the literature (□, Oshima; (32) ⬡, Regoutz; (33) △, Wenckstern; (34) ▽, Yang; (35) ◇, Zhang; (36) ▷, Swallow (24)). Barrier heights (ΦB) are derived by subtracting the surface Fermi level to VBM (ξ) from the band gap (ΦB = Eg – ξ). The surface space-charge variation is schematically represented in (b) and (c) with positive ΦB indicating electron depletion and upward band bending (b), while negative ΦB indicated electron accumulation and downward band bending (c).

von Wenckstern et al. recently investigated the Schottky barrier characteristics of PLD combinatorial (InxGa1–x)2O3 films with PtOδ contacts via current–voltage measurements. (8) Their results are in excellent agreement with our findings, showing that the β-Ga2O3 phase has a higher Schottky barrier height which decreases as In content is increased. They find the barrier height difference between the two end phases to be ΔΦSB ∼ 0.8 eV, reasonably close to the difference we see here of ΔΦB ∼ 1.2 eV. They also find that the Ga-rich phase has the best Schottky diode response (ideality factor) while the In-rich has the lowest series resistance. The band bending diagrams for the two binary materials are shown in Figure 7b,c. Interestingly, both InxGa1–xN (ref (39)) and InxGa1–xAs (refs (40and41)) also display an electron accumulation to depletion transition at the surface with increasing Ga content. Those cases are simpler as no phase transition occurs across the composition range. However, the same trend is observed with Ga compounds displaying a larger band gap and higher, positive ΦB and surface electron depletion, while In compounds have a smaller band gap with a negative ΦB and surface electron accumulation. This will be discussed further in section 4.

3.4. Electronic Structure

To further explore the effects of the changing cation composition in (InxGa1–x)2O3 alloys, we focus on the electronic structure of the stoichiometric materials In2O3, InGaO3, and Ga2O3, utilizing DFT calculated DOS for the three materials. The partial and total density of states are displayed for Ga2O3, InGaO3, and In2O3 in Figure 8a–f. These plots show the orbital contributions (without any cross-section corrections) and include a small amount of Gaussian broadening (0.1 eV full width at half-maximum) to assist in visualizing the data. For the calculated spectra, the zero of the binding energy scale is set to the VBM.

Figure 8

Figure 8. Uncorrected partial (colored lines) and total (black lines) DOS for (a) β-Ga2O3, (b) hexagonal InGaO3, and (c) bixbyite In2O3, with the insets showing an expanded region of the CBM. The valence band regions are expanded in (d)–(f). For InGaO3 in (e), orbitals with strong overlap are shaded to aid in visualization.

The VBs of β-Ga2O3 (Figure 8a,d) and In2O3 (Figure 8c,f) are primarily composed of three features. The bottom of the VB, in each case, consists of O 2p mixed with Ga 4s/In 5s, while the middle of the VB is dominated by O 2p, with some contribution from Ga 4p/In 5p states. Finally, the top of the VB is heavily dominated by O 2p, with a small contribution from occupied Ga 3d/In 4d orbitals, indicative of p–d repulsion in these materials. (42) The p–d repulsion is symmetry-forbidden at Γ in octahedral symmetry complexes, which forces the VBM to occur away from Γ. This effect accounts for In2O3 having an indirect fundamental band gap with the VBM away from the Γ-point being ∼50 meV above the highest valence band at the Γ-point. (23) Similarly, β-Ga2O3 has an indirect fundamental band gap of ∼40 meV below the direct one. (43) These differences between direct and indirect band gaps are too small to be significant in most optical experiments. (Note that ZnO does not have octahedral symmetry, and so p–d repulsion is symmetry-allowed; ZnO therefore has a direct fundamental band gap at Γ.) The CBM for both β-Ga2O3 and In2O3 is dominated by Ga 4s/In 5s character, with some contribution from O 2s (see the inset in Figure 8a–c) as well as some from O 2p. These are in agreement with previous calculations for In2O3 (refs (1,44,and45)) and Ga2O3 (refs (46−48)).
The InGaO3 structure (Figure 8b,e) has a more complex DOS than the two binary phases because it has more than two cation elemental contributions. However, many similarities can be identified. The O 2p component is again dominant across the whole VB. The other orbitals tend to heavily hybridize throughout the valence band structure, likely because of the close proximity of In and Ga orbital energies. The bottom of the VB has predominantly O 2p orbital character (∼6.5 eV). The next distinguishable feature around ∼5 eV is again O 2p-dominated with strong contributions from In and Ga s states. The middle section of the DOS has additional intensity coming from Ga 4p and In 5p components, which have their maximum intensity around ∼3.5 and ∼2 eV, respectively. These states have significant intensity over the whole VB and do not obviously mix as readily as the s and d orbitals. The VBM is again O 2p-dominated, with contributions from In and Ga d levels. The CBM is dominated by O 2s, In 5s, and Ga 4s contributions with some O 2p character.
Figure 9 shows the cross-section-corrected DOS (using interpolated values for 1486.6 eV from the photoionization cross sections tabulated in ref (49)), including broadening by convolution with a Voigt function with ∼0.4 eV Gaussian and ∼0.3 eV Lorentzian component, compared to the experimentally determined VB spectra. The calculated and experimental VB regions are shown in Figures 9a and 9b, respectively, while the calculated and experimental semicore levels (Ga 3d and In 4d) are shown in Figures 9c and 9d, respectively. First, comparing Figures 9a and 9b, we see the general features match very well throughout all the spectra. Figure 9a displays the calculated β-Ga2O3 spectra in red, followed by the InGaO3 phase in the middle in brown, and finally the In2O3 in black at the bottom, with the PDOS contributions labeled. Figure 9b shows the experimental data where the phase transition is demonstrated by utilizing phase pure single crystalline data for the top and bottom spectra. (23,24) The brown spectrum in the center belongs to the hexagonal (mixed) phase InGaO3, while the spectra either side of this correspond to an In content of approximately 25% and 75%, respectively. All experimental spectra have been shifted to locate their VBM at 0 eV for comparison with the calculated DOS. Upon comparison of the spectra in Figure 9b, the highest binding energy feature of the β-Ga2O3 (Ga 4s dominated) is prominent around 6.5 eV but diminishes in size and shifts to lower binding energy as In content is increased. In the InGaO3 spectra, this feature is extended in energy but much less intense, matching the calculations in Figure 9a extremely well albeit with slightly less features resolved than calculated. This feature shifts and diminishes further, being located at ∼5.5 eV in pure In2O3. The leading edge at the VBM looks similar in the two end-point spectra, but the InGaO3 phase has additional intensity due to the contribution from two cation d levels.

Figure 9

Figure 9. Valence and semicore levels. (a) Cross-section-corrected and broadened DFT partial and total VB-DOS of β-Ga2O3 (top), InGaO3 (middle), and In2O3 (bottom). (b) Measured XPS VB spectra aligned to the VBM. The top and bottom spectra were taken from refs (24) and (23) for single crystalline β-Ga2O3 (x = 0) and In2O3 (x = 1), respectively. The other spectra represent intermediate composition steps, working from top to bottom In(x) is x = 0.25, x = 0.5, and x = 0.75, respectively. (c) DFT calculated semicore levels for β-Ga2O3 (top), InGaO3 (middle), and In2O3 (bottom). The semicore levels are dominated by the d-orbital contributions from Ga and In. Note that SOC has been included for the In2O3 which splits the d band, better accounting for the broadness of the semicore level. (d) Measured XPS semicore level spectra of β-Ga2O3 (ref (24)) (top), InGaO3 (middle), and In2O3 (ref (23)) (bottom). Two Gaussians are overlaid in the InGaO3 spectra to aid comparison with the In 4d and Ga 3d hybrid semicore level in the theory. The high binding energy region in each case is shown magnified ×15.

Turning attention now to the calculated semicore levels in Figure 9c, we see both In2O3 and β-Ga2O3 have a large peak comprised nearly entirely of Ga 3d/In 4d and a higher binding energy peak of mostly O 2s character (with some cation d mixing). The shoulder on the low binding energy side of the large peaks has a small O s contribution also, although this is swamped after cross-section corrections are applied. This s–d hybridization is associated with materials for which the cation-d and anion-s levels have similar energy. (50) Comparing the energy position of the calculated and experimental data (Figures 9c and 9d), we see the characteristic underbinding of these levels by the calculations, (51) especially the lower binding energy semicore levels which are around ∼1–2 eV below the experimental ones. (23) This is a deficiency of the DFT approach used in these calculations; (52) despite the HSE06 functional generally giving very accurate band gaps, quasi-particle effects are neglected which have been shown to redistribute spectral weight at higher binding energies. (46,48,51) We also see that the experimentally measured peaks are much wider than those calculated (which are broadened in the same manner as the VB in Figure 9a). This may be attributed to an increase in lifetime broadening for the localized semicore levels compared with the much less localized valence states, (29) although we cannot rule out final-state relaxation effects working to narrow the valence band spectra, which are not included in the calculation. (53) Despite this, the measured regions share similar features to the calculated ones, such as the asymmetry seen in the low-energy peaks. It is clear in Figure 9d that the In 4d-derived peak is much wider than the Ga 3d peak. This is due to a higher degree of spin–orbit interaction which splits the In 4d band. Spin–orbit coupling (SOC) has been included in the DOS for In2O3 in Figure 9c, explaining its irregular shape relative to the Ga 3d level in agreement with previous studies. (54) See Figure S6 for a comparison of the In 4d level calculated with and without SOC included.
The higher binding energy peaks seen around ∼19 eV in Figure 9c,d, which comprise of mostly O 2s character, are vastly overestimated in intensity in the calculation compared to experiment, where the intensity had to be multiplied by a factor of ×15 before it was visible. This again may be attributed to the issues discussed above. The theory predicts a fairly strong contribution from the metal d level to this peak, giving further evidence that s–d hybridization occurs in all three materials. It is also worth noting that for the mixed phase InGaO3 spectra there are two distinct peaks around 13 and 15 eV in the theory (15 and 17 eV in the experiment). The peak intensities vary heavily with indium content (x), which is a good indicator of the extent of alloying and the stoichiometry of the system (acknowledging that the photoionization cross section is roughly twice as large for In 4d compared to Ga 3d, explaining why the In 4d peak is twice as intense as the Ga 3d peak in the stoichiometric InGaO3 material).

