Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T14:02:54.209Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Have We Found The Final Explanation For The Onset Of Rapid Interlayer Mass Transport?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 March 2011

M. Giesen  and
H. Ibach
M. Giesen
Affiliation:
Institut für Schichten und Grenzflächen, ISG 3, Forschungszentrum Jülich, D 52425 Jülich, Germany
H. Ibach
Affiliation:
Institut für Schichten und Grenzflächen, ISG 3, Forschungszentrum Jülich, D 52425 Jülich, Germany
Get access

Abstract

In recent STM experiments on multilayer island decay on Cu(111) in UHV a novel rapid interlayer mass transport was observed. This new transport mechanism may accelerate island stack decay by several orders of magnitude. Initial explanations for the onset of rapid decay events were based on the correlation between the occupation of surface states and the presence of a step edge barrier for adatom hopping over the island edges. We present new experimental data measured for Ag(111) which are in contradiction to the former interpretation of rapid interlayer mass transport. We show that all experimental results may be explained by considering an exchange mechanism when island edges in a stack are in close proximity.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 672: Symposium O – Mechanisms of Surface and Microstructure Evolution in Deposited Films and Film Structures , 2001 , O1.2
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2001

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

[1] Giesen, M., Prog. Surf. Sci. 68, (2001) (in press). (preprint available on http://www.fz-juelich.de/igv/GIESEN/ag-giesen1.htm#Publications)Google Scholar
[2] Ehrlich, G. and Hudda, F.G., J. Chem. Phys. 44, 1039 (1966).Google Scholar
[3] Schwoebel, R.L. and Shipsey, E.J., J. Appl. Phys. 37, 3682 (1966).Google Scholar
[4] Giesen, M., Icking-Konert, G.S. and Ibach, H., Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 552 (1998).Google Scholar
[5] Giesen, M., Surf. Sci. 441, 391 (1999).Google Scholar
[6] Giesen, M., Icking-Konert, G.S. and Ibach, H., Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 3101 (1999).Google Scholar
[7] Memmel, N. and Bertel, E., Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 485 (1995).Google Scholar
[8] Memmel, N., Surf. Sci. Rep. 32, 91 (1998).Google Scholar
[9] Kevan, S.D., Phys. Rev. Lett. 50, 526 (1983).Google Scholar
[10] Kevan, S.D. and Gaylord, R.H., Phys. Rev. B 36, 5809 (1987).Google Scholar
[11] Giesen, M. and Ibach, H., Surf. Sci. 464, L697 (2000).Google Scholar
[12] Icking-Konert, G.S., Giesen, M. and Ibach, H., Surf. Sci. 398, 37 (1998).Google Scholar
[13] Feibelman, P.J., Surf. Sci. 478, L349 (2001).Google Scholar
[14] Morgenstern, K., Rosenfeld, G., Comsa, G., Sorensen, M.R., Hammer, B., Laegsgaard, E. and Besenbacher, F., Phys. Rev. B 63, 045412/1-5 (2001).Google Scholar
[15] Steimer, C., Giesen, M. and Ibach, H., Surf. Sci. 471, 80 (2001).Google Scholar