During an AVC measurement the extraction position x and the injection
position
are varied. These are the location of the extraction of the
surface potential and the location of the injection of electrons, respectively.
Therefore the AVC potential
is a function of the two variables x
and
.
![]() ![]() ![]() |
(2.4) |
For an ideal AVC measurement the injection and extraction location are equal
and they are changed simultaneously. This position is moved along the diagonal
z of the x-
plane.
![]() ![]() ![]() |
(2.5) |
In an actual measurement the secondary electrons are emitted from a region with a diameter of the order of the diameter of the probing primary electron beam and which extends several nanometers into the semiconductor in vertical direction.
The AVC potential is assumed to be sufficiently often continuous differentiable
with respect to the variables x and
so that we can write
![]() ![]() ![]() |
(2.6) |
and
In the following the right side of (2.7) is investigated and approximations for the three terms of the sum are derived.
The first term of the sum on the right side of (2.7)
describes variations due to a change of the potential extraction position with
fixed injection position. Therefore it is given by the Poisson equation in
which the charge density is the sum of the charge density caused by the
injection of electrons
and the charge density caused by the doping
.
The second term on the right side of (2.7) can be rewritten as
Now the right side of (2.8) can be inserted into (2.9).
The second term of the sum on the right side of (2.10) vanishes
because the integrand does not dependent on the injection position .
For uniform doping there is no difference between moving the injection position
and varying the extraction location x by the same amount in the
opposite direction.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
(2.12) |
In this case (2.11) can be written as
where
is the charge density caused by injection for a uniform
doping. For nonuniform doping (2.11) can be written like
(2.13) with the additional term
in which all effects
of the nonuniform doping are summarized.
The third term of the sum on the right side of (2.7)
describes the effect of varying the injection position
and keeping the
extraction position x constant. For a first approximation again constant
doping is assumed. Then for the second derivative of the AVC potential there
is no contribution from the charge caused by the doping
. A change of
the injection position has the same effect on the AVC potential as a change of
the extraction position by the same amount in the same direction.
![]() ![]() |
(2.15) |
For uniform doping the third term of the sum on the right side of (2.7) can then be written as
|
(2.16) |
Similarly to the approximation of the second term of (2.7)
the effects of nonuniform doping are summarized in an additional term
(x,
).
Combining the approximations (2.8), (2.13), and (2.17) the second derivative of the AVC potential (2.7) finally can be written as
where
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
(2.19) |
The second derivative of the AVC potential
is proportional to the
superposition of a contribution of the charge density caused by the doping and
a contribution due to the injection of electrons.
To calculate
one has to solve the drift-diffusion equations
which has to be done by numeric integration for the general case. At the
injection position the injected charge is an upper bound for
.
From (2.18) it is clear that only when
is
several orders of magnitude smaller than
the location of the
pn-junction is at the position where the second derivative of
equals
zero and therefore it can be extracted from the measured AVC potential
without inverse modeling.
For uniform doping (2.18) does not dependent on the beam current. Therefore an approximation is needed only for the space charge region where the doping changes considerably.