4. Chemical Trends in Common-Cation Materials

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

The natural question that follows the determination of the electronic structure of a material is, how does this fit with the chemical trends of related materials, such as those with a common cation (or indeed common anion)? Here we compare the properties of In2O3, InGaO3, and β-Ga2O3 with each other and with other indium- and gallium-containing compounds in the form of the zinc-blende (ZB) and wurtzite III–V semiconductors, which have seen a lot of research in previous years. (55−57) The understanding gained from these arguably simpler systems can be used to further our understanding of the metal oxides investigated here.
Figure 10a shows the calculated band-edge positions for common Ga- and In-cation compounds, including In2O3, β-Ga2O3, InGaO3, In–V, and Ga–V semiconductor materials with respect to the charge neutrality level (ECNL). The calculated direct band gaps from the Γ-point were tuned by varying the fraction of Hartree–Fock exact exchange incorporated into HSE06 range-separated hybrid functional to reproduce experimental values (see for examples refs (1and61−63)). Focusing on the VBM for the Ga compounds in Figure 10a, we see a general trend emerge. First, the VBM are seen to increase in energy from Ga2O3 < GaN < GaP < GaAs < GaSb with respect to ECNL. As shown in Figure 8, the VBM of β-Ga2O3 consists of primarily O p character mixed with Ga d, while the VBM of the ZB Ga–V semiconductors are mostly of mixed anion and cation p-orbital character. (56) Therefore, both sets of materials have mostly anion p-orbital VBM character in common, so this is the major influence on the VBM position and not the cation energy level. The fact that the In compounds roughly share this VBM evolution supports this. Indeed, from Figure 10b of the individual elemental orbital energy levels, it is apparent that the anion p levels share exactly the same trend, increasing in energy going from O through to Sb. Also, as might be expected, InGaO3 has a VBM in between that of β-Ga2O3 and In2O3. Note that the indirect transition from the VBM between Γ and M to the CBM at Γ is highlighted for InGaO3, which is still between the VBM positions of β-Ga2O3 and In2O3. The only other significant indirect transition in Figure 10a is from GaP, where the CBM lies between Γ and X (ref (61)). (In2O3 and β-Ga2O3 may have a smaller indirect transition also, but these may be too close to the direct band gaps to definitively prove experimentally. (46,51,64)) Note also that the differences between the VBM position of the common-anion materials (see for example β-Ga2O3 and In2O3, where the VBM of β-Ga2O3 is lower relative to ECNL) have been explained for ZB III–V and II–VI semiconductors to be due to the p–d interaction, (42,65,66) a relatively small effect in these materials compared to the orbital positioning, but explaining why the VBM of Ga–V tends to have a lower energy than In–V.

Figure 10

Figure 10. (a) Theoretically calculated band-edge positions for Ga and In cation compounds relative to the charge neutrality level ECNL. Γ–Γ transitions are shown, but in cases where the indirect transition is significant this is indicated. (b) Atomic orbital energy levels for the constituent elements taken experimentally (58) and theoretically (59) where experiment was not available. These results corroborate the trends seen in other works. (55,60) (c) Absolute volume deformation potential at the Γ-point aVΓ, CBM deformation potential aVΓ,CBM, and VBM deformation potential aVΓ,VBM for compounds. (d) Calculated equilibrium unit cell volume and volume per atom (unit cell volume normalized by the number of atoms it contains) for compounds.

The CBM of these systems all derive from cation–anion s–s hybridization. However, it is clear from Figure 10a,b that there is very little correlation between the trends of the position of the CBM and that of the individual anion/cation s levels. A useful parameter that has been used to describe the shift in band extrema with respect to an absolute energy reference (often the CNL) for crystals under volume deformation is known as the hydrostatic volume deformation potential (aV). Hydrostatic volume deformation potentials were evaluated over a series of volumes to identify the change in the direct band gap with volume according to the formula
(2)
where the direct band gap EgΓ was evaluated at the Γ-point from the conduction and valence band eigenvalues. While deformation potentials for relative energies, such as the band gap, are robust from first-principles calculations, changes in individual states, such as the conduction and valence band extrema, require knowledge of a suitable reference level such as a core level, vacuum level, or another state, whose dependence on volume deformations is known. (56,67−69) Cardona and Christensen (68) used Brillouin-zone averaging for deformation potentials referenced to the dielectric midgap energy, which was previously shown to be an equivalent representation of the branch-point energy (EBP) and the CNL for zinc-blende semiconductors. (70) Following this approach, we evaluated the branch-point energies for the oxides and III–V materials with the scheme of Schleife et al. (71,72) using 12 valence bands and 6 conduction bands for the 10-atom monoclinic and hexagonal unit cells and 48 valence bands and 24 valence bands for the 40-atom bixbyite unit cells. With these values, we identify an EBP of 4.06 eV above the VBM for Ga2O3 and 3.39 eV above the VBM for In2O3, indicating a valence band offset of 0.67 eV, in good agreement with the value ∼0.6 eV derived experimentally. (22,24,29) We note that the overall quantitative conclusions do depend on the choice of the numbers of bands included in the averaging, (72) but other comparable choices (e.g., 4 conduction and 8 valence bands for Ga2O3 and 16 conduction and 32 valence bands for In2O3) led to changes in the relative offsets by ∼0.05 eV. These values were also computed for Ga–V and In–V compounds, explicitly accounting for spin–orbit effects, with the results summarized in Table 1.
Table 1. Summary of Calculated Properties, Including Deformation Potentials for the Band Gaps (aVΓ) and Band Edges (aVΓ,c and aVΓ,v)a
 Ga2O3GaNGaPGaAsGaSbIn2O3InNInPInAsInSbInGaO3
α (%)3228283233282526293032
EBP (eV)4.062.380.680.42–0.113.391.650.750.470.043.79
EgΓ (eV)4.853.462.901.530.822.860.731.420.410.224.13
B0 (kbar)18442003885751552171514236965964552026
volume (Å3)104.3145.2040.6245.6257.78522.2462.1051.3656.8870.23113.99
V/atom (Å3)10.4311.3020.3122.8128.8913.0615.5225.6828.4435.1111.40
aVΓ (eV)–8.66–7.82–9.08–8.54–8.46–6.34–4.04–6.14–5.92–6.77–8.70
aVΓ,c (eV)–4.96–6.48–9.86–8.86–9.27–3.70–3.23–6.33–6.66–7.79–5.43
aVΓ,v (eV)3.701.34–0.78–0.32–0.812.640.81–0.19–0.73–1.023.27
a

The band edge deformation potentials were determined by using the branch-point energy (EBP, defined relative to each material’s VBM) as a reference level, as described in the text. The α parameter represents the fraction of Hartree–Fock exact exchange incorporated into the HSE06 range-separated hybrid functional, which was tuned to reproduce the experimental band gaps.

We additionally assessed the validity of EBP as a suitable reference scale through tests with InP by aligning the average electrostatic potential with the vacuum level for a series of hydrostatically strained unrelaxed, 8-layer slab models of the (111) surface. Aligned relative to the vacuum level, the deformation potentials of EBP and the VBM were found to be −0.19 and −0.41 eV, respectively. The value for EBP is on the same order as the deformation potential calculated for the VBM when aligned relative to EBP (∼−0.2 eV), indicating the uncertainty in this approach. This suggests that EBP, similar to core levels, (69) are not fully robust reference levels for absolute volume deformation potentials. Nonetheless, we use it to consider qualitative trends in the spirit of Cardona and Christensen. We include the calculated band gap and band edge components of the deformation potentials as a function of the equilibrium volume per atom in Figures S7 and S8, with the results summarized in Figure 10c and Table 1.
When considering the absolute deformation potentials of the band edges, as referenced to the EBP in Figure 10c, we see that aVΓ,v (the deformation potential of the VBM) is positive for oxides and decreases as the coupling from the anion p orbitals increases, becoming negative for phosphides, arsenides, and antimonides, which all share similar values. This seems to have only a small effect on the position of the VBM due to lattice compression, which is instead mostly dependent on the anion p-orbital position as mentioned. aVΓ,c tends to be a relatively large negative number, contributing much more heavily to |aV| and to the position of the CBM. (55,56,73) In this respect, we also find that the oxides do exhibit significant differences compared to the III–Vs. We find that the aVΓ,c values are again negative for the oxides, but they exhibit a weaker dependence than that in III–Vs. We find that the conduction and valence band deformation potentials are of more comparable magnitudes in the oxides, whereas III–Vs tend to exhibit much larger magnitudes of the aVΓ,c values relative to the aVΓ,v.
When compared to the III–Vs, we find that the oxide aVΓ (where aVΓ = aVΓ,caVΓ,v) values are similar, but with the nitride values deviating more than those of the oxides. Our results for the Ga–V and In–V band gap deformation potentials largely follow those in ref (69), exhibiting the same qualitative trends, but with slightly larger absolute values. This may be a consequence of our results being obtained with tuned hybrid functionals, as opposed to the density functional theory within the local density approximation. (69) Another apparent outlier in Figure 10a,c is InN, which was discussed previously by Wei et al. (55) to be in no small part due to the relatively small value of aVΓ,c and hence small aVΓ.
Hence, the shifts in the energy gap are heavily affected not only by the positions of the constituent orbital energy levels but also by the changes in the CBM position, the changes in aV, and on the size of the unit cell. We plot the unit cell volumes and the volume per atom (unit cell volume divided by its occupany) in Figure 10d to visualize how these sizes vary between materials. Note that In2O3 has an extremely large unit cell, but it contains many atoms, and so its volume per atom is actually rather small in comparison to those in III–Vs. We see in Figure 10c that the Ga-anion semiconductors have larger |aV| than the respective In-anion semiconductors. This coupled with the fact that the Ga-based semiconductors have lower unit cell volumes than the respective indium-based compounds means Ga-based materials tend to have larger band gaps.
To summarize, our results are consistent with previous results on the III–V materials that identify (1) band gap deformation potentials are negative and (2) this dependence has a far larger contribution from the deformation potential of the conduction band minima (aVΓ,c) rather than for the valence band maxima (aVΓ,v). (56,67−69) However, in contrast to the III–Vs, we find (3) larger contributions to the aVΓ,v for the more ionic oxide semiconductors which are of comparable magnitude to the aVΓ,c.

5. Conclusion

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

The evolution of the electronic structure of a variable composition (InxGa1–x)2O3 alloy has been determined by using a combination of combinatorial XPS, measurements of the optical gap, and state-of-the-art hybrid functional DFT calculations. We show the simple trends regarding the evolution of the valence band edges in (InxGa1–x)2O3. The energy of the valence band edge is reduced considerably with increasing In content when the bixbyite phase is realized. This affects the surface space-charge properties of the material. As shown, β-Ga2O3 displays upward surface band bending and electron depletion, which diminishes and subsequently changes to electron accumulation with increasing In content. The bixbyite phase displays electron accumulation and downward band bending consistent with previous findings. The transition from accumulation to depletion for Ga-rich alloys occurs at approximately x = 0.35. Furthermore, we investigate the electronic structure of these materials through calculated electronic density of states for the phase-pure materials and compare this to XPS valence band spectra. All phases are found to have O 2p-dominated valence bands and have contributions from In 4d/Ga 3d states at the VBM, associated with p–d repulsion. The CBM are In 5s/Ga 4s-dominated with a strong O 2s contribution. s–d hybridization of the systems is explored looking at the semicore levels. Finally, In2O3 and β-Ga2O3 are placed in the context of other materials to shed light on the origin of the optoelectronic performance of these materials, such as their wide gap nature and the n-type dopability of In2O3 and β-Ga2O3. The electronic structure and band edge positions of In2O3, Ga2O3, and (InxGa1–x)2O3 alloys have been understood in terms of their place within chemical trends of common-cation and common-anion materials. Trends in atomic orbital energies have been examined, and deformation potentials have been calculated. Compared with III–V semiconductors, it was found that there is a larger contribution to the aVΓ values from the aVΓ,v terms for the more ionic oxide semiconductors which are of comparable magnitude to the aVΓ,c terms. The volume deformation potentials are −8.66 eV for Ga2O3, −8.70 eV for InGaO3, and −6.34 eV for In2O3.

Supporting Information

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

The Supporting Information is available free of charge at https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsami.0c16021.

  • XPS core levels and associated analysis, optical transmission and absorption spectra, XPS semicore levels, DFT of semicore levels accounting for SOC, DFT calculated band gap deformation potentials (PDF)

Terms & Conditions

Most electronic Supporting Information files are available without a subscription to ACS Web Editions. Such files may be downloaded by article for research use (if there is a public use license linked to the relevant article, that license may permit other uses). Permission may be obtained from ACS for other uses through requests via the RightsLink permission system: http://pubs.acs.org/page/copyright/permissions.html.

