No Access
Published Online: 09 May 2014
Accepted: April 2014
Journal of Applied Physics 115, 183702 (2014); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4875683
The charge carrier drift mobility in disordered semiconductors is commonly graphically extracted from time-of-flight (TOF) photocurrent transients yielding a single transit time. However, the term transit time is ambiguously defined and fails to deliver a mobility in terms of a statistical average. Here, we introduce an advanced computational procedure to evaluate TOF transients, which allows to extract the whole distribution of transit times and mobilities from the photocurrent transient, instead of a single value. This method, extending the work of Scott et al. (Phys. Rev. B 46, 8603 (1992)), is applicable to disordered systems with a Gaussian density of states and its accuracy is validated using one-dimensional Monte Carlo simulations. We demonstrate the superiority of this new approach by comparing it to the common geometrical analysis of hole TOF transients measured on poly(3-hexyl thiophene-2,5-diyl). The extracted distributions provide access to a very detailed and accurate analysis of the charge carrier transport. For instance, not only the mobility given by the mean transit time but also the mean mobility can be calculated. Whereas the latter determines the macroscopic photocurrent, the former is relevant for an accurate determination of the energetic disorder parameter σ within the Gaussian disorder model. σ derived by using the common geometrical method is, as we show, underestimated instead.
The current work was supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG), project EiNDORSE (DE 830/9-1). C.D. gratefully acknowledges the support of the Bavarian Academy of Sciences and Humanities.
  1. 1. B. Movaghar, M. Grünewald, B. Ries, H. Bässler, and D. Würtz, Phys. Rev. B 33, 5545 (1986). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.33.5545 , Google ScholarCrossref
  2. 2. V. I. Arkhipov and A. I. Rudenko, Philos. Mag. B 45, 189 (1982). https://doi.org/10.1080/13642818208246327 , Google ScholarCrossref
  3. 3. A. I. Rudenko and V. I. Arkhipov, Philos. Mag. B 45, 177 (1982). https://doi.org/10.1080/13642818208246326 , Google ScholarCrossref
  4. 4. J. Lorrmann, B. H. Badada, O. Inganäs, V. Dyakonov, and C. Deibel, J. Appl. Phys. 108, 113705 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3516392 , Google ScholarScitation, ISI
  5. 5. T. Strobel, C. Deibel, and V. Dyakonov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 266602 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.105.266602 , Google ScholarCrossref
  6. 6. L. M. Andersson, C. Müller, B. H. Badada, F. Zhang, U. Würfel, and O. Inganäs, J. Appl. Phys. 110, 024509 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3609079 , Google ScholarScitation
  7. 7. A. Einstein, Ann. Phys. 322, 549 (1905). https://doi.org/10.1002/andp.19053220806 , Google ScholarCrossref
  8. 8. M. von Smoluchowski, Ann. Phys. 326, 756 (1906). https://doi.org/10.1002/andp.19063261405 , Google ScholarCrossref
  9. 9. A. Wagenpfahl, C. Deibel, and V. Dyakonov, IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quantum Electron. 16, 1759 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1109/JSTQE.2010.2042142 , Google ScholarCrossref
  10. 10. A. Wagenpfahl, D. Rauh, M. Binder, C. Deibel, and V. Dyakonov, Phys. Rev. B 82, 115306 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.82.115306 , Google ScholarCrossref
  11. 11. L. Onsager, Phys. Rev. 54, 554 (1938). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.54.554 , Google ScholarCrossref
  12. 12. C. L. Braun, J. Chem. Phys. 80, 4157 (1984). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.447243 , Google ScholarScitation, ISI
  13. 13. P. Langevin, Ann. Chim. Phys. 28, 433 (1903). Google Scholar
  14. 14. J. J. Thomson and E. Rutherford, Philos. Mag. Ser. 5 42, 392 (1896). https://doi.org/10.1080/14786449608620932 , Google ScholarCrossref
  15. 15. H. Scher and E. Montroll, Phys. Rev. B 12, 2455 (1975). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.12.2455 , Google ScholarCrossref
  16. 16. V. R. Nikitenko, H. von Seggern, and H. Bässler, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 19, 136210 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1088/0953-8984/19/13/136210 , Google ScholarCrossref
