5 eV), which can be ascribed to the trap states near the film surface.

The S parameter of the injection energy was approximately between 0.5 and 2 keV, which mainly represented the annihilation events occurring in the aluminum oxide film. Figure 5a shows that the S parameter initially increased rapidly, which indicated a higher vacancy defect density of the inner oxide film than that of the surface. A decrease was observed beyond 1 keV, demonstrating that the S parameter of the Al2O3/Si interface was lower than that of the Al2O3 films. The lower S parameter can be attributed to the positron annihilation with high-momentum electrons of oxygen at the interface. This result was probably due to the SiO x layer grown between the aluminum oxide and Si substrate, which reportedly has an important click here function in excellent surface passivation [6, 20, 21]. https://www.selleckchem.com/products/sch772984.html The S parameter continued to increase after 2 keV with increased incident energy because larger

portions of positrons were injected into the silicon substrate. The S parameter in the substrate was much higher than that in the oxide film because of the different chemical environments of annihilation. The S parameter did not reach a constant value before 10 keV, which implied that positrons with 10 keV energy check details cannot completely penetrate the Si substrate far from the oxide layer. The S-E plot in Figure 5a also shows that the S parameter in Al2O3 films (about 1 keV) evidently decreased with increased annealing temperature because of the decreased density of trap vacancies in the Al2O3 films. The W parameter was more sensitive to the chemical environment of the annihilation site. The larger W and smaller S parameters indicated more positrons

annihilating core electrons. Thus, the smallest S and largest W parameters of the sample annealed at 750°C (Figure 5a,b) implied that the Al2O3 films had been compressed at this temperature with the lowest vacancy defect density and that the film structure probably did not change. Figure 5 Doppler broadening spectroscopy of S – W parameters vs. positron incident energy. (a) S and (b) W parameters vs. positron incident energy for samples annealed at different temperatures for 10 min. (c) S-W plot for samples annealed at different temperatures for 10 min. The S and W parameters of the same incident energy were plotted in one graph, as shown in Figure 5c. The Dimethyl sulfoxide S vs. W diagrams of monolithic materials present clusters of points because all S or W parameters are almost the same [14]. For example, in one type of defect, the S and W parameters may vary with the positron incident energy, and the S-W plot extends to the line passing the data point of the bulk region without defect [13, 14]. The slope of the line changes with the layers of different compositions and defect types. Thus, the annealed sample consisted of a three-layered structure in which each curve consisted of three extended line segments (Figure 5c).