Author Information

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

  • Corresponding Author
  • Authors
    • Jack E. N. Swallow - Stephenson Institute for Renewable Energy and Department of Physics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 7ZF, U.K.Department of Materials, University of Oxford, Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3PH, U.K.
    • Robert G. Palgrave - Department of Chemistry, University College London, 20 Gordon Street, London WC1H 0AJ, U.K.Orcidhttp://orcid.org/0000-0003-4522-2486
    • Philip A. E. Murgatroyd - Stephenson Institute for Renewable Energy and Department of Physics, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 7ZF, U.K.
    • Anna Regoutz - Department of Chemistry, University College London, 20 Gordon Street, London WC1H 0AJ, U.K.Orcidhttp://orcid.org/0000-0002-3747-3763
    • Michael Lorenz - Felix Bloch Institute for Solid State Physics, Universität Leipzig, Leipzig, GermanyOrcidhttp://orcid.org/0000-0003-2774-6040
    • Anna Hassa - Felix Bloch Institute for Solid State Physics, Universität Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany
    • Marius Grundmann - Felix Bloch Institute for Solid State Physics, Universität Leipzig, Leipzig, GermanyOrcidhttp://orcid.org/0000-0001-7554-182X
    • Holger von Wenckstern - Felix Bloch Institute for Solid State Physics, Universität Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany
    • Joel B. Varley - Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, California 94550, United StatesOrcidhttp://orcid.org/0000-0002-5384-5248
  • Notes
    The authors declare no competing financial interest.

Acknowledgments

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

J.E.N.S. acknowledges funding through the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) Centre for Doctoral Training in New and Sustainable Photovoltaics (EP/L01551X/1). James Gibbon is acknowledged for preliminary analysis of the photoemission data. T.D.V. acknowledges funding from EPSRC Grant EP/N015800/1. P.A.E.M. acknowledges undergraduate vacation bursary funding from the EPSRC. This work was partially performed under the auspices of the U.S. DOE by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory under Contract DE-AC52-07NA27344 and supported by the Critical Materials Institute, an Energy Innovation Hub funded by the U.S. DOE, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Advanced Manufacturing Office. This work was also supported by the Air Force Office of Scientific Research under Award FA9550-18-1-0024.

References

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

This article references 73 other publications.