  17. 17. D. Monroe, Phys. Rev. Lett. 54, 146 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.54.146 , Google ScholarCrossref
  18. 18. S. D. Baranovskii, H. Cordes, F. Hensel, and G. Leising, Phys. Rev. B 62, 7934 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.62.7934 , Google ScholarCrossref
  19. 19. Z. G. Yu, D. L. Smith, A. Saxena, R. L. Martin, and A. R. Bishop, Phys. Rev. B 63, 085202 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.63.085202 , Google ScholarCrossref
  20. 20. N. Rappaport, Y. Preezant, and N. Tessler, Phys. Rev. B 76, 235323 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.76.235323 , Google ScholarCrossref
  21. 21. H. Bässler, Phys. Status Solidi B 175, 15 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1002/pssb.2221750102 , Google ScholarCrossref
  22. 22. J. J. M. van der Holst, M. A. Uijttewaal, B. Ramachandhran, R. Coehoorn, P. A. Bobbert, G. A. de Wijs, and R. A. de Groot, Phys. Rev. B 79, 085203 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.79.085203 , Google ScholarCrossref
  23. 23. R. Schmechel, Phys. Rev. B 66, 235206 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.66.235206 , Google ScholarCrossref
  24. 24. W. F. Pasveer, J. Cottaar, C. Tanase, R. Coehoorn, P. A. Bobbert, P. W. M. Blom, D. M. de Leeuw, and M. A. J. Michels, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 206601 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.94.206601 , Google ScholarCrossref
  25. 25. R. Coehoorn, W. F. Pasveer, P. A. Bobbert, and M. A. J. Michels, Phys. Rev. B 72, 155206 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.72.155206 , Google ScholarCrossref
  26. 26. V. I. Arkhipov, E. V. Emelianova, and H. Bässler, Philos. Mag. Part B 81, 985 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1080/13642810108205785 , Google ScholarCrossref
  27. 27. W. E. Spear, Proc. Phys. Soc. Sect. B 70, 669 (1957). https://doi.org/10.1088/0370-1301/70/7/304 , Google ScholarCrossref
  28. 28. R. Kepler, Phys. Rev. 119, 1226 (1960). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.119.1226 , Google ScholarCrossref
  29. 29. O. H. LeBlanc, J. Chem. Phys. 30, 1443 (1959). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1730219 , Google ScholarScitation
  30. 30. J. C. Scott, L. T. Pautmeier, and L. B. Schein, Phys. Rev. B 46, 8603 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.46.8603 , Google ScholarCrossref
  31. 31. N. Rappaport, O. Solomesch, and N. Tessler, J. Appl. Phys. 99, 064507 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2180435 , Google ScholarScitation
  32. 32. D. Bloom and S. W. S. McKeever, J. Appl. Phys. 82, 249 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.365805 , Google ScholarScitation
  33. 33. N. Schupper, R. Kahatabi, R. Diamant, and D. Avramov, Diffus. Fundam. 11, 88 (2009). Google Scholar
  34. 34. A. R. Melnyk and D. M. Pai, in Physical Methods of Chemistry: Determination of Electronic and Optical Properties, 2nd ed., edited by B. W. Rossiter and R. C. Baetzold (John Wiley & Sons Inc, New York, 1993) Chap. 5, pp. 321–386. Google Scholar
  35. 35. J. M. Marshall, J. Berkin, and C. Main, Philos. Mag. Part B 56, 641 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1080/13642818708220169 , Google ScholarCrossref
  36. 36. G. Seynhaeve, G. J. Adriaenssens, H. Michiel, and H. Overhof, Philos. Mag. Part B 58, 421 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1080/13642818808218384 , Google ScholarCrossref
  37. 37. S. V. Novikov and A. V. Vannikov, J. Phys. Chem. C 113, 2532 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1021/jp808578b , Google ScholarCrossref
  38. 38. A. Baumann, J. Lorrmann, C. Deibel, and V. Dyakonov, Appl. Phys. Lett. 93, 252104 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3055608 , Google ScholarScitation
  39. 39. W. C. Germs, J. J. M. van der Holst, S. L. M. van Mensfoort, P. A. Bobbert, and R. Coehoorn, Phys. Rev. B 84, 165210 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.84.165210 , Google ScholarCrossref
  40. 40. N. Tessler and Y. Roichman, Org. Electron. 6, 200 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orgel.2005.06.006 , Google ScholarCrossref
