Transcript Slide 1
Quantization and depth effects, XPS and Auger I. XPS: The Chemical Shift II. Mean free path, overlayer attenuation, etc. III. Auger spectroscopy, final state effects Lecture 5—chemical shift 1 The XPS Chemical Shift: Shifts in Core level Binding Energies with Chemical State ΔEChemical Shift In part fromC. Smart, et al., Univ. Hong Kong and UWO 2 The binding energy is defined as: Eb = hv –Ek –Φ Where hv= photon energy Ek = kinetic energy of the photoelectron Φ = work function of the spectrometer Specifically, the CHEMICAL SHIFT is ΔEb That is the change in Eb relative to some chemical standard Binding energies and particle size 3 Chemical Shift in Au compounds vs. bulk elemental gold PHI handbook Binding energies and particle size 4 eEkin hv Ekin Evacuum Evacuum Φspectrometer EF EB Because the electron emitted from the solid has to impact on the analyzer/dectector to be counted, the relationship Ekin and EB has to include the work function term of the detector (typically, 4-5 eV): Ekin = hv-EB – Φspectrometer We only need the work function term for the spectrometer, not the sample, because (for a conducting sample) the two Fermi levels are coupled. Obviously, electrically insulating samples present problems (Charging) 5 eEkin hv Ekin Evacuum Evacuum Φspectrometer EF Changes in EB result from : EB 1. Changes in oxidation state of the atom (initial state effect) mainly 2. Changes in response of the system to the core hole final state: sometimes ΔEB = ΔE(in.state) – ΔR + other effects (e.g., band bending) where ΔR = changes in the relaxation response of the system to the final state core hole (see M.K. Bahl, et al., Phys. Rev. B 21 (1980) 1344 6 7 Primarily an initial state effect 8 ΔEb = kΔqi + ΔVij Vij often similar in different atoms of same material, so Δvij is typically 9 negligible Initial state term, often similar for diff. atoms in same molecule ΔEb = kΔqi + ΔVij In principle, can be obtained from ground state Mulliken Charge Density calculations Valence charge is removed or added to an atom by interaction with surrounding atoms. Binding energies and particle size 10 Chemical shift is dominated by changes in ground state valence charge density: Changes in valence charge density dominated by nearest-neighbor interactions Qualitative interpretation on basis of differences in ground state electronegativities Binding energies and particle size 11 e- O C EN = 3.5 EN = 2.5 C C O withdraws valence charge from C: C(1s) shifts to higher BE relative to elemental C (diamond) at 285.0 eV Elemental C: binding energy = 285.0 eV e- Ti C Ti donates charge to C, binding energy shifts to smaller values relative to 285 eV EN = 1.5 Binding energies and particle size 12 Thus, a higher oxidation state (usually) yields a higher binding energy! 13 Electron withdrawing groups shift core levels to higher binding energy Binding energies and particle size 14 Binding energy shifts can be used to follow the course of surface reactions for complex materials: e.g., atomic O /(Pt)NiSi (e.g., Manandhar, et al., Appl. Surf. Sci. 254(2008) 7486 Vacuum Atomic O = Ni = Si Bulk NiSi (Schematic, not real structure) Binding energies and particle size 15 Pauling Electronegativities, Ground State Si = 1.8 Ni-O or Si-O formation shift of Ni or Si to higher BE O = 3.5 Ni = 1.8 Question: Ni-Si Ni-Ni. Which way should BE move (think). Binding energies and particle size 16 SiO2 Si XPS binding energy shifts for Pt-doped NiSi as a function of exposure to atomic O at room temp. (Manadhar, et al., Appl. Surf. Sci. 