  1. 1
    Walsh, A.; Da Silva, J. L. F.; Wei, S.-H.; Korber, C.; Klein, A.; Piper, L. F. J.; DeMasi, A.; Smith, K. E.; Panaccione, G.; Torelli, P.; Payne, D. J.; Bourlange, A.; Egdell, R. G. Nature of the Band Gap of In2O3 Revealed by First-Principles Calculations and X-Ray Spectroscopy. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2008, 100, 167402,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.167402
  2. 2
    Ellmer, K. Past Achievements and Future Challenges in the Development of Optically Transparent Electrodes. Nat. Photonics 2012, 6, 809817,  DOI: 10.1038/nphoton.2012.282
  3. 3
    Pearton, S. J.; Yang, J.; Cary, P. H.; Ren, F.; Kim, J.; Tadjer, M. J.; Mastro, M. A. A Review of Ga2O3 Materials, Processing, and Devices. Appl. Phys. Rev. 2018, 5, 011301,  DOI: 10.1063/1.5006941
  4. 4
    Lorenz, M. The 2016 Oxide Electronic Materials and Oxide Interfaces Roadmap. J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 2016, 49, 433001,  DOI: 10.1088/0022-3727/49/43/433001
  5. 5
    Gonçalves, G.; Barquinha, P.; Pereira, L.; Franco, N.; Alves, E.; Martins, R.; Fortunato, E. High Mobility a-IGO Films Produced at Room Temperature and Their Application in TFTs. Electrochem. Solid-State Lett. 2010, 13, H20H22,  DOI: 10.1149/1.3257613
  6. 6
    Huang, W.-L.; Hsu, M.-H.; Chang, S.-P.; Chang, S.-J.; Chiou, Y.-Z. Indium Gallium Oxide Thin Film Transistor for Two-Stage UV Sensor Application. ECS J. Solid State Sci. Technol. 2019, 8, Q3140Q3143,  DOI: 10.1149/2.0251907jss
  7. 7
    Kim, Y. G.; Kim, T.; Avis, C.; Lee, S.-H.; Jang, J. Stable and High-Performance Indium Oxide Thin-Film Transistor by Ga Doping. IEEE Trans. Electron Devices 2016, 63, 10781084,  DOI: 10.1109/TED.2016.2518703
  8. 8
    von Wenckstern, H.; Splith, D.; Werner, A.; Müller, S.; Lorenz, M.; Grundmann, M. Properties of Schottky Barrier Diodes on (InxGa1-x)2O3 for 0.01 ≤ x ≤ 0.85 Determined by a Combinatorial Approach. ACS Comb. Sci. 2015, 17, 710715,  DOI: 10.1021/acscombsci.5b00084
  9. 9
    Kranert, C.; Lenzner, J.; Jenderka, M.; Lorenz, M.; von Wenckstern, H.; Schmidt-Grund, R.; Grundmann, M. Lattice Parameters and Raman-active Phonon Modes of (InxGa1-x)2O3 for x < 0.4. J. Appl. Phys. 2014, 116, 013505,  DOI: 10.1063/1.4886895
  10. 10
    Shannon, R. D.; Prewitt, C. T. Synthesis and Structure of Phases in the In2O3-Ga2O3 System. J. Inorg. Nucl. Chem. 1968, 30, 13891398,  DOI: 10.1016/0022-1902(68)80277-5
  11. 11
    Kneiß, M.; Hassa, A.; Splith, D.; Sturm, C.; von Wenckstern, H.; Lorenz, M.; Grundmann, M. Epitaxial Stabilization of Single Phase κ-(InxGa1-x)2O3 Thin Films up to x = 0.28 on c-Sapphire and κ-Ga2O3(001) Templates by Tin-Assisted VCCS-PLD. APL Mater. 2019, 7, 101102,  DOI: 10.1063/1.5120578
  12. 12
    Heyd, J.; Scuseria, G. E.; Ernzerhof, M. Hybrid Functionals Based on a Screened Coulomb Potential. J. Chem. Phys. 2003, 118, 82078215,  DOI: 10.1063/1.1564060
  13. 13
    Blöchl, P. E. Projector Augmented-Wave Method. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 1994, 50, 1795317979,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.50.17953
  14. 14
    Kresse, G.; Furthmüller, J. Efficient Iterative Schemes for Ab Initio Total-energy Calculations using a Plane-wave Basis Set. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 1996, 54, 1116911186,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.54.11169
  15. 15
    Blöchl, P. E.; Jepsen, O.; Andersen, O. K. Improved Tetrahedron Method for Brillouin-zone Integrations. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 1994, 49, 1622316233,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.49.16223
  16. 16
    Onuma, T.; Saito, S.; Sasaki, K.; Goto, K.; Masui, T.; Yamaguchi, T.; Honda, T.; Kuramata, A.; Higashiwaki, M. Temperature-Dependent Exciton Resonance Energies and their Correlation with IR-active Optical Phonon Modes in β-Ga2O3 Single Crystals. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2016, 108, 101904,  DOI: 10.1063/1.4943175
  17. 17
    Ingebrigtsen, M. E.; Varley, J. B.; Kuznetsov, A. Y.; Svensson, B. G.; Alfieri, G.; Mihaila, A.; Badstübner, U.; Vines, L. Iron and Intrinsic Deep Level States in Ga2O3. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2018, 112, 042104,  DOI: 10.1063/1.5020134
  18. 18
    Geller, S. Crystal Structure of β-Ga2O3. J. Chem. Phys. 1960, 33, 676684,  DOI: 10.1063/1.1731237
  19. 19
    Prozheeva, V.; Hölldobler, R.; von Wenckstern, H.; Grundmann, M.; Tuomisto, F. Effects of Alloy Composition and Si-doping on Vacancy Defect Formation in (InxGa1-x)2O3 Thin Films. J. Appl. Phys. 2018, 123, 125705,  DOI: 10.1063/1.5022245
  20. 20
    Schmidt-Grund, R.; Kranert, C.; Bontgen, T.; von Wenckstern, H.; Krauß, H.; Grundmann, M. Dielectric Function in the NIR-VUV Spectral Range of (InxGa1-x)2O3 Thin Films. J. Appl. Phys. 2014, 116, 053510,  DOI: 10.1063/1.4891521
  21. 21
    von Wenckstern, H.; Kneiß, M.; Hassa, A.; Storm, P.; Splith, D.; Grundmann, M. A Review of the Segmented-Target Approach to Combinatorial Material Synthesis by Pulsed-Laser Deposition. Phys. Status Solidi B 2020, 257, 1900626,  DOI: 10.1002/pssb.201900626
  22. 22
    Vines, L.; Bhoodoo, C.; von Wenckstern, H.; Grundmann, M. Electrical Conductivity of In2O3 and Ga2O3 after Low Temperature Ion Irradiation; Implications for Intrinsic Defect Formation and Charge Neutrality Level. J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 2018, 30, 025502,  DOI: 10.1088/1361-648X/aa9e2a
  23. 23
    King, P. D. C.; Veal, T. D.; Fuchs, F.; Wang, C. Y.; Payne, D. J.; Bourlange, A.; Zhang, H.; Bell, G. R.; Cimalla, V.; Ambacher, O.; Egdell, R. G.; Bechstedt, F.; McConville, C. F. Band Gap, Electronic Structure, and Surface Electron Accumulation of Cubic and Rhombohedral In2O3. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 2009, 79, 205211,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.79.205211
  24. 24
    Swallow, J. E. N.; Varley, J. B.; Jones, L. A. H.; Gibbon, J. T.; Piper, L. F. J.; Dhanak, V. R.; Veal, T. D. Transition from Electron Accumulation to Depletion at β-Ga2O3 Surfaces: The Role of Hydrogen and the Charge Neutrality Level. APL Mater. 2019, 7, 022528,  DOI: 10.1063/1.5054091
  25. 25
    Nagata, T.; Hoga, T.; Yamashita, A.; Asahi, T.; Yagyu, S.; Chikyow, T. Valence Band Modification of a (GaxIn1-x)2O3 Solid Solution System Fabricated by Combinatorial Synthesis. ACS Comb. Sci. 2020, 22, 433439,  DOI: 10.1021/acscombsci.0c00033
  26. 26
    King, P. D. C.; Veal, T. D.; Payne, D. J.; Bourlange, A.; Egdell, R. G.; McConville, C. F. Surface Electron Accumulation and the Charge Neutrality Level in In2O3. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2008, 101, 116808,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.101.116808
  27. 27
    Lovejoy, T. C.; Chen, R.; Zheng, X.; Villora, E. G.; Shimamura, K.; Yoshikawa, H.; Yamashita, Y.; Ueda, S.; Kobayashi, K.; Dunham, S. T.; Ohuchi, F. S.; Olmstead, M. A. Band Bending and Surface Defects in β-Ga2O3. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2012, 100, 181602,  DOI: 10.1063/1.4711014
  28. 28
    Navarro-Quezada, A.; Alamé, S.; Esser, N.; Furthmüller, J.; Bechstedt, F.; Galazka, Z.; Skuridina, D.; Vogt, P. Near Valence-band Electronic Properties of Semiconducting β-Ga2O3 (100) Single Crystals. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 2015, 92, 195306,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.92.195306
  29. 29
    King, P. D. C.; Veal, T. D.; Schleife, A.; Zúñiga-Pérez, J.; Martel, B.; Jefferson, P. H.; Fuchs, F.; Muñoz-Sanjosé, V.; Bechstedt, F.; McConville, C. F. Valence-band Electronic Structure of CdO, ZnO, and MgO from X-ray Photoemission Spectroscopy and Quasi-particle-corrected Density-functional Theory Calculations. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 2009, 79, 205205,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.79.205205
  30. 30
    Moses, P. G.; Van de Walle, C. G. Band Bowing and Band Alignment in InGaN Alloys. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2010, 96, 021908,  DOI: 10.1063/1.3291055
  31. 31
    Peelaers, H.; Steiauf, D.; Varley, J. B.; Janotti, A.; Van de Walle, C. G. (InxGa1-x)2O3 Alloys for Transparent Electronics. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 2015, 92, 085206,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.92.085206
  32. 32
    Oshima, T.; Fujita, S. Properties of Ga2O3-based (InxGa1-x)2O3 Alloy Thin Films Grown by Molecular Beam Epitaxy. Phys. Status Solidi C 2008, 5, 31133115,  DOI: 10.1002/pssc.200779297
  33. 33
    Regoutz, A.; Egdell, R.; Morgan, D.; Palgrave, R.; Téllez, H.; Skinner, S.; Payne, D.; Watson, G.; Scanlon, D. Electronic and Surface Properties of Ga-doped In2O3 Ceramics. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2015, 349, 970982,  DOI: 10.1016/j.apsusc.2015.04.106
  34. 34
    von Wenckstern, H.; Splith, D.; Purfürst, M.; Zhang, Z.; Kranert, C.; Müller, S.; Lorenz, M.; Grundmann, M. Structural and Optical Properties of (In,Ga)2O3 Thin Films and Characteristics of Schottky Contacts Thereon. Semicond. Sci. Technol. 2015, 30, 024005,  DOI: 10.1088/0268-1242/30/2/024005
  35. 35
    Yang, F.; Ma, J.; Luan, C.; Kong, L. Structural and Optical Properties of Ga2(1-x)In2xO3 films Prepared on α-Al2O3 (0001) by MOCVD. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2009, 255, 44014404,  DOI: 10.1016/j.apsusc.2008.10.129
  36. 36
    Zhang, Z.; von Wenckstern, H.; Lenzner, J.; Lorenz, M.; Grundmann, M. Visible-blind and Solar-blind Ultraviolet Photodiodes Based on (InxGa1-x)2O3. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2016, 108, 123503,  DOI: 10.1063/1.4944860
  37. 37
    Michel, J.; Splith, D.; Rombach, J.; Papadogianni, A.; Berthold, T.; Krischok, S.; Grundmann, M.; Bierwagen, O.; von Wenckstern, H.; Himmerlich, M. Processing Strategies for High-Performance Schottky Contacts on n-Type Oxide Semiconductors: Insights from In2O3. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2019, 11, 2707327087,  DOI: 10.1021/acsami.9b06455
  38. 38
    Rombach, J.; Papadogianni, A.; Mischo, M.; Cimalla, V.; Kirste, L.; Ambacher, O.; Berthold, T.; Krischok, S.; Himmerlich, M.; Selve, S.; Bierwagen, O. The Role of Surface Electron Accumulation and Bulk Doping for Gas-Sensing Explored with Single-Crystalline In2O3 Thin Films. Sens. Actuators, B 2016, 236, 909916,  DOI: 10.1016/j.snb.2016.03.079
  39. 39
    Veal, T. D.; Jefferson, P. H.; Piper, L. F. J.; McConville, C. F.; Joyce, T. B.; Chalker, P. R.; Considine, L.; Lu, H.; Schaff, W. J. Transition from Electron Accumulation to Depletion at InGaN Surfaces. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2006, 89, 202110,  DOI: 10.1063/1.2387976
  40. 40
    Kajiyama, K.; Mizushima, Y.; Sakata, S. Schottky Barrier Height of n-InxGa1-xAs Diodes. Appl. Phys. Lett. 1973, 23, 458,  DOI: 10.1063/1.1654957
  41. 41
    Lüth, H. Research on III-V Semiconductor Interfaces: Its Impact on Technology and Devices. Physica Status Solidi (a) 2001, 187, 3344,  DOI: 10.1002/1521-396X(200109)187:1<33::AID-PSSA33>3.0.CO;2-9
  42. 42
    Wei, S.-H.; Zunger, A. Role of Metal d States in II-VI Semiconductors. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 1988, 37, 8958,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.37.8958
  43. 43
    Varley, J. B.; Weber, J. R.; Janotti, A.; Van de Walle, C. G. Oxygen Vacancies and Donor Impurities in β-Ga2O3. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2010, 97, 142106,  DOI: 10.1063/1.3499306
  44. 44
    Karazhanov, S. Z.; Ravindran, P.; Vajeeston, P.; Ulyashin, A.; Finstad, T. G.; Fjellvag, H. Phase Stability, Electronic Structure, and Optical Properties of Indium Oxide Polytypes. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 2007, 76, 075129,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.76.075129
  45. 45
    Mryasov, O. N.; Freeman, A. J. Electronic Band Structure of Indium Tin Oxide and Criteria for Transparent Conducting Behavior. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 2001, 64, 233111,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.64.233111
  46. 46
    Furthmüller, J.; Bechstedt, F. Quasiparticle Bands and Spectra of Ga2O3 Polymorphs. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 2016, 93, 115204,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.93.115204
  47. 47
    Hajnal, Z.; Miró, J.; Kiss, G.; Réti, F.; Deák, P.; Herndon, R. C.; Kuperberg, J. M. Role of Oxygen Vacancy Defect States in the n-type Conduction of β-Ga2O3. J. Appl. Phys. 1999, 86, 3792,  DOI: 10.1063/1.371289
  48. 48
    Swallow, J. E. N. Influence of Polymorphism on the Electronic Structure of Ga2O3. Chem. Mater. 2020, 32, 84608470,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.chemmater.0c02465
  49. 49
    Scofield, J. Theoretical photoionization cross sections from 1 to 1500 keV, 1973.
  50. 50
    Persson, C.; Zunger, A. s-d Coupling in Zinc-blende Semiconductors. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 2003, 68, 073205,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.68.073205
  51. 51
    Fuchs, F.; Bechstedt, F. Indium-oxide Polymorphs from First Principles: Quasiparticle Electronic States. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 2008, 77, 155107,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.77.155107
  52. 52
    Fuchs, F.; Furthmüller, J.; Bechstedt, F.; Shishkin, M.; Kresse, G. Quasiparticle Band Structure based on a Generalized Kohn-Sham Scheme. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 2007, 76, 115109,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.76.115109
  53. 53
    Ley, L.; Pollak, R. A.; McFeely, F. R.; Kowalczyk, S. P.; Shirley, D. A. Total Valence-band Densities of States of III-V and II-VI Compounds from X-ray Photoemission Spectroscopy. Phys. Rev. B 1974, 9, 600621,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.9.600
  54. 54
    Erhart, P.; Klein, A.; Egdell, R. G.; Albe, K. Band Structure of Indium Oxide: Indirect Versus Direct Band Gap. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 2007, 75, 153205,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.75.153205
  55. 55
    Wei, S.-H.; Nie, X.; Batyrev, I. G.; Zhang, S. B. Breakdown of the Band-gap-common-cation Rule: The Origin of the Small Band Gap of InN. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 2003, 67, 165209,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.67.165209
  56. 56
    Wei, S.-H.; Zunger, A. Predicted Band-gap Pressure Coefficients of all Diamond and Zinc-blende Semiconductors: Chemical Trends. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 1999, 60, 5404,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.60.5404
  57. 57
    Li, Y.-H.; Gong, X. G.; Wei, S.-H. Ab Initio All-Electron Calculation of Absolute Volume Deformation Potentials of IV-IV, III-V, and II-VI Semiconductors: The Chemical Trends. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 2006, 73, 245206,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.73.245206
  58. 58
    Mann, J. B.; Meek, T. L.; Allen, L. C. Configuration Energies of the Main Group Elements. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2000, 122, 27802783,  DOI: 10.1021/ja992866e
  59. 59
    Fischer, C. F. Average-energy-of-configuration Hartree-Fock Results for the Atoms Helium to Radon. At. Data Nucl. Data Tables 1973, 12, 8799,  DOI: 10.1016/0092-640X(73)90014-4
  60. 60
    Herman, F.; Skillman, S. Atomic Structure Calculations; Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1963.
  61. 61
    Vurgaftman, I.; Meyer, J. R.; Ram-Mohan, L. R. Band Parameters for III-V Compound Semiconductors and their Alloys. J. Appl. Phys. 2001, 89, 58155875,  DOI: 10.1063/1.1368156
  62. 62
    Wu, J.; Walukiewicz, W.; Shan, W.; Yu, K. M.; Ager, J. W.; Li, S. X.; Haller, E. E.; Lu, H.; Schaff, W. J. Temperature Dependence of the Fundamental Band Gap of InN. J. Appl. Phys. 2003, 94, 44574460,  DOI: 10.1063/1.1605815
  63. 63
    Tippins, H. H. Optical Absorption and Photoconductivity in the Band Edge of β-Ga2O3. Phys. Rev. 1965, 140, A316A319,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRev.140.A316
  64. 64
    Varley, J. B.; Schleife, A. Bethe-Salpeter Calculation of Optical-absorption Spectra of In2O3 and Ga2O3. Semicond. Sci. Technol. 2015, 30, 024010,  DOI: 10.1088/0268-1242/30/2/024010
  65. 65
    Wei, S.-H.; Zunger, A. Calculated Natural Band Offsets of all II-VI and III-V Semiconductors: Chemical Trends and the Role of Cation d Orbitals. Appl. Phys. Lett. 1998, 72, 2011,  DOI: 10.1063/1.121249
  66. 66
    Wei, S.-H.; Zunger, A. Role of d Orbitals in Valence-Band Offsets of Common-Anion Semiconductors. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1987, 59, 144,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.59.144
  67. 67
    Van de Walle, C. G.; Martin, R. M. Absolute Deformation Potentials: Formulation and Ab initio Calculations for Semiconductors. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1989, 62, 20282031,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.62.2028
  68. 68
    Cardona, M.; Christensen, N. E. Acoustic Deformation Potentials and Heterostructure Band Offsets in Semiconductors. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 1987, 35, 61826194,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.35.6182
  69. 69
    Li, Y.-H.; Gong, X. G.; Wei, S.-H. Ab initio All-electron Calculation of Absolute Volume Deformation Potentials of IV-IV, III-V, and II-VI Semiconductors: The Chemical Trends. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 2006, 73, 245206,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.73.245206
  70. 70
    Varley, J. B.; Samanta, A.; Lordi, V. Descriptor-Based Approach for the Prediction of Cation Vacancy Formation Energies and Transition Levels. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 2017, 8, 50595063,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.jpclett.7b02333
  71. 71
    Schleife, A.; Fuchs, F.; Rödl, C.; Furthmüller, J.; Bechstedt, F. Branch-point Energies and Band Discontinuities of III-nitrides and III-/II-oxides from Quasiparticle Band-structure Calculations. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2009, 94, 012104,  DOI: 10.1063/1.3059569
  72. 72
    Shapera, E. P.; Schleife, A. Database-Driven Materials Selection for Semiconductor Heterojunction Design. Advanced Theory and Simulations 2018, 1, 1800075,  DOI: 10.1002/adts.201800075
  73. 73
    Walsh, A.; Catlow, C. R. A.; Zhang, K. H. L.; Egdell, R. G. Control of the Band-gap States of Metal Oxides by the Application of Epitaxial Strain: The Case of Indium Oxide. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 2011, 83, 161202(R)  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.83.161202

Cited By

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

This article is cited by 47 publications.

