Phys. Rev. Lett. Phys. Rev. A Phys. Rev. B Phys. Rev. C Phys. Rev. D Phys. Rev. E Phys. Rev. ST AB Rev. Mod. Phys. Phys. Rev. (Series I) Phys. Rev. Volume: Page/Article:

Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 325–328 (1991)

[Issue 3 – 21 January 1991 ]

[ Previous article | Next article | Issue 3 contents ]

A new universality class for kinetic growth: One-dimensional molecular-beam epitaxy

S. Das Sarma and P. Tamborenea

Department of Physics, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland 20742-4111

We study a new model for kinetic growth motivated by the physics of molecular-beam epitaxy where the deposited atoms can relax to kink sites maximizing the number of saturated bonds. The model is thus intermediate between the well-known random-deposition model with no relaxation and the random-deposition model with perfect relaxation, producing growth exponents which are in between these two extremes. In particular, the growth exponent beta , defining the interface width W~t ^beta at intermediate times, is found to be beta [approx equals] 0.375±0.005 in d=1+1 dimensions. Our estimated alpha for this model is around 1.5 for 1+1 dimensions.

©1991 The American Physical Society

URL: http://link.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v66/p325
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.66.325
PACS: 61.50.Cj, 05.40.+j, 05.70.Ln, 68.55.Bd

[ Previous article | Next article | Issue 3 contents ]

References

1. S. F. Edwards and D. R. Wilkinson, Proc. Roy. Soc. London A 381, 17 (1982).
2. M. Kardar, G. Parisi and Y. C. Zhang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 56, 889 (1986) [SPIRES].
3. F. Family, J. Phys. A 19, L441 (1986) [ INSPEC].
4. T. Halpin-Healy, Phys. Rev. Lett. 62, 442 (1989); 63, 917 (1989); 64, 109(E) (1990); (to be published).
5. J. M. Kim and J. M. Kosterlitz, Phys. Rev. Lett. 62, 2289 (1989); J. Kerterz and D. E. Wolf, , 2571 (1989); J. G. Amar and F. Family, 64, 543 (1990); H. Guo et al., , 1262 (1990); B. M. Forrest and L. H. Tang, , 1405 (1990); Y. P. Pelligrini and R. Jullien, , 1745 (1990).
6. S. Das Sarma, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A 8, 2714 (1990) [ SPIN]; A. Madhukar and S. V. Ghaisas, CRC Crit. Rev. Solid State Mater. Sci. 13, 1434 (1987); R. Kariotis and M. G. Lagally, Surf. Sci. 216, 557 (1989) [ INSPEC]; S. Clarke and D. Vvedensky, Phys. Rev. Lett. 58, 2235 (1987); and, Surf. Sci. 189/190, 1033 (1987); A. Rockett, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 6, 763 (1988) [ INSPEC]; T. Kawamura, A. Kobayashi and S. Das Sarma, Phys. Rev. B 39, 12723 (1989); S. Das Sarma et al., J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 5, 1179 (1987) [ SPIN][ INSPEC]; A. Kobayashi and S. Das Sarma, Phys. Rev. B 37, 1039 (1988).
7. T. Vicsek, Fractal Growth Phenomena (World Scientific, Singapore, 1989); F. Family (to be published).
8. We have calculated beta for various values of L (32 < L < 32 768) for various l and p. Our logW "-" log t plots are linear over 2 to 6 decades of time. The error estimate is based on variation in beta extracted from various L values. Details will be given in a longer publication.
9. Note that for any finite-size system (i.e., l/L != 0 ), large values of l will tend to cause saturation of the interface widths at shorter times, making it more difficult to extract an unam- biguous beta for larger l values.
10. C. Herring, in The Physics of Powder Metallurgy, edited by W. E. Kingston (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1951); W. W. Mullins, J. Appl. Phys. 28, 333 (1957); 30, 77 (1959); See also P. Noziéres, J. Phys. (Paris) 48, 1605 (1987) [ INSPEC].
11. D. E. Wolf and J. Villain (to be published).
12. L. Golubovic-acute and R. Bruinsma, preceding Letter, Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 321 (1991).

[ Previous article | Next article | Issue 3 contents ]