Applied Surface Science 400 (2017) 71–76

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Surface Science

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apsusc

Full Length Article

Mechanic-electrical transformations in the Kelvin method

Yu. S. Zharkikh a,∗ , S.V. Lysochenko b
a
Faculty of Radio Physics, Electronics and Computer Systems, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, 4G, Ave. Academician Glushkov, 03127, Kyiv,
Ukraine
b
Institute of High Technologies, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, 4G, Ave. Academician Glushkov, 03127, Kyiv, Ukraine

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: To explain the initiation mechanism of alternating current in an electric circuit containing the dynamic
Received 1 June 2016 capacitor a model of mechanic- electrical transformation is suggested to use. In such a model, electric
Received in revised form charges disposed between the capacitor plates serve as a cause of measured signal in contrast to the
15 November 2016
contact potential difference, which is considered as the main base in the Kelvin’s model. If one of the
Accepted 11 December 2016
plates moves periodically, then the conditions of the charges screening are changed and thereby the
Available online 21 December 2016
capacitor recharging current is arise. The measuring is based on compensation of the recharging current
by current, which generated by a source of electromotive force (EMF). The compensation voltage depends
Keywords:
Kelvin method on both the distribution of ions or dipoles over the studied surface and the charges creating the surface
Contact potential difference potential barrier. This voltage is independent on the bulk electro-physical characteristics of a solid.
Work function © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Mechanic-electrical transformer
Semiconductor surface

1. Introduction emission current density is je = 10−36 A/cm2 [5]), so we can neglect

The ability to prevent the electrons escape from a solid is the
fundamental property of the surface. Many scientific works are
devoted to investigation of the work function of solids; their results
are generalized in reviews, monographs and included in textbooks
[1–5]. Nevertheless, up to now, there is deficient of a generally
accepted physical mechanism of the electrons retaining in a solid, as
well as a lack of coincidence is observed in absolute values of work
functions W obtained by different authors for the same materials
[1,2]. The authors often do connect the difference between W values
determined by the Kelvin method and those obtained by alternative
methods, with drawbacks of experiments, and suggest measures to
improve the method [6–9]. However, it may be far more essential
the existed fundamental difference between physical effects under-
lying the different methods of the work function determination. For
example, in electron emission based methods, one determines the
energy needed for an electron to leave the solid. Here, an electron is
the information agent, which really leaves the solid bulk and travels
from cathode towards the anode. Quite the contrary, in the Kelvin
method the transfer of electrons between plates of the dynamic
capacitor is practically absent (for example, at W = 2.5 eV, T = 300 K,
the emission phenomena. In this method, the electric field gener-
ated by charges inside the capacitor gap, serves as the information
agent. In both the methods, obtaining of a wanted signal is asso-
ciated with using external, relatively to a studied sample, energy
sources: heaters and irradiation devices in the thermo- and photo-
emission methods, or vibrator in the dynamic capacitor method.
In the emission methods, energy of external source is spent to
increase the energy of electrons thus making them to be able to
leave the solid. Whereas the work of the mechanical vibrator in the
Kelvin method does not change the electrons energy, instead, it is
converted into the energy of alternating electric current. Since the
mechanisms of transformation of external energy into measured
signal are essentially different in these methods then the measure-
ment results may reflect in different ways the properties of the
studied surface. In this work, attention is drawn to the fact that
signal measured by the Kelvin method does not possess the same
connection with work function as it takes place for the model of
surface energy barriers accepted in the emission methods.
2. Theory and experiment

2.1. Transformation of mechanical to electrical energy in

dynamic capacitor
∗ Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: yurzhar@gmail.com (Yu.S. Zharkikh), lys@univ.kiev.ua Fig. 1 shows the scheme of measurement setup used in the
(S.V. Lysochenko). Kelvin method. The plate 1 of the capacitor is setting into the

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2016.12.085
0169-4332/© 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
72 Yu.S. Zharkikh, S.V. Lysochenko / Applied Surface Science 400 (2017) 71–76

Fig. 2. The plane of dipoles in the dynamic capacitor.

ing q1 (t) function which, in turn, can be found from a simultaneous

consideration of formulas (1) to (5):
dq1 d2 Qaω cos ωt
Fig. 1. The scheme of measurement setup. The plane of electrical charges is in the ĩQ = =  2 (6)
dt d̃1 + d2
dynamic capacitor.

The compensation current ĩB caused by the voltage UB applied

reciprocating motion by means of electrodynamic or piezoelectric to the dynamic capacitor was calculated as:
vibrator. This motion causes the signal which is compensated by
dC ε0 aω cos ωt
voltage UB given by the controlled source B. The state of achieved ĩB = UB =  2 UB (7)
dt d̃1 + d2
compensation is displayed by null – indicator A.
The signal in the dynamic capacitor circuit is observed even if
the plates are made of the same material and, hence, in the absence Taking into account that ĩQ = ĩB if the currents are compensated
of the contact potential difference (CPD). This signal is caused by and using formulas (6) and (7) we find the compensation voltage
presence of statically charged objects between the plates. Let us UCB :
show this on examples of electric charges and dipoles inside the Q
UCB = d2 (8)
capacitor gap. ε0
In general case, charge Q may be distributed over the whole gap
2.1.1. Electric charges between the capacitor plates d2 and the gaps d1 and d2 may have different dielectric constants ε1
Let us consider the signal emergence conditions in circuit shown and ε2 . Dividing the gap d2 into parallel layers, and then summing
in Fig. 1. Charge Q is localized in a plane situated at distances d1 their contributions we obtain in this case:
and d2 from the plates (here and after indices 1 and 2 denote the  d2
1
corresponding capacitor plates). The electric field of the Q-charge UCB =  (x) xdx (9)
ε2 ε0
induces accumulation of screening charges q1 and q2 on the capac- 0
itor plates (the charges density are per unit surface). According to where x is coordinate orthogonal to the plate surface, and (x) is
Gauss law: the volume charge density in every point of the gap d2 .

