ABSTRACT
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.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
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. 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. V. I. Arkhipov and A. I. Rudenko, Philos. Mag. B 45, 189 (1982). https://doi.org/10.1080/13642818208246327 , Google ScholarCrossref
- 3. A. I. Rudenko and V. I. Arkhipov, Philos. Mag. B 45, 177 (1982). https://doi.org/10.1080/13642818208246326 , Google ScholarCrossref
- 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. T. Strobel, C. Deibel, and V. Dyakonov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 266602 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.105.266602 , Google ScholarCrossref
- 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. A. Einstein, Ann. Phys. 322, 549 (1905). https://doi.org/10.1002/andp.19053220806 , Google ScholarCrossref
- 8. M. von Smoluchowski, Ann. Phys. 326, 756 (1906). https://doi.org/10.1002/andp.19063261405 , Google ScholarCrossref
- 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. 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. L. Onsager, Phys. Rev. 54, 554 (1938). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.54.554 , Google ScholarCrossref
- 12. C. L. Braun, J. Chem. Phys. 80, 4157 (1984). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.447243 , Google ScholarScitation, ISI
- 13. P. Langevin, Ann. Chim. Phys. 28, 433 (1903). Google Scholar
- 14. J. J. Thomson and E. Rutherford, Philos. Mag. Ser. 5 42, 392 (1896). https://doi.org/10.1080/14786449608620932 , Google ScholarCrossref
- 15. H. Scher and E. Montroll, Phys. Rev. B 12, 2455 (1975). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.12.2455 , Google ScholarCrossref
- 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. D. Monroe, Phys. Rev. Lett. 54, 146 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.54.146 , Google ScholarCrossref
- 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. 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. N. Rappaport, Y. Preezant, and N. Tessler, Phys. Rev. B 76, 235323 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.76.235323 , Google ScholarCrossref
- 21. H. Bässler, Phys. Status Solidi B 175, 15 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1002/pssb.2221750102 , Google ScholarCrossref
- 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. R. Schmechel, Phys. Rev. B 66, 235206 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.66.235206 , Google ScholarCrossref
- 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. 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. 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. W. E. Spear, Proc. Phys. Soc. Sect. B 70, 669 (1957). https://doi.org/10.1088/0370-1301/70/7/304 , Google ScholarCrossref
- 28. R. Kepler, Phys. Rev. 119, 1226 (1960). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.119.1226 , Google ScholarCrossref
- 29. O. H. LeBlanc, J. Chem. Phys. 30, 1443 (1959). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1730219 , Google ScholarScitation
- 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. N. Rappaport, O. Solomesch, and N. Tessler, J. Appl. Phys. 99, 064507 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2180435 , Google ScholarScitation
- 32. D. Bloom and S. W. S. McKeever, J. Appl. Phys. 82, 249 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.365805 , Google ScholarScitation
- 33. N. Schupper, R. Kahatabi, R. Diamant, and D. Avramov, Diffus. Fundam. 11, 88 (2009). Google Scholar
- 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. J. M. Marshall, J. Berkin, and C. Main, Philos. Mag. Part B 56, 641 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1080/13642818708220169 , Google ScholarCrossref
- 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. S. V. Novikov and A. V. Vannikov, J. Phys. Chem. C 113, 2532 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1021/jp808578b , Google ScholarCrossref
- 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. 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. N. Tessler and Y. Roichman, Org. Electron. 6, 200 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orgel.2005.06.006 , Google ScholarCrossref
- 41. J. v. Neumann, Ann. Math. 33, 574 (1932). https://doi.org/10.2307/1968536 , Google ScholarCrossref
- 42. P. R. Halmos and J. von Neumann, Ann. Math. 43, 332 (1942). https://doi.org/10.2307/1968872 , Google ScholarCrossref
- 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. J. M. Marshall, Philos. Mag. 36, 959 (1977). https://doi.org/10.1080/14786437708239770 , Google ScholarCrossref
- 45. F. W. Schmidlin, Phys. Rev. B 16, 2362 (1977). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.16.2362 , Google ScholarCrossref
- 46. J. Noolandi, Phys. Rev. B 16, 4466 (1977). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.16.4466 , Google ScholarCrossref
- 47. M. Grünewald and P. Thomas, Phys. Status Solidi B 94, 125 (1979). https://doi.org/10.1002/pssb.2220940113 , Google ScholarCrossref
- 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. C. Deibel, T. Strobel, and V. Dyakonov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 036402 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.103.036402 , Google ScholarCrossref
- 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. A. Miller and E. Abrahams, Phys. Rev. 120, 745 (1960). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.120.745 , Google ScholarCrossref
- 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. J. Frenkel, Phys. Rev. 54, 647 (1938). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.54.647 , Google ScholarCrossref
- 54. D. H. Dunlap, V. Kenkre, and P. Parris, J. Imaging Sci. Technol. 43, 437 (1999). Google Scholar
- 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. R. Storn and K. Price, J. Global Optim. 11, 341 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008202821328 , Google ScholarCrossref
- 57. E. Schrödinger, Phys. Z. 16, 289 (1915). Google Scholar
- 58. M. C. K. Tweedie, Nature 155, 453 (1945). https://doi.org/10.1038/155453a0 , Google ScholarCrossref
- 59. A. Siegert, Phys. Rev. 81, 617 (1951). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.81.617 , Google ScholarCrossref
- 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. 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. 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. 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. R. Mauer, M. Kastler, and F. Laquai, Adv. Funct. Mater. 20, 2085 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1002/adfm.201000320 , Google ScholarCrossref
- 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. 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. G. Paasch and S. Scheinert, J. Appl. Phys. 107, 104501 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3374475 , Google ScholarScitation
Please Note: The number of views represents the full text views from December 2016 to date. Article views prior to December 2016 are not included.