254 (2008) 7486 SiO2 peak appears (shift to higher BE) Exposure to atomic O Ni (2p) shifts to lower BE. Why? 17 O + O2 Si SiO2 PtSi Pt1+ySi NiSi Ni1+x Si (A) Si transport and oxidation Preferential Si oxidation, Si flux creates metal-rich substrates O + O2 Pt silicate formation Pt1+y Si Ni1+x Si (B) Si transport kinetically inhibited, metal oxidation How do we estimate q, Δq? This is usually done with Mulliken atomic charge densities, originally obtained by LCAO methods: ΨMO = caΦa + cbΦb Φa(b) atomic orbital on atom a (b) Ψ 2 = caca* ΦaΦa* + [cross terms] + cbcb* ΦbΦb* Atomic charge on atom a Atomic charge on atom b Overlap charge 19 Different Boron Environments in orthocarborane derived films (B10C2HX and B10C2HX:Y) B-B-H C2-B-H C-B-H RC-B Rc=Ring carbon C2-B CB-B B-B-H C2-B-H C-B-H B2-B Figure 3 Chemical Shifts: Final Note •Calculating ground state atomic charge populations with DFT: •Minimal basis sets give best results (LCAO-MO) •Such basis sets are not best for lowest energy/geometric optimization Binding energies and particle size 22 Attenuation: hv I = I0 Clean surface of a film or single crystal hv eI = I0exp(-d/λ) d Issues: film or single crystal with overlayer of thickness d 1. Average coverage 2. Calculating λ 3. Relative vs. Absolute intensities Binding energies and particle size 23 Monolayer Surface coverage = Θ1 d = d1 Bare surface Coverage = 1-(Θ1+Θ2) Bilayer Surface coverage = Θ2 d = d2 We can only measure a total intensity from a macroscopic area of the surface: I = [1-(Θ1+Θ2)] I0 + Θ1I0 exp[-d1/λ] + Θ2 1I0 exp[-d2/λ] = I0exp[-dave/λ] we can only determine average coverage with XPS! Binding energies and particle size 24 Consider 2 cases: 1. dave < 1 ML (0<Θ<1) 2. dave> 1 ML (Θ> 1) We need to look at the RATIO of Isubstrate (IB) and Ioverlayer (IA) Why? Absolute intensity of IB can be impacted by: 1. Small changes in sample position 2. Changes in x-ray flux IB/IA will remain constant Binding energies and particle size 25 Calculation of the overlayer coverage First, we need to calculate the IMFP of the electrons of the substrate through the overlayer and the IMFP of the electrons in the overlayer. The formula to calculate the IMFP is (NIST): IMFP=E/Ep2([βln(γE)-(C/E)+(D/E2]) Binding energies and particle size 26 Element ρ(g cm-3) Nv E Eg (ener (Band gy) Gap M Ep Sulfur 6 2.07 32 152 Co O in MgO th-C 9 8.9 58.9 765 6 2.25 12.01 722.6 17.94 0 2308 33.58 1 5444 30.53 0 4293 C in C th--C 4 2.25 12.01 265 Co Thr--C 9 2.25 765 0 C in C th--Co 4 O Thru C 6 β γ U C D (Ep)2 ln(γE) (C/E) (D/E2 [βln(γE)Ep2([βln(γE)- IMFP=E/Ep2([βln(γE) 2 ) (C/E)+(D/E ] (C/E)+(D/E2]) -(C/E)+(D/E2]) 0.026 0.1327 0.3881 1.616 45.326 321.9 3.0046 0.010 0.001 0.07190997 8203 5418 4372 789 6107 264 2437 637 962 8 0.013 0.0640 1.3599 0.732 25.112 1127. 3.8913 0.000 4.29E 0.05338727 9544 2335 9767 402 0484 982 6834 957 -05 6 0.005 0.1273 1.1241 0.947 30.018 932.3 4.5219 0.001 5.75E 0.02472347 7446 3333 1749 053 3562 43 0886 311 -05 9 23.14972023 6.56595408 60.21989045 12.7034439 23.05076374 31.34820209 24.93 0.012 0.1273 0.7494 1.288 37.812 621.5 3.5187 0.004 0.000 0 1146 6928 3333 1166 035 2375 62 8287 861 538 0.04034127 25.07460164 10.56846301 16.88 0.030 0.1273 0.3438 1.657 46.248 285.1 4.5789 0.002 7.9E68 7302 3333 1964 124 5516 64 2887 166 05 0.13862427 39.5306522 19.3520713 2.25 12.01 1201 24.93 0.012 0.1273 0.7494 1.288 37.812 621.5 5.0299 0.001 2.62E 0.06279824 0 1146 6928 3333 1166 035 2375 62 6286 072 -05 3 39.03300374 30.76883368 2.25 12.01 30.53 0.005 0.1273 1.1241 0.947 30.018 932.3 4.1536 0.001 0.000 0.02208713 0 4293 7446 3333 1749 053 3562 43 6114 894 12 5 20.59278693 24.2803464 48.27 0.005 0.1273 2.8102 0.587 5.0541 2330. 