  1. Mohamed Abdelilah Fadla, Myrta Grüning, Lorenzo Stella. Effective Band Structure and Crack Formation Analysis in Pseudomorphic Epitaxial Growth of (InxGa1–x)2O3 Alloys: A First-Principles Study. ACS Omega 2024, 9 (13) , 15320-15327. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.3c10047
  2. Abhishek Rawat, Laura Clark, Chuzhong Zhang, John Cavin, Vinod K. Sangwan, Peter S. Toth, Csaba Janáky, Riddhi Ananth, Elise Goldfine, Michael J. Bedzyk, Emily A. Weiss, James M. Rondinelli, Mark C. Hersam, Efstathios I. Meletis, Krishnan Rajeshwar. Solution Combustion Synthesis and Characterization of Magnesium Copper Vanadates. Inorganic Chemistry 2023, 62 (23) , 8903-8913. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.inorgchem.3c00452
  3. Alexander Karg, Justin Andreas Bich, Adrian Messow, Marco Schowalter, Stephan Figge, Andreas Rosenauer, Patrick Vogt, Martin Eickhoff. Nucleation Window of Ga2O3 and In2O3 for Molecular Beam Epitaxy on (0001) Al2O3. Crystal Growth & Design 2023, 23 (6) , 4435-4441. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.cgd.3c00193
  4. Zhenni Yang, Wenshan Chen, Siliang Kuang, Ziqian Sheng, Jueli Shi, Duanyang Chen, Meiyan Cui, Hongji Qi, Kelvin H. L. Zhang. Crystal Phase, Electronic Structure, and Surface Band Bending of (InxGa1–x)2O3 Alloy Wide-Band-Gap Semiconductors. Crystal Growth & Design 2022, 22 (12) , 7325-7330. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.cgd.2c00948
  5. Manoj K. Jamarkattel, Adam B. Phillips, Indra Subedi, Abasi Abudulimu, Ebin Bastola, Deng-Bing Li, Xavier Mathew, Yanfa Yan, Randy J. Ellingson, Nikolas J. Podraza, Michael J. Heben. Indium Gallium Oxide Emitters for High-Efficiency CdTe-Based Solar Cells. ACS Applied Energy Materials 2022, 5 (5) , 5484-5489. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsaem.2c00153
  6. Junlei Zhao, Xinyu Wang, Haohao Chen, Zhaofu Zhang, Mengyuan Hua. Two-Dimensional Ferroelectric Ga2O3 Bilayers with Unusual Strain-Engineered Interlayer Interactions. Chemistry of Materials 2022, 34 (8) , 3648-3658. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemmater.1c04245
  7. Eric Welch, Md Abdul Ahad Talukder, Nathan Rabelo Martins, Pablo Damasceno Borges, Ravi Droopad, Luisa Scolfaro. Indium defect complexes in (In x Ga 1−x ) 2 O 3 : a combined experimental and hybrid density functional theory study. Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics 2024, 57 (14) , 145302. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6463/ad1b9b
  8. Vasyl Stasiv, Yaroslav Zhydachevskyy, Vitalii Stadnik, Vasyl Hreb, Vitaliy Mykhaylyk, Leonid Vasylechko, Andriy Luchechko, Tomasz Wojciechowski, Piotr Sybilski, Andrzej Suchocki. Chemical tuning of photo- and persistent luminescence of Cr3+-activated β-Ga2O3 by alloying with Al2O3 and In2O3. Journal of Alloys and Compounds 2024, 982 , 173827. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2024.173827
  9. A. Jörns, H. von Wenckstern, S. Vogt, P. Schlupp, M. Grundmann. Demonstration of Two Multi‐Component Target Ablation Approaches and Their Application in Combinatorial Pulsed Laser Deposition. Advanced Physics Research 2024, 30 https://doi.org/10.1002/apxr.202300140
  10. Andriy Luchechko, Vyacheslav Vasyltsiv, Markiyan Kushlyk, Vasyl Hreb, Dmytro Slobodzyan, Leonid Vasylechko, Yaroslav Zhydachevskyy. Crystal Structure, Luminescence and Electrical Conductivity of Pure and Mg2+-Doped β-Ga2O3-In2O3 Solid Solutions Synthesized in Oxygen or Argon Atmospheres. Materials 2024, 17 (6) , 1391. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma17061391
  11. J. B. Varley, J. R. Weber, A. Janotti, C. G. Van de Walle. Dangling bonds, the charge neutrality level, and band alignment in semiconductors. Journal of Applied Physics 2024, 135 (7) https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0190043
  12. Yupeng Zhang, Ruiheng Zhou, Xinyan Liu, Zhengyu Bi, Shengping Ruan, Yan Ma, Xin Li, Caixia Liu, Yu Chen, Jingran Zhou. Sol-Gel Synthesized Amorphous (InxGa1−x)2O3 for UV Photodetection with High Responsivity. Sensors 2024, 24 (3) , 787. https://doi.org/10.3390/s24030787
  13. Junlei Zhao, Jesper Byggmästar, Huan He, Kai Nordlund, Flyura Djurabekova, Mengyuan Hua. Complex Ga2O3 polymorphs explored by accurate and general-purpose machine-learning interatomic potentials. npj Computational Materials 2023, 9 (1) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41524-023-01117-1
  14. Min Gye Kim, Jun Hyung Jeong, Jin Hyun Ma, Min Ho Park, Seunghwan Kim, Soohyung Park, Seong Jun Kang. A chemically treated IGZO-based highly visible-blind UV phototransistor with suppression of the persistent photoconductivity effect. Journal of Materials Chemistry C 2023, 11 (43) , 15178-15196. https://doi.org/10.1039/D3TC02756B
  15. Su Yeon Cha, Sukjune Choi, Dongwoo Kim, Okkyun Seo, Bongjin Simon Mun, Do Young Noh, Hyon Chol Kang. Short-range positional order in phase separated indium gallium oxide islands deposited in a reducing atmosphere. Applied Surface Science 2023, 637 , 157943. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2023.157943
  16. Taikyu Kim, Cheol Hee Choi, Jae Seok Hur, Daewon Ha, Bong Jin Kuh, Yongsung Kim, Min Hee Cho, Sangwook Kim, Jae Kyeong Jeong. Progress, Challenges, and Opportunities in Oxide Semiconductor Devices: A Key Building Block for Applications Ranging from Display Backplanes to 3D Integrated Semiconductor Chips. Advanced Materials 2023, 35 (43) https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.202204663
  17. Michael Lorenz, Holger Hochmuth, Holger von Wenckstern, Marius Grundmann. Flexible hardware concept of pulsed laser deposition for large areas and combinatorial composition spreads. Review of Scientific Instruments 2023, 94 (8) https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0142085
  18. Dongwook Kim, Hyeonju Lee, Youngjun Yun, Jaehoon Park, Xue Zhang, Jin-Hyuk Bae, Sungkeun Baang. Analyzing Acceptor-like State Distribution of Solution-Processed Indium-Zinc-Oxide Semiconductor Depending on the In Concentration. Nanomaterials 2023, 13 (15) , 2165. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano13152165
  19. Haojie Li, Zhengyuan Wu, Pengfei Tian, Jinchai Li, Junyong Kang, Guoqi Zhang, Zhilai Fang. AlInGaN nanocrystal seeded growth of weak p-type β-(In 0.1 Ga 0.9 ) 2 O 3 nanowires and nanobelts. CrystEngComm 2023, 25 (25) , 3674-3681. https://doi.org/10.1039/D3CE00317E
  20. Kammutty Musliyarakath Abdul Shekkeer, Junchen Deng, Kuan Yew Cheong, Kadiarakath Manathparambil Riyas, Hock Jin Quah. Alteration in growth temperatures of metal-organic decomposed GaxCe1-xOyNz passivation layer in nitrogen/oxygen/nitrogen ambient. Ceramics International 2023, 49 (9) , 14760-14770. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2023.01.072
  21. Xilai Liu, Chunxiang Zhao, Chunyao Niu, Yu Jia. Computational and experimental studies on band alignment of ZnO/InxGa2−xO3/GaN heterojunctions. The Journal of Chemical Physics 2023, 158 (13) https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0134277
  22. Hao Wang, Behrouz Movahhed Nouri, Hamed Dalir, Volker J. Sorger, , . 30 GHz plasmonic slot MoTe2 photodetector integrated with silicon photonic circuits at telecom wavelength. 2023, 38. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2651013
  23. Vadim MORARI, Victor ZALAMAI, Emil V. RUSU, Veaceslav V. URSAKI, Pascal COLPO, Ion M. TIGINYANU, , , . Study of (GaxIn1-x)2O3 thin films produced by aerosol deposition method. 2023, 12. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2642127
  24. Junting Chen, Junlei Zhao, Sirui Feng, Li Zhang, Yan Cheng, Hang Liao, Zheyang Zheng, Xiaolong Chen, Zhen Gao, Kevin J. Chen, Mengyuan Hua. Formation and Applications in Electronic Devices of Lattice‐Aligned Gallium Oxynitride Nanolayer on Gallium Nitride. Advanced Materials 2023, 35 (12) https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.202208960
  25. N.N. Yakovlev, A.V. Almaev, V.I. Nikolaev, B.O. Kushnarev, A.I. Pechnikov, S.I. Stepanov, A.V. Chikiryaka, R.B. Timashov, M.P. Scheglov, P.N. Butenko, D.A. Almaev, E.V. Chernikov. Low-resistivity gas sensors based on the In2O3-Ga2O3 mixed compounds films. Materials Today Communications 2023, 34 , 105241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mtcomm.2022.105241
  26. Eric Welch, Pablo Borges, Luisa Scolfaro. Hybrid density functional theory study of substitutional Gd in β -Ga2O3. Physica B: Condensed Matter 2023, 651 , 414558. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physb.2022.414558
  27. Sai Lyu. Band offsets at the interfaces between β − Ga 2 O 3 and Al 2 O 3 . Physical Review Materials 2023, 7 (1) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevMaterials.7.014603
  28. Dongwook Kim, Hyeonju Lee, Bokyung Kim, Sungkeun Baang, Kadir Ejderha, Jin-Hyuk Bae, Jaehoon Park. Investigation on Atomic Bonding Structure of Solution-Processed Indium-Zinc-Oxide Semiconductors According to Doped Indium Content and Its Effects on the Transistor Performance. Materials 2022, 15 (19) , 6763. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15196763
  29. Kammutty Musliyarakath Abdul Shekkeer, Kuan Yew Cheong, Hock Jin Quah. Growth of Quaternary GaxCe1-xOyNz passivation layer for silicon based metal-oxide-semiconductor capacitor. Materials Chemistry and Physics 2022, 290 , 126549. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matchemphys.2022.126549
  30. Nasir Alfaraj, Kuang-Hui Li, Laurentiu Braic, Mohamed Nejib Hedhili, Zaibing Guo, Tien Khee Ng, Boon S. Ooi. Optical and interfacial characteristics of a heterojunction between (2¯01)-oriented single-domain β-(In 0.072 Ga 0.928 ) 2 O 3 and α-Al 2 O 3 crystals. Optical Materials Express 2022, 12 (8) , 3273. https://doi.org/10.1364/OME.462192
  31. Paul Lee, Minh Nhut Le, Gahye Kim, Sung Min Kwon, Jeong‐Wan Jo, Jaehyun Kim, Yong‐Hoon Kim, Sung Kyu Park, Kyunghan Ahn, Myung‐Gil Kim. Efficient Oxygen‐Vacancy Suppression and Electrical Stabilization of Solution‐Processed In 2 O 3 :Q (Q = S, Se) Thin‐Film Transistor with Chalcogen Alloying. Advanced Electronic Materials 2022, 8 (7) https://doi.org/10.1002/aelm.202101250
  32. Manoj K. Jamarkattel, Adam B. Phillips, Indra Subedi, Abasi Abudulimu, Ebin Bastola, Deng-Bing Li, Zhaoning Song, Xavier Matthew, Yanfa Yan, Randy J. Ellingson, Nikolas J. Podraza, Michael J. Heben. Properties of Co-Sputtered $(\text{In}_{\mathrm{X}}\text{Ga}_{(1-\mathrm{X})})_{2}\mathrm{O}_{3}$ Layers Used in CdTe Solar Cells. 2022, 0972-0974. https://doi.org/10.1109/PVSC48317.2022.9938695
  33. Mahitosh Biswas, Hiroyuki Nishinaka. Thermodynamically metastable α -, ε - (or κ -), and γ -Ga2O3: From material growth to device applications. APL Materials 2022, 10 (6) https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0085360
  34. Ziheng Wang, Zehao Lin, Mengwei Si, Peide D. Ye. Characterization of Interface and Bulk Traps in Ultrathin Atomic Layer-Deposited Oxide Semiconductor MOS Capacitors With HfO2/In2O3 Gate Stack by C-V and Conductance Method. Frontiers in Materials 2022, 9 https://doi.org/10.3389/fmats.2022.850451
  35. Yuri Ogura, Yuta Arata, Hiroyuki Nishinaka, Masahiro Yoshimoto. Alloying In 2 O 3 and Ga 2 O 3 on AlN templates for deep-ultraviolet transparent conductive films by mist chemical vapor deposition. Japanese Journal of Applied Physics 2022, 61 (SC) , SC1037. https://doi.org/10.35848/1347-4065/ac4688
  36. Wenshan Chen, Xiangyu Xu, Jiaye Zhang, Jueli Shi, Jiawei Zhang, Wencheng Chen, Qijin Cheng, Yuzheng Guo, Kelvin H. L. Zhang. (In x Ga 1− x ) 2 O 3 Thin Film Based Solar‐Blind Deep UV Photodetectors with Ultra‐High Detectivity and On/Off Current Ratio. Advanced Optical Materials 2022, 10 (7) https://doi.org/10.1002/adom.202102138
  37. Kar Yeow Tan, Hock Jin Quah. Growth of metal‐organic decomposed ternary Ga x Ce y O z films by nitrogen‐infused wet oxidation for metal‐oxide‐semiconductor capacitor. International Journal of Energy Research 2022, 46 (5) , 5756-5770. https://doi.org/10.1002/er.7520
  38. Alexandra Papadogianni, Takahiro Nagata, Oliver Bierwagen. The electrical conductivity of cubic (In 1−x Ga x ) 2 O 3 films (x ≤ 0.18): native bulk point defects, Sn-doping, and the surface electron accumulation layer. Japanese Journal of Applied Physics 2022, 61 (4) , 045502. https://doi.org/10.35848/1347-4065/ac4ec7
  39. Alexandra Papadogianni, Charlotte Wouters, Robert Schewski, Johannes Feldl, Jonas Lähnemann, Takahiro Nagata, Elias Kluth, Martin Feneberg, Rüdiger Goldhahn, Manfred Ramsteiner, Martin Albrecht, Oliver Bierwagen. Molecular beam epitaxy of single-crystalline bixbyite ( In 1 − x Ga x ) 2 O 3 films ( x ≤ 0.18 ): Structural properties and consequences of compositional inhomogeneity. Physical Review Materials 2022, 6 (3) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevMaterials.6.033604
  40. Khue Nguyen, Pavle V. Radovanovic. Defects and impurities in colloidal Ga 2 O 3 nanocrystals: new opportunities for photonics and lighting. Canadian Journal of Chemistry 2022, 100 (1) , 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjc-2021-0203
  41. Joel B. Varley. First-principles calculations of structural, electrical, and optical properties of ultra-wide bandgap (Al$$_x$$Ga$$_{1-x}$$)$$_2$$O$$_3$$ alloys. Journal of Materials Research 2021, 36 (23) , 4790-4803. https://doi.org/10.1557/s43578-021-00371-7
  42. Isa Hatipoglu, Daniel A. Hunter, Partha Mukhopadhyay, Martin S. Williams, Paul R. Edwards, Robert W. Martin, Winston V. Schoenfeld, G. Naresh-Kumar. Correlation between deep-level defects and functional properties of β-(Sn x Ga1- x )2O3 on Si photodetectors. Journal of Applied Physics 2021, 130 (20) https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0068186
  43. Xinyi Xia, Chaker Fares, Fan Ren, Anna Hassa, Holger von Wenckstern, Marius Grundmann, S. J. Pearton. Al Composition Dependence of Band Offsets for SiO 2 on α-(Al x Ga 1−x ) 2 O 3. ECS Journal of Solid State Science and Technology 2021, 10 (11) , 113007. https://doi.org/10.1149/2162-8777/ac39a8
  44. Cheng-Yi Huang, Mau-Phon Houng, Sufen Wei, Cheng-Fu Yang. Depositions of In2xGa2−2xO3-based films and their application in the fabrication of a thin-film transistor. Modern Physics Letters B 2021, 35 (29) https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217984921410116
  45. Han-Yin Liu, Zhen-Yuan Huang. Investigation of p-NiO/N-Ga₀.₃Zn₀.₇O Heterojunction Photodiodes for Ultraviolet-B Detection. IEEE Sensors Journal 2021, 21 (19) , 21486-21493. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSEN.2021.3104826
  46. Johannes Feldl, Martin Feneberg, Alexandra Papadogianni, Jonas Lähnemann, Takahiro Nagata, Oliver Bierwagen, Rüdiger Goldhahn, Manfred Ramsteiner. Bandgap widening and behavior of Raman-active phonon modes of cubic single-crystalline (In,Ga)2O3 alloy films. Applied Physics Letters 2021, 119 (4) https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0056532
  47. A. Dive, J. Varley, S. Banerjee. In 2 O 3 − Ga 2 O 3 Alloys as Potential Buffer Layers in Cd Te Thin-Film Solar Cells. Physical Review Applied 2021, 15 (3) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevApplied.15.034028
  • Abstract

