Noncontact Atomic Force Microscopy - Yale School of Engineering ...
Noncontact Atomic Force Microscopy - Yale School of Engineering ...
Noncontact Atomic Force Microscopy - Yale School of Engineering ...
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Th-1120<br />
Combined Qplus-AFM and STM imaging <strong>of</strong> the Si(100) surface:<br />
Activating the c(4x2) to p(2x1) transition with subnanometre oscillation<br />
amplitudes<br />
A. Sweetman, S. Gangopadhyay, R. Danza, and P. Moriarty<br />
<strong>School</strong> <strong>of</strong> Physics and Astronomy, University <strong>of</strong> Nottingham,<br />
Nottingham NG7 2RD, UK<br />
We report the first combined Qplus AFM and STM images <strong>of</strong> the Si(100) surface. The<br />
study <strong>of</strong> the Si(100)-(2x1) and c(4x2) reconstructions using scanning probe methods<br />
(both STM and NC-AFM) has led to a variety <strong>of</strong> intriguing and controversial issues<br />
associated with identifying the ground state <strong>of</strong> the system [1]. Foremost among these<br />
have been the determination <strong>of</strong> whether the silicon dimers, which give rise to the (2x)<br />
periodicity at the Si(100) surface, are asymmetric or symmetric, and the extent to which<br />
the measurement technique might influence the energy balance. Previous experimental<br />
NC-AFM measurements (with ~ 10 nm amplitude) combined with theoretical<br />
calculations [2] showed that the AFM probe could strongly influence the Si(100) surface,<br />
stabilising a p(2x1) phase at low temperatures. Our Qplus measurements, taken with<br />
probe oscillation amplitudes ranging from 250 pm to 10 nm, not only confirm that the<br />
strong influence <strong>of</strong> the tip is retained at subnanometre oscillation amplitudes, but, as<br />
shown in Fig. 1, suggest that tip symmetry plays a central role in stabilisation <strong>of</strong> a<br />
particular surface phase. In addition, there are clear and striking differences between<br />
STM and Qplus AFM images <strong>of</strong> the Si(100)-(2x1) phase arising from the residual dimer<br />
buckling associated with probe-induced stabilisation <strong>of</strong> the p(2x1) structure.<br />
[1] Lev Kantorovich and Chris Hobbs, Phys. Rev. B 73 245420 (2006) and references therein<br />
[2] Yan Jun Li et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 96 106104 (2006)<br />
Fig. 1 Qplus AFM images <strong>of</strong> the Si(100) surface. (a) Regions <strong>of</strong> both (2x1) and c(4x2)<br />
symmetry are visible. (df=-10.9 Hz, A vib=350 pm (700 pm pk-pk), V gap=+0.3V). (b) and (c)<br />
Images <strong>of</strong> the same surface region taken in parallel with identical scan parameters showing the<br />
influence <strong>of</strong> the scan direction on the surface phase. Image (b) was taken while the tip was<br />
moving from left to right. For Image (c) the tip was moving from right to left.<br />
76