4.3882 0.000 -1.3E- 0.02373862 0 8956 6184 3333 9373 367 0956 858 5884 93 05 2 -55.33134684 -11.42571139 58.9 500 Ni Thru C 15 2.25 12.01 632.2 Mg thru C 2 2.25 12.01 1435. 5 17.62 0.028 0.1273 0.3747 1.629 45.606 310.7 5.2083 0.001 2.21E 0.14668249 0 8982 3767 3333 0583 018 1187 81 2154 135 -05 4 45.58613442 31.48983827 Fe thru C 6 2.25 12.01 775.1 30.53 0.005 0.1273 1.1241 0.947 30.018 932.3 4.5920 0.001 0.02520763 0 4293 7446 3333 1749 053 3562 43 4509 222 5E-05 3 23.50216098 32.979946 Mg thru MgO 8 3.58 1435. 5 24.36 0.017 0.1009 0.7160 1.318 38.506 593.8 4.9761 0.000 1.87E 0.08430378 0 9634 1225 4664 3453 409 4818 79 0525 918 -05 2 50.06624913 28.67201009 40 Binding energies and particle size 27 Terms used in the excel sheet (example Carbon through MgO) Column Term used 1 Valence electrons of the element (O) 2 Density of the over layer (Carbon) 3 Mass of the over layer 4 Kinetic Energy of the element(O) After you insert all the four columns, the IMFP is calculated on its own. d overlayer substrate overlayer A(Ini*IcS) B(Ic*IniS) C 0 7660 0 1 7374.851 2454.299 2 7100.317 4835.711 3 6836.003 7146.401 4 6581.528 9388.467 5 6336.526 11563.95 6 6100.644 13674.83 7 5873.543 15723.01 8 5654.897 17710.37 9 5444.389 19638.71 10 5241.718 21509.78 11 5046.591 23325.29 12 4858.729 25086.88 13 4677.859 26796.15 14 4503.722 28454.67 15 4336.068 30063.92 16 4174.655 31625.39 17 4019.251 33140.48 18 3869.631 34610.58 19 3725.581 36037.02 20 3586.894 37421.1 21 3453.369 38764.08 22 3324.815 40067.17 23 3201.047 41331.56 24 3081.885 42558.4 25 2967.16 43748.81 26 2856.706 44903.87 27 2750.363 46024.62 28 2647.978 47112.09 29 2549.406 48167.26 30 2454.502 49191.1 31 2363.132 50184.53 32 2275.162 51148.46 substrate Si 7660 82642.42 7660 82642.42 7660 82642.42 7660 82642.42 7660 82642.42 7660 82642.42 7660 82642.42 7660 82642.42 7660 82642.42 7660 82642.42 7660 82642.42 7660 82642.42 7660 82642.42 7660 82642.42 7660 82642.42 7660 82642.42 7660 82642.42 7660 82642.42 7660 82642.42 7660 82642.42 7660 82642.42 7660 82642.42 7660 82642.42 7660 82642.42 7660 82642.42 7660 82642.42 7660 82642.42 7660 82642.42 7660 82642.42 7660 82642.42 7660 82642.42 7660 82642.42 7660 82642.42 Binding energies and particle size =D6*EXP(-A6/26.36) =E6*(1-EXP(-A6/33.17)) =Area under the curve1915/0.25 =Area under the curve 54544/0.6 29 15000 13000 11000 9000 7000 Series1 Series2 5000 3000 1000 -1 -0.5 0 -1000 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 Binding energies and particle size 6.5 7 7.5 8 30 Take-off angle variations in XPS: Definition Take off angle (θ) is the angle between the surface normal and the axis of the analyzer. (Some people use 90-θ) θ θ = 0 normal emission θ=89 grazing emission Take-off angle variations in XPS: Intensity vs. θ Intensity of a photoemission peak goes as I ~ I cosθ Therefore, intensities of adsorbates and other species are NOT enhanced at grazing emission (large θ)! Take-off angle variations in XPS: Sampling Depth (d) normal emission (θ = 0) d ~ λ (inelastic mean free path) λ θ λcosθ increased take-off angle: d~ λ cosθ (reduced sampling depth) d~ λ cosθ: Effective sampling depth (d) decreases as θ increases Relative intensities of surface species enhanced relative to those of subsurface: Si SiO2 SiO2 Si λ SiO2 λcosθ Si In Dragon and other systems: Arrangement of sample holder may cause increased signal from Ta or other extraneous