    Figure 1

    Figure 1. Unit cells of (a) monoclinic β-Ga2O3, (b) hexagonal phase InGaO3, and (c) bixbyite In2O3. Ga atoms are shown in green, In atoms in purple, and O atoms in red. For (a) and (c), the inequivalent cation sites are shown with different color octahedra.

    Figure 2

    Figure 2. (a) False color representation of wide-angle 2θ–ω XRD patterns, taken at ∼1 mm intervals (55 in total) across the compositionally graded strip in the direction highlighted by a black arrow in Figure 3. Black horizontal lines indicate the point in the film corresponding to the monoclinic phase (top line), the onset of the hexagonal phase (middle line), and the onset of the bixbyite phase (bottom line). (b), (c), and (d) show individual diffraction patterns taken at the horizontal lines at 40, 9, and 6 mm, showing primarily (b) the monoclinic β-Ga2O3 phase, (c) the hexagonal InGaO3 (II), and (d) the bixbyite In2O3 phase, respectively. A small peak corresponding to the 0004 peak of the hexagonal (InxGa1–x)2O3 phase can be seen at ∼29° in (d). Note the intensity scale in (b)–(d) is logarithmic.

    Figure 3

    Figure 3. (a) EDX line scan of Ga and In content along the film. Black dashed lines represent positions of different crystallographic phases (bixbyite to mixed bixbyite–hexagonal–monoclinic to monoclinic). (b) EDX false color map of In content in the as deposited (InxGa1–x)2O3 film (51 mm diameter), the black arrow displaying the position where the line scan was taken, and a 4 mm wide strip was cut for further experiments.

    Figure 4

    Figure 4. High-resolution XPS plots of the valence band of (InxGa1–x)2O3 film. A total of 46 spectra were recorded across the film at 1 mm intervals, matching the EDX measurement in Figure 3. The spectra recorded from the Ga-rich end of the film are at the top, with increasing In content down the plot.

    Figure 5

    Figure 5. Energy positions of the VBM from XPS referenced to EF as a function of EDX indium content. Black dashed lines separate the region of different crystallographic phases.

    Figure 6

    Figure 6. Optical gap vs indium content as determined via transmission spectroscopy. A fit to the data points was performed by using the bowing equation, (30,31) with the fitted parameters displayed in the equation. Importantly, for x > 0.6, because of transitions from the topmost valence bands being dipole forbidden, these values do not correspond to the fundamental band gap.

    Figure 7

    Figure 7. (a) Variation of band gap (Eg) and barrier height (ΦB) at the (InxGa1–x)2O3 surface with respect to varying indium content (x). Energy gaps were determined in this study by transmission measurements (○) as well as values being taken from the literature (□, Oshima; (32) ⬡, Regoutz; (33) △, Wenckstern; (34) ▽, Yang; (35) ◇, Zhang; (36) ▷, Swallow (24)). Barrier heights (ΦB) are derived by subtracting the surface Fermi level to VBM (ξ) from the band gap (ΦB = Eg – ξ). The surface space-charge variation is schematically represented in (b) and (c) with positive ΦB indicating electron depletion and upward band bending (b), while negative ΦB indicated electron accumulation and downward band bending (c).

    Figure 8

    Figure 8. Uncorrected partial (colored lines) and total (black lines) DOS for (a) β-Ga2O3, (b) hexagonal InGaO3, and (c) bixbyite In2O3, with the insets showing an expanded region of the CBM. The valence band regions are expanded in (d)–(f). For InGaO3 in (e), orbitals with strong overlap are shaded to aid in visualization.

    Figure 9

    Figure 9. Valence and semicore levels. (a) Cross-section-corrected and broadened DFT partial and total VB-DOS of β-Ga2O3 (top), InGaO3 (middle), and In2O3 (bottom). (b) Measured XPS VB spectra aligned to the VBM. The top and bottom spectra were taken from refs (24) and (23) for single crystalline β-Ga2O3 (x = 0) and In2O3 (x = 1), respectively. The other spectra represent intermediate composition steps, working from top to bottom In(x) is x = 0.25, x = 0.5, and x = 0.75, respectively. (c) DFT calculated semicore levels for β-Ga2O3 (top), InGaO3 (middle), and In2O3 (bottom). The semicore levels are dominated by the d-orbital contributions from Ga and In. Note that SOC has been included for the In2O3 which splits the d band, better accounting for the broadness of the semicore level. (d) Measured XPS semicore level spectra of β-Ga2O3 (ref (24)) (top), InGaO3 (middle), and In2O3 (ref (23)) (bottom). Two Gaussians are overlaid in the InGaO3 spectra to aid comparison with the In 4d and Ga 3d hybrid semicore level in the theory. The high binding energy region in each case is shown magnified ×15.

