Reexamination of Gain Theory for Intrinsic Photoconductive Devices

The quantum efficiency <inline-formula><math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><semantics><mrow><mo stretchy="false">(</mo><mi>Q</mi><mi>E</mi><mo stretchy="false">)<...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Nenad Vrucinic, Yong Zhang
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2025-05-01
Series:Photonics
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6732/12/5/523
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The quantum efficiency <inline-formula><math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><semantics><mrow><mo stretchy="false">(</mo><mi>Q</mi><mi>E</mi><mo stretchy="false">)</mo></mrow></semantics></math></inline-formula> or gain <inline-formula><math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><semantics><mrow><mo stretchy="false">(</mo><mi>G</mi><mo stretchy="false">)</mo></mrow></semantics></math></inline-formula> of a photoconductive device is most commonly given in the literature as a ratio of carrier lifetime to transit time, allowing for a value much greater than unity. In this work, by assuming primary photoconductivity, we reexamine the photoconductive theory for the device with an intrinsic (undoped) semiconductor, with nearly zero equilibrium carrier densities. Analytic gain formula is obtained for arbitrary drift and diffusion parameters under a bias voltage and by neglecting the polarization effect due to the relative displacement in the electron and hole distributions. We find that the lifetime/transit-time ratio formula is only valid in the limit of weak field and no diffusion. Numerical simulations are performed to examine the polarization effect, confirming that it does not change the qualitative conclusions. We discuss the distinction between two <inline-formula><math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><semantics><mrow><mi>Q</mi><mi>E</mi></mrow></semantics></math></inline-formula> definitions used in the literature: accumulative <inline-formula><math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><semantics><mrow><mi>Q</mi><mi>E</mi></mrow></semantics></math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><semantics><mrow><mfenced separators="|"><mrow><msub><mrow><mi>Q</mi><mi>E</mi></mrow><mrow><mi>a</mi><mi>c</mi><mi>c</mi></mrow></msub></mrow></mfenced></mrow></semantics></math></inline-formula>, considering the contributions of the flow of all photocarriers, regardless of whether they reach the electrode; and apparent <inline-formula><math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><semantics><mrow><mi>Q</mi><mi>E</mi></mrow></semantics></math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><semantics><mrow><msub><mrow><mi>Q</mi><mi>E</mi></mrow><mrow><mi>a</mi><mi>p</mi><mi>p</mi></mrow></msub><mo stretchy="false">)</mo></mrow></semantics></math></inline-formula>, measuring the photocurrent at the electrode. In general, <inline-formula><math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><semantics><mrow><msub><mrow><mi>Q</mi><mi>E</mi></mrow><mrow><mi>a</mi><mi>c</mi><mi>c</mi></mrow></msub><mo>></mo><msub><mrow><mi>Q</mi><mi>E</mi></mrow><mrow><mi>a</mi><mi>p</mi><mi>p</mi></mrow></msub></mrow></semantics></math></inline-formula>, due to an inhomogeneous photocurrent in the channel; however, both approach the same unity limit for strong drift. We find that <inline-formula><math xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><semantics><mrow><msub><mrow><mi>Q</mi><mi>E</mi></mrow><mrow><mi>a</mi><mi>c</mi><mi>c</mi></mrow></msub><mo> </mo><mo>≠</mo><msub><mrow><mo> </mo><mi>Q</mi><mi>E</mi></mrow><mrow><mi>a</mi><mi>p</mi><mi>p</mi></mrow></msub></mrow></semantics></math></inline-formula> is a deficiency of the commonly adopted constant-carrier-lifetime approximation in the recombination terms.
ISSN:2304-6732