  41. 41. J. v. Neumann, Ann. Math. 33, 574 (1932). https://doi.org/10.2307/1968536 , Google ScholarCrossref
  42. 42. P. R. Halmos and J. von Neumann, Ann. Math. 43, 332 (1942). https://doi.org/10.2307/1968872 , Google ScholarCrossref
  43. 43. M. Silver, K. Dy, and I. Huang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 27, 21 (1971). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.27.21 , Google ScholarCrossref
  44. 44. J. M. Marshall, Philos. Mag. 36, 959 (1977). https://doi.org/10.1080/14786437708239770 , Google ScholarCrossref
  45. 45. F. W. Schmidlin, Phys. Rev. B 16, 2362 (1977). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.16.2362 , Google ScholarCrossref
  46. 46. J. Noolandi, Phys. Rev. B 16, 4466 (1977). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.16.4466 , Google ScholarCrossref
  47. 47. M. Grünewald and P. Thomas, Phys. Status Solidi B 94, 125 (1979). https://doi.org/10.1002/pssb.2220940113 , Google ScholarCrossref
  48. 48. S. D. Baranovskii, T. Faber, F. Hensel, and P. Thomas, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 9, 2699 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1088/0953-8984/9/13/007 , Google ScholarCrossref
  49. 49. C. Deibel, T. Strobel, and V. Dyakonov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 036402 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.103.036402 , Google ScholarCrossref
  50. 50. J. Cottaar, R. Coehoorn, and P. A. Bobbert, Phys. Rev. B 82, 205203 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.82.205203 , Google ScholarCrossref
  51. 51. A. Miller and E. Abrahams, Phys. Rev. 120, 745 (1960). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.120.745 , Google ScholarCrossref
  52. 52. M. Schubert, E. Preis, J. C. Blakesley, P. Pingel, U. Scherf, and D. Neher, Phys. Rev. B 87, 024203 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.87.024203 , Google ScholarCrossref
  53. 53. J. Frenkel, Phys. Rev. 54, 647 (1938). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.54.647 , Google ScholarCrossref
  54. 54. D. H. Dunlap, V. Kenkre, and P. Parris, J. Imaging Sci. Technol. 43, 437 (1999). Google Scholar
  55. 55. A. P. Tyutnev, R. Ikhsanov, V. Saenko, and E. Pozhidaev, Chem. Phys. 404, 88 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemphys.2012.03.004 , Google ScholarCrossref
  56. 56. R. Storn and K. Price, J. Global Optim. 11, 341 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008202821328 , Google ScholarCrossref
  57. 57. E. Schrödinger, Phys. Z. 16, 289 (1915). Google Scholar
  58. 58. M. C. K. Tweedie, Nature 155, 453 (1945). https://doi.org/10.1038/155453a0 , Google ScholarCrossref
  59. 59. A. Siegert, Phys. Rev. 81, 617 (1951). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.81.617 , Google ScholarCrossref
  60. 60. T.-J. Ha, P. Sonar, and A. Dodabalapur, Appl. Phys. Lett. 100, 153302 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3697994 , Google ScholarScitation
  61. 61. J. A. Freire and M. G. E. da Luz, J. Chem. Phys. 119, 2348 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1586696 , Google ScholarScitation
  62. 62. A. V. Nenashev, F. Jansson, S. D. Baranovskii, R. Österbacka, A. V. Dvurechenskii, and F. Gebhard, Phys. Rev. B 81, 115203 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.81.115203 , Google ScholarCrossref
  63. 63. A. V. Nenashev, F. Jansson, S. D. Baranovskii, R. Österbacka, A. V. Dvurechenskii, and F. Gebhard, Phys. Rev. B 81, 115204 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.81.115204 , Google ScholarCrossref
  64. 64. R. Mauer, M. Kastler, and F. Laquai, Adv. Funct. Mater. 20, 2085 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1002/adfm.201000320 , Google ScholarCrossref
  65. 65. S. Scheinert, M. Grobosch, G. Paasch, I. Hörselmann, M. Knupfer, and J. Bartsch, J. Appl. Phys. 111, 064502 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3693541 , Google ScholarScitation
  66. 66. R. Winter, M. S. Hammer, C. Deibel, and J. Pflaum, Appl. Phys. Lett. 95, 263313 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3276694 , Google ScholarScitation
  67. 67. G. Paasch and S. Scheinert, J. Appl. Phys. 107, 104501 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3374475 , Google ScholarScitation
  1. © 2014 AIP Publishing LLC.