    Figure 10

    Figure 10. (a) Theoretically calculated band-edge positions for Ga and In cation compounds relative to the charge neutrality level ECNL. Γ–Γ transitions are shown, but in cases where the indirect transition is significant this is indicated. (b) Atomic orbital energy levels for the constituent elements taken experimentally (58) and theoretically (59) where experiment was not available. These results corroborate the trends seen in other works. (55,60) (c) Absolute volume deformation potential at the Γ-point aVΓ, CBM deformation potential aVΓ,CBM, and VBM deformation potential aVΓ,VBM for compounds. (d) Calculated equilibrium unit cell volume and volume per atom (unit cell volume normalized by the number of atoms it contains) for compounds.

  • References

    ARTICLE SECTIONS
    Jump To

    This article references 73 other publications.

    1. 1
      Walsh, A.; Da Silva, J. L. F.; Wei, S.-H.; Korber, C.; Klein, A.; Piper, L. F. J.; DeMasi, A.; Smith, K. E.; Panaccione, G.; Torelli, P.; Payne, D. J.; Bourlange, A.; Egdell, R. G. Nature of the Band Gap of In2O3 Revealed by First-Principles Calculations and X-Ray Spectroscopy. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2008, 100, 167402,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.167402
    2. 2
      Ellmer, K. Past Achievements and Future Challenges in the Development of Optically Transparent Electrodes. Nat. Photonics 2012, 6, 809817,  DOI: 10.1038/nphoton.2012.282
    3. 3
      Pearton, S. J.; Yang, J.; Cary, P. H.; Ren, F.; Kim, J.; Tadjer, M. J.; Mastro, M. A. A Review of Ga2O3 Materials, Processing, and Devices. Appl. Phys. Rev. 2018, 5, 011301,  DOI: 10.1063/1.5006941
    4. 4
      Lorenz, M. The 2016 Oxide Electronic Materials and Oxide Interfaces Roadmap. J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 2016, 49, 433001,  DOI: 10.1088/0022-3727/49/43/433001
    5. 5
      Gonçalves, G.; Barquinha, P.; Pereira, L.; Franco, N.; Alves, E.; Martins, R.; Fortunato, E. High Mobility a-IGO Films Produced at Room Temperature and Their Application in TFTs. Electrochem. Solid-State Lett. 2010, 13, H20H22,  DOI: 10.1149/1.3257613
    6. 6
      Huang, W.-L.; Hsu, M.-H.; Chang, S.-P.; Chang, S.-J.; Chiou, Y.-Z. Indium Gallium Oxide Thin Film Transistor for Two-Stage UV Sensor Application. ECS J. Solid State Sci. Technol. 2019, 8, Q3140Q3143,  DOI: 10.1149/2.0251907jss
    7. 7
      Kim, Y. G.; Kim, T.; Avis, C.; Lee, S.-H.; Jang, J. Stable and High-Performance Indium Oxide Thin-Film Transistor by Ga Doping. IEEE Trans. Electron Devices 2016, 63, 10781084,  DOI: 10.1109/TED.2016.2518703
    8. 8
      von Wenckstern, H.; Splith, D.; Werner, A.; Müller, S.; Lorenz, M.; Grundmann, M. Properties of Schottky Barrier Diodes on (InxGa1-x)2O3 for 0.01 ≤ x ≤ 0.85 Determined by a Combinatorial Approach. ACS Comb. Sci. 2015, 17, 710715,  DOI: 10.1021/acscombsci.5b00084
    9. 9
      Kranert, C.; Lenzner, J.; Jenderka, M.; Lorenz, M.; von Wenckstern, H.; Schmidt-Grund, R.; Grundmann, M. Lattice Parameters and Raman-active Phonon Modes of (InxGa1-x)2O3 for x < 0.4. J. Appl. Phys. 2014, 116, 013505,  DOI: 10.1063/1.4886895
    10. 10
      Shannon, R. D.; Prewitt, C. T. Synthesis and Structure of Phases in the In2O3-Ga2O3 System. J. Inorg. Nucl. Chem. 1968, 30, 13891398,  DOI: 10.1016/0022-1902(68)80277-5
    11. 11
      Kneiß, M.; Hassa, A.; Splith, D.; Sturm, C.; von Wenckstern, H.; Lorenz, M.; Grundmann, M. Epitaxial Stabilization of Single Phase κ-(InxGa1-x)2O3 Thin Films up to x = 0.28 on c-Sapphire and κ-Ga2O3(001) Templates by Tin-Assisted VCCS-PLD. APL Mater. 2019, 7, 101102,  DOI: 10.1063/1.5120578
    12. 12
      Heyd, J.; Scuseria, G. E.; Ernzerhof, M. Hybrid Functionals Based on a Screened Coulomb Potential. J. Chem. Phys. 2003, 118, 82078215,  DOI: 10.1063/1.1564060
    13. 13
      Blöchl, P. E. Projector Augmented-Wave Method. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 1994, 50, 1795317979,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.50.17953
    14. 14
      Kresse, G.; Furthmüller, J. Efficient Iterative Schemes for Ab Initio Total-energy Calculations using a Plane-wave Basis Set. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 1996, 54, 1116911186,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.54.11169
    15. 15
      Blöchl, P. E.; Jepsen, O.; Andersen, O. K. Improved Tetrahedron Method for Brillouin-zone Integrations. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 1994, 49, 1622316233,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.49.16223
    16. 16
      Onuma, T.; Saito, S.; Sasaki, K.; Goto, K.; Masui, T.; Yamaguchi, T.; Honda, T.; Kuramata, A.; Higashiwaki, M. Temperature-Dependent Exciton Resonance Energies and their Correlation with IR-active Optical Phonon Modes in β-Ga2O3 Single Crystals. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2016, 108, 101904,  DOI: 10.1063/1.4943175
    17. 17
      Ingebrigtsen, M. E.; Varley, J. B.; Kuznetsov, A. Y.; Svensson, B. G.; Alfieri, G.; Mihaila, A.; Badstübner, U.; Vines, L. Iron and Intrinsic Deep Level States in Ga2O3. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2018, 112, 042104,  DOI: 10.1063/1.5020134
    18. 18
      Geller, S. Crystal Structure of β-Ga2O3. J. Chem. Phys. 1960, 33, 676684,  DOI: 10.1063/1.1731237
    19. 19
      Prozheeva, V.; Hölldobler, R.; von Wenckstern, H.; Grundmann, M.; Tuomisto, F. Effects of Alloy Composition and Si-doping on Vacancy Defect Formation in (InxGa1-x)2O3 Thin Films. J. Appl. Phys. 2018, 123, 125705,  DOI: 10.1063/1.5022245
    20. 20
      Schmidt-Grund, R.; Kranert, C.; Bontgen, T.; von Wenckstern, H.; Krauß, H.; Grundmann, M. Dielectric Function in the NIR-VUV Spectral Range of (InxGa1-x)2O3 Thin Films. J. Appl. Phys. 2014, 116, 053510,  DOI: 10.1063/1.4891521
    21. 21
      von Wenckstern, H.; Kneiß, M.; Hassa, A.; Storm, P.; Splith, D.; Grundmann, M. A Review of the Segmented-Target Approach to Combinatorial Material Synthesis by Pulsed-Laser Deposition. Phys. Status Solidi B 2020, 257, 1900626,  DOI: 10.1002/pssb.201900626
    22. 22
      Vines, L.; Bhoodoo, C.; von Wenckstern, H.; Grundmann, M. Electrical Conductivity of In2O3 and Ga2O3 after Low Temperature Ion Irradiation; Implications for Intrinsic Defect Formation and Charge Neutrality Level. J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 2018, 30, 025502,  DOI: 10.1088/1361-648X/aa9e2a
    23. 23
      King, P. D. C.; Veal, T. D.; Fuchs, F.; Wang, C. Y.; Payne, D. J.; Bourlange, A.; Zhang, H.; Bell, G. R.; Cimalla, V.; Ambacher, O.; Egdell, R. G.; Bechstedt, F.; McConville, C. F. Band Gap, Electronic Structure, and Surface Electron Accumulation of Cubic and Rhombohedral In2O3. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 2009, 79, 205211,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.79.205211
    24. 24
      Swallow, J. E. N.; Varley, J. B.; Jones, L. A. H.; Gibbon, J. T.; Piper, L. F. J.; Dhanak, V. R.; Veal, T. D. Transition from Electron Accumulation to Depletion at β-Ga2O3 Surfaces: The Role of Hydrogen and the Charge Neutrality Level. APL Mater. 2019, 7, 022528,  DOI: 10.1063/1.5054091
    25. 25
      Nagata, T.; Hoga, T.; Yamashita, A.; Asahi, T.; Yagyu, S.; Chikyow, T. Valence Band Modification of a (GaxIn1-x)2O3 Solid Solution System Fabricated by Combinatorial Synthesis. ACS Comb. Sci. 2020, 22, 433439,  DOI: 10.1021/acscombsci.0c00033
    26. 26
      King, P. D. C.; Veal, T. D.; Payne, D. J.; Bourlange, A.; Egdell, R. G.; McConville, C. F. Surface Electron Accumulation and the Charge Neutrality Level in In2O3. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2008, 101, 116808,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.101.116808
    27. 27
      Lovejoy, T. C.; Chen, R.; Zheng, X.; Villora, E. G.; Shimamura, K.; Yoshikawa, H.; Yamashita, Y.; Ueda, S.; Kobayashi, K.; Dunham, S. T.; Ohuchi, F. S.; Olmstead, M. A. Band Bending and Surface Defects in β-Ga2O3. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2012, 100, 181602,  DOI: 10.1063/1.4711014
    28. 28
      Navarro-Quezada, A.; Alamé, S.; Esser, N.; Furthmüller, J.; Bechstedt, F.; Galazka, Z.; Skuridina, D.; Vogt, P. Near Valence-band Electronic Properties of Semiconducting β-Ga2O3 (100) Single Crystals. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 2015, 92, 195306,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.92.195306
    29. 29
      King, P. D. C.; Veal, T. D.; Schleife, A.; Zúñiga-Pérez, J.; Martel, B.; Jefferson, P. H.; Fuchs, F.; Muñoz-Sanjosé, V.; Bechstedt, F.; McConville, C. F. Valence-band Electronic Structure of CdO, ZnO, and MgO from X-ray Photoemission Spectroscopy and Quasi-particle-corrected Density-functional Theory Calculations. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 2009, 79, 205205,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.79.205205
    30. 30
      Moses, P. G.; Van de Walle, C. G. Band Bowing and Band Alignment in InGaN Alloys. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2010, 96, 021908,  DOI: 10.1063/1.3291055
    31. 31
      Peelaers, H.; Steiauf, D.; Varley, J. B.; Janotti, A.; Van de Walle, C. G. (InxGa1-x)2O3 Alloys for Transparent Electronics. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 2015, 92, 085206,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.92.085206
    32. 32
      Oshima, T.; Fujita, S. Properties of Ga2O3-based (InxGa1-x)2O3 Alloy Thin Films Grown by Molecular Beam Epitaxy. Phys. Status Solidi C 2008, 5, 31133115,  DOI: 10.1002/pssc.200779297
    33. 33
      Regoutz, A.; Egdell, R.; Morgan, D.; Palgrave, R.; Téllez, H.; Skinner, S.; Payne, D.; Watson, G.; Scanlon, D. Electronic and Surface Properties of Ga-doped In2O3 Ceramics. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2015, 349, 970982,  DOI: 10.1016/j.apsusc.2015.04.106
    34. 34
      von Wenckstern, H.; Splith, D.; Purfürst, M.; Zhang, Z.; Kranert, C.; Müller, S.; Lorenz, M.; Grundmann, M. Structural and Optical Properties of (In,Ga)2O3 Thin Films and Characteristics of Schottky Contacts Thereon. Semicond. Sci. Technol. 2015, 30, 024005,  DOI: 10.1088/0268-1242/30/2/024005
    35. 35
      Yang, F.; Ma, J.; Luan, C.; Kong, L. Structural and Optical Properties of Ga2(1-x)In2xO3 films Prepared on α-Al2O3 (0001) by MOCVD. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2009, 255, 44014404,  DOI: 10.1016/j.apsusc.2008.10.129
    36. 36
      Zhang, Z.; von Wenckstern, H.; Lenzner, J.; Lorenz, M.; Grundmann, M. Visible-blind and Solar-blind Ultraviolet Photodiodes Based on (InxGa1-x)2O3. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2016, 108, 123503,  DOI: 10.1063/1.4944860
    37. 37
      Michel, J.; Splith, D.; Rombach, J.; Papadogianni, A.; Berthold, T.; Krischok, S.; Grundmann, M.; Bierwagen, O.; von Wenckstern, H.; Himmerlich, M. Processing Strategies for High-Performance Schottky Contacts on n-Type Oxide Semiconductors: Insights from In2O3. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2019, 11, 2707327087,  DOI: 10.1021/acsami.9b06455
    38. 38
      Rombach, J.; Papadogianni, A.; Mischo, M.; Cimalla, V.; Kirste, L.; Ambacher, O.; Berthold, T.; Krischok, S.; Himmerlich, M.; Selve, S.; Bierwagen, O. The Role of Surface Electron Accumulation and Bulk Doping for Gas-Sensing Explored with Single-Crystalline In2O3 Thin Films. Sens. Actuators, B 2016, 236, 909916,  DOI: 10.1016/j.snb.2016.03.079
    39. 39
      Veal, T. D.; Jefferson, P. H.; Piper, L. F. J.; McConville, C. F.; Joyce, T. B.; Chalker, P. R.; Considine, L.; Lu, H.; Schaff, W. J. Transition from Electron Accumulation to Depletion at InGaN Surfaces. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2006, 89, 202110,  DOI: 10.1063/1.2387976
    40. 40
      Kajiyama, K.; Mizushima, Y.; Sakata, S. Schottky Barrier Height of n-InxGa1-xAs Diodes. Appl. Phys. Lett. 1973, 23, 458,  DOI: 10.1063/1.1654957
    41. 41
      Lüth, H. Research on III-V Semiconductor Interfaces: Its Impact on Technology and Devices. Physica Status Solidi (a) 2001, 187, 3344,  DOI: 10.1002/1521-396X(200109)187:1<33::AID-PSSA33>3.0.CO;2-9
    42. 42
      Wei, S.-H.; Zunger, A. Role of Metal d States in II-VI Semiconductors. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 1988, 37, 8958,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.37.8958
    43. 43
      Varley, J. B.; Weber, J. R.; Janotti, A.; Van de Walle, C. G. Oxygen Vacancies and Donor Impurities in β-Ga2O3. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2010, 97, 142106,  DOI: 10.1063/1.3499306
    44. 44
      Karazhanov, S. Z.; Ravindran, P.; Vajeeston, P.; Ulyashin, A.; Finstad, T. G.; Fjellvag, H. Phase Stability, Electronic Structure, and Optical Properties of Indium Oxide Polytypes. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 2007, 76, 075129,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.76.075129
    45. 45
      Mryasov, O. N.; Freeman, A. J. Electronic Band Structure of Indium Tin Oxide and Criteria for Transparent Conducting Behavior. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 2001, 64, 233111,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.64.233111
    46. 46
      Furthmüller, J.; Bechstedt, F. Quasiparticle Bands and Spectra of Ga2O3 Polymorphs. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 2016, 93, 115204,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.93.115204
    47. 47
      Hajnal, Z.; Miró, J.; Kiss, G.; Réti, F.; Deák, P.; Herndon, R. C.; Kuperberg, J. M. Role of Oxygen Vacancy Defect States in the n-type Conduction of β-Ga2O3. J. Appl. Phys. 1999, 86, 3792,  DOI: 10.1063/1.371289
    48. 48
      Swallow, J. E. N. Influence of Polymorphism on the Electronic Structure of Ga2O3. Chem. Mater. 2020, 32, 84608470,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.chemmater.0c02465
    49. 49
      Scofield, J. Theoretical photoionization cross sections from 1 to 1500 keV, 1973.
    50. 50
      Persson, C.; Zunger, A. s-d Coupling in Zinc-blende Semiconductors. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 2003, 68, 073205,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.68.073205
    51. 51
      Fuchs, F.; Bechstedt, F. Indium-oxide Polymorphs from First Principles: Quasiparticle Electronic States. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 2008, 77, 155107,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.77.155107
    52. 52
      Fuchs, F.; Furthmüller, J.; Bechstedt, F.; Shishkin, M.; Kresse, G. Quasiparticle Band Structure based on a Generalized Kohn-Sham Scheme. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 2007, 76, 115109,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.76.115109
    53. 53
      Ley, L.; Pollak, R. A.; McFeely, F. R.; Kowalczyk, S. P.; Shirley, D. A. Total Valence-band Densities of States of III-V and II-VI Compounds from X-ray Photoemission Spectroscopy. Phys. Rev. B 1974, 9, 600621,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.9.600
    54. 54
      Erhart, P.; Klein, A.; Egdell, R. G.; Albe, K. Band Structure of Indium Oxide: Indirect Versus Direct Band Gap. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 2007, 75, 153205,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.75.153205
    55. 55
      Wei, S.-H.; Nie, X.; Batyrev, I. G.; Zhang, S. B. Breakdown of the Band-gap-common-cation Rule: The Origin of the Small Band Gap of InN. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 2003, 67, 165209,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.67.165209
    56. 56
      Wei, S.-H.; Zunger, A. Predicted Band-gap Pressure Coefficients of all Diamond and Zinc-blende Semiconductors: Chemical Trends. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 1999, 60, 5404,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.60.5404
    57. 57
      Li, Y.-H.; Gong, X. G.; Wei, S.-H. Ab Initio All-Electron Calculation of Absolute Volume Deformation Potentials of IV-IV, III-V, and II-VI Semiconductors: The Chemical Trends. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 2006, 73, 245206,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.73.245206
    58. 58
      Mann, J. B.; Meek, T. L.; Allen, L. C. Configuration Energies of the Main Group Elements. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2000, 122, 27802783,  DOI: 10.1021/ja992866e
    59. 59
      Fischer, C. F. Average-energy-of-configuration Hartree-Fock Results for the Atoms Helium to Radon. At. Data Nucl. Data Tables 1973, 12, 8799,  DOI: 10.1016/0092-640X(73)90014-4
    60. 60
      Herman, F.; Skillman, S. Atomic Structure Calculations; Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1963.
    61. 61
      Vurgaftman, I.; Meyer, J. R.; Ram-Mohan, L. R. Band Parameters for III-V Compound Semiconductors and their Alloys. J. Appl. Phys. 2001, 89, 58155875,  DOI: 10.1063/1.1368156
    62. 62
      Wu, J.; Walukiewicz, W.; Shan, W.; Yu, K. M.; Ager, J. W.; Li, S. X.; Haller, E. E.; Lu, H.; Schaff, W. J. Temperature Dependence of the Fundamental Band Gap of InN. J. Appl. Phys. 2003, 94, 44574460,  DOI: 10.1063/1.1605815
    63. 63
      Tippins, H. H. Optical Absorption and Photoconductivity in the Band Edge of β-Ga2O3. Phys. Rev. 1965, 140, A316A319,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRev.140.A316
    64. 64
      Varley, J. B.; Schleife, A. Bethe-Salpeter Calculation of Optical-absorption Spectra of In2O3 and Ga2O3. Semicond. Sci. Technol. 2015, 30, 024010,  DOI: 10.1088/0268-1242/30/2/024010
    65. 65
      Wei, S.-H.; Zunger, A. Calculated Natural Band Offsets of all II-VI and III-V Semiconductors: Chemical Trends and the Role of Cation d Orbitals. Appl. Phys. Lett. 1998, 72, 2011,  DOI: 10.1063/1.121249
    66. 66
      Wei, S.-H.; Zunger, A. Role of d Orbitals in Valence-Band Offsets of Common-Anion Semiconductors. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1987, 59, 144,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.59.144
    67. 67
      Van de Walle, C. G.; Martin, R. M. Absolute Deformation Potentials: Formulation and Ab initio Calculations for Semiconductors. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1989, 62, 20282031,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.62.2028
    68. 68
      Cardona, M.; Christensen, N. E. Acoustic Deformation Potentials and Heterostructure Band Offsets in Semiconductors. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 1987, 35, 61826194,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.35.6182
    69. 69
      Li, Y.-H.; Gong, X. G.; Wei, S.-H. Ab initio All-electron Calculation of Absolute Volume Deformation Potentials of IV-IV, III-V, and II-VI Semiconductors: The Chemical Trends. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 2006, 73, 245206,  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.73.245206
    70. 70
      Varley, J. B.; Samanta, A.; Lordi, V. Descriptor-Based Approach for the Prediction of Cation Vacancy Formation Energies and Transition Levels. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 2017, 8, 50595063,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.jpclett.7b02333
    71. 71
      Schleife, A.; Fuchs, F.; Rödl, C.; Furthmüller, J.; Bechstedt, F. Branch-point Energies and Band Discontinuities of III-nitrides and III-/II-oxides from Quasiparticle Band-structure Calculations. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2009, 94, 012104,  DOI: 10.1063/1.3059569
    72. 72
      Shapera, E. P.; Schleife, A. Database-Driven Materials Selection for Semiconductor Heterojunction Design. Advanced Theory and Simulations 2018, 1, 1800075,  DOI: 10.1002/adts.201800075
    73. 73
      Walsh, A.; Catlow, C. R. A.; Zhang, K. H. L.; Egdell, R. G. Control of the Band-gap States of Metal Oxides by the Application of Epitaxial Strain: The Case of Indium Oxide. Phys. Rev. B: Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 2011, 83, 161202(R)  DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.83.161202
  • Supporting Information