materials. These should be monitored. However, enhancement of SiO2 relative to Si will remain the same. Ta sample holders Binding energies and particle size 36 Multiplet Splitting: 1. Valence electrons give rise to different spin states (crystal field, etc. Cu 2p 3/2 vs. ½ states 2. Formation of a core hole shell yields an unpaired electron left in the shell 3. Coupling between the core electron spin and valence spins gives rise to final states with different total angular momentum. Binding energies and particle size 37 Multiplet splitting in Cu 2p3/2 2p1/2 Binding energies and particle size 38 Auger Spectroscopy: Final State Effects XPS initial State XPS Final State hv or e- Auger Initial State Binding energies and particle size Auger Final State 39 Kinetic Energy of Auger Electron: This transition is denoted as (KLL) e- detector eInitial state Final State L2,3 (2p) L1 (2s) K (1s) L2,3 (2p) L1 (2s) K (1s) KEAuger = EK - EL1 – EL2,3 - Ueff ~ EK – EL-EL - Ueff Note: Auger transitions are broad, and small changes in BE (EL1 vs. EL2,3 ) sometimes don’t matter that much (sloppy notation) What is Ueff? Binding energies and particle size 40 L2,3 (2p) L1 (2s) K (1s) Ueff is the coulombic interaction of the final state holes, as screened by the final state response of the system: e.g., Jennison, Kelber and Rye “Auger Final States in Covalent Systems”, Phys. Rev. B. 25 (1982) 1384 Binding energies and particle size 41 For a typical metal, the final state holes are often delocalized (completely screened), and Ueff ~ 0 eV. However, for adsorbed molecules, or nanoparticles, the holes are constrained in proximity to each other. Ueff can be large, as large as 10 eV or more. Nanoparticle, Ueff ~ 1/R Agglomeration, should see shift in Auger peak as Ueff decreases R Heat in UHV Binding energies and particle size 42 KE(LVV) = EL –EV – EV – Ueff as particle size increases, Ueff decreases Note shift in Cu(LVV) Auger as nanoparticles on surface agglomerate J. Tong, et al. Appl. Surf. Sci. 187 (2002) 253 Cu/Si:O:C:H Binding energies and particle size 43 Similar effects in Auger KE are seen for agglomeration during Cu deposition at room temp. (Tong et al.) Cu(LVV) shift with increasing Cu coverage Binding energies and particle size Note corresponding change in Cu(2p3/2) binding energy. 44 Auger in derivative vs. integral mode When doing XPS, x-ray excited Auger spectra are acquired along with photoemission lines Binding energies and particle size 45 Auger spectra, though broad, can give information on the chemical state (esp. if the XPS BE shift is small as in Cu(0) vs. Cu(I) Above spectra are presented in the N(E) vs. E mode—or “integral mode” Binding energies and particle size 46 However, in some cases Auger spectroscopy is used simply to monitor surface cleanliness, elemental composition, etc. This often involves using electron stimulated Auger (no photoemission lines). Auger spectra are typically broad, and on a rising background. Presenting spectra in the differential mode (dN(E)/dE) eliminates the background. Peak-to-peak height (rather than peak area) is proportional to total signal intensity, and the background issue is eliminated. Except in certain cases, however, (e.g., C(KVV)) most chemical bonding info is lost. Binding energies and particle size 47 Auger (derivative mode) of graphene growth on Co3O4(111)/Co(0001) (Zhou, et al., JPCM 24 (2012) 072201 Homework: explain the data on the right. Binding energies and particle size 48 N(E) KE Peak-to-peak height Binding energies and particle size 49