AVS 53rd International Symposium
    Applied Surface Science Thursday Sessions
       Session AS-ThM

Paper AS-ThM1
Deep Core X-ray Photoelectron and Auger Spectra: A Comparison of Different Methods for Interpretation

Thursday, November 16, 2006, 8:00 am, Room 2005

Session: Ultra Thin Films and Buried Interfaces
Presenter: L. Kövér, Institute of Nuclear Research of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences
Authors: L. Kövér, Institute of Nuclear Research of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences
M. Novák, Institute of Nuclear Research of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences
S. Egri, University of Debrecen, Hungary
I. Cserny, Institute of Nuclear Research of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences
Z. Berényi, Institute of Nuclear Research of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences
J. Tóth, Institute of Nuclear Research of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences
W. Drube, Synchrotron DESY, Germany
F. Yubero, CSIC-U, Spain
S. Tougaard, University of Southern Denmark
W.S.M. Werner, Vienna University of Technology, Austria
Correspondent: Click to Email
The accuracy of quantitative chemical analysis of surface/interface layers is significantly influenced by the spectral contribution from electrons suffered energy losses within the solid. There is little information on the effects of such loss processes for higher energy electrons, promising for analysis of buried interfaces. Deep core (1s, 2s) photoelectron and KLL Auger spectra (resonant and non-resonant) excited by hard X-rays from homogeneous semiconductors Si, Ge and 3d transition metals (Cu, Ni, Fe) were measured with high energy resolution. The measured spectra were analyzed applying different approaches: i) the spectra were fitted by components reflecting surface, bulk and intrinsic (hole induced) excitations, using the "modified Hüfner model",@footnote 1@ ii) by the help of the Partial Intensity Analysis method@footnote 2@ contributions from bulk and surface excitations were successively removed from the spectra, iii) the spectra were simulated using the dielectric response theory.@footnote 3@ For surface excitations, both former models yield only small contributions to the spectra, while using the dielectric response theory surface and bulk excitations are not separated. Strong deviations occur, however, regarding the contribution from intrinsic excitations estimated by using different models, especially between the dielectric response theory and the other two models. Possible reasons of these deviations are discussed. This work was supported by the European Community - Research Infrastructure Action under the FP6 'Structuring the European Research Area' Programme (through the Integrated Infrastructure Initiative) Integrating Activity on Synchrotron and Free Electron Laser Science. @FootnoteText@@footnote 1@L. Kövér, M. Novák, S. Egri, I.Cserny, Z. Berényi, J. Tóth, D. Varga, W. Drube, F. Yubero, S. Tougaard, W. S. M. Werner, Surf. Interface Anal. 38(2006)569. @footnote 2@W. S. M. Werner, Surf. Interface Anal. 31(2001)141. @footnote 3@F. Yubero, S. Tougaard, Phys. Rev. B71(2005)045414.