% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded.  This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.

@ARTICLE{MllerCaspary:850195,
      author       = {Müller-Caspary, Knut and Oppermann, Oliver and Grieb, Tim
                      and Krause, Florian F. and Rosenauer, Andreas and Marco},
      title        = {{M}aterials characterisation by angle-resolved scanning
                      transmission electron microscopy},
      journal      = {Scientific reports},
      volume       = {6},
      issn         = {2045-2322},
      address      = {London},
      publisher    = {Nature Publishing Group},
      reportid     = {FZJ-2018-04269},
      pages        = {37146},
      year         = {2016},
      abstract     = {Solid-state properties such as strain or chemical
                      composition often leave characteristic fingerprints in the
                      angular dependence of electron scattering. Scanning
                      transmission electron microscopy (STEM) is dedicated to
                      probe scattered intensity with atomic resolution, but it
                      drastically lacks angular resolution. Here we report both a
                      setup to exploit the explicit angular dependence of
                      scattered intensity and applications of angle-resolved STEM
                      to semiconductor nanostructures. Our method is applied to
                      measure nitrogen content and specimen thickness in a
                      GaNxAs1−x layer independently at atomic resolution by
                      evaluating two dedicated angular intervals. We demonstrate
                      contrast formation due to strain and composition in a Si-
                      based metal-oxide semiconductor field effect transistor
                      (MOSFET) with GexSi1−x stressors as a function of the
                      angles used for imaging. To shed light on the validity of
                      current theoretical approaches this data is compared with
                      theory, namely the Rutherford approach and contemporary
                      multislice simulations. Inconsistency is found for the
                      Rutherford model in the whole angular range of
                      16–255 mrad. Contrary, the multislice simulations are
                      applicable for angles larger than 35 mrad whereas a
                      significant mismatch is observed at lower angles. This
                      limitation of established simulations is discussed
                      particularly on the basis of inelastic scattering.},
      cin          = {ER-C-1},
      ddc          = {000},
      cid          = {I:(DE-Juel1)ER-C-1-20170209},
      pnm          = {143 - Controlling Configuration-Based Phenomena (POF3-143)},
      pid          = {G:(DE-HGF)POF3-143},
      typ          = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
      pubmed       = {pmid:27849001},
      UT           = {WOS:000388081000001},
      doi          = {10.1038/srep37146},
      url          = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/850195},
}