    Supporting Information

    ARTICLE SECTIONS
    Jump To

    The Supporting Information is available free of charge at https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsami.0c16021.

    • XPS core levels and associated analysis, optical transmission and absorption spectra, XPS semicore levels, DFT of semicore levels accounting for SOC, DFT calculated band gap deformation potentials (PDF)


    Terms & Conditions

    Most electronic Supporting Information files are available without a subscription to ACS Web Editions. Such files may be downloaded by article for research use (if there is a public use license linked to the relevant article, that license may permit other uses). Permission may be obtained from ACS for other uses through requests via the RightsLink permission system: http://pubs.acs.org/page/copyright/permissions.html.

Pair your accounts.

Export articles to Mendeley

Get article recommendations from ACS based on references in your Mendeley library.

Pair your accounts.

Export articles to Mendeley

Get article recommendations from ACS based on references in your Mendeley library.

You’ve supercharged your research process with ACS and Mendeley!

STEP 1:
Click to create an ACS ID

Please note: If you switch to a different device, you may be asked to login again with only your ACS ID.

Please note: If you switch to a different device, you may be asked to login again with only your ACS ID.

Please note: If you switch to a different device, you may be asked to login again with only your ACS ID.

MENDELEY PAIRING EXPIRED
Your Mendeley pairing has expired. Please reconnect