q1 + q2 = Q (1) 2.1.2. Dipoles between capacitor plates

The static charge Q does not lead to any potential difference U12
between the capacitor plates:
U 12 = U 1 + U 2 = 0
and, because of this, electric fields E 1 and E 2 inside the gaps of
d1 and d2 take such values that
E 1 d1 + E 2 d2 = 0
On the other hand, the magnitudes of these fields are deter-
mined by q1 and q2 charges of the capacitor plates:
E 1 = q1 /ε0, E 2 = q2 /ε0 ,
where ε0 —permittivity.
The vibrational motion of the plate 1 with the amplitude a  d1
and circular frequency ω results in the modulation of its distance
d̃1 to the plane of Q charge:
d̃1 = d1 + asinωt
We assume that d1  d2 because the charge Q is closely tied
with the surface of the plate 2 (for example, after an adsorption).
The gap variation d̃1 leads to redistribution of electric fields E 1
and E 2 . This is accompanied by variation of screening charges q1 and
q2 by their interchanging through the external circuit of capacitor.
Thus the alternating current ĩQ generated with the frequency of gap
modulation. We find the magnitude of this current by differentiat-
In Fig. 2, dipoles are located in such positions that plane of x
coordinate intersects the middle of the dipole length l. The values d1
and d2 are distances from the dipole poles to corresponding plates.
(2) To determine the magnitudes of screening charges q1 and q2 ,
we should find the configuration of electric field E(x) generated by
the considered layer of dipoles. Calculation results for distribution
of electric-field intensity around a separate dipole are well known
[10]. For the component along the longitudinal dipole axis, at x » l,
(3) it is obtained:
1 2p
Ex = (10)
4ε0 x3
where p = ql is dipole moment, q—pole charge.
(4)
Using formula (10), we have calculated the force of interaction
between electric charge e and the r-radius ring of dipoles. Then
by integrating over radius r we determine the interaction force
between this unit charge and the disk of radius R. The obtained
formula can be essentially simplified at the condition R » x. Finally,
we have the dependence of electric field strength E on the distance
(5) x to a dipole layer:
pn 1
E= (11)
ε0 x
where n is dipole density per unit surface.
The similarity of the models presented in Figs. 1 and 2 is in fact
that in both cases the charged plane divides the inter-plate space
in such a manner that the capacitor can be considered as com-
posed of two serial capacitors with gaps d1 and d2 . Therefore, the
 Yu.S. Zharkikh, S.V. Lysochenko / Applied Surface Science 400 (2017) 71–76
Fig. 3. Dependence of compensation voltage UCB on doses number n of charge
deposited onto surface SiO2 of thickness 25 nm.
dipoles density inside layer N can be conditionally divided onto two
components:
N = n1 + n2
where n1 and n2 are dipole densities that causing the screening
charges q1 and q2 which are accumulated in upper and lower plates
of the capacitor (Fig. 2).
Mutually coordinated relationships between n and q can be
found if to proceed from the assumption that electric field strength
of charges distributed on a capacitor plate must coincide with
electric field strength of the dipole field that induces the charges
accumulation. By equating values of E given by formulas (4) and
(11), we find:
pn1 pn2
q1 = , q2 =
d1 d2
 xTaking into account that the potential difference U (x) =
E (x) dx, and using formula (11), we calculate a voltage drops
0
between poles of the dipoles and plates of the capacitor:
pn1 2d1 pn2 2d2
U1 = ln , U2 = ln
ε0 l ε0 l whereas the RHS segment – under a changed sign of the deposited
Since the presence of dipole layer can’t lead to originating of a
potential difference between the capacitor plates (U1 + U2 = 0 (2))
then we obtain from (14):
n1 ln2d2 /l
= (15)
n2 ln2d1 /l
Further calculation procedure to find compensation voltage UCB
is similar to that considered above in item 2.1.1: at first, from (4),
(11)–(15), we find dependence q1 (t); then we do differentiate this
dependence thus determining current ĩQ and, by equating it with
current ĩB (formula (7)), under the condition d1 » d2 , we obtain:
pN ln2d2 /l
UCB =
ε0 ln2d1 /l + ln2d2 /l
The elementary calculations demonstrated in this paragraph are
based on the fundamental laws of electricity. These are made specif-
ically for simplest models to give a clear non-complicated idea on
the mechanism of signal initiation in the dynamic capacitor. From
the point of view of electrical engineering, dynamic capacitor is
a transformer of mechanical energy of vibrator into the energy of
electric current. Work of moving the capacitor plate is spent on
changing the pattern of electric field inside the gap and this is
accompanied by flowing of charges between the capacitor plates
(see the Graphical abstract). Current of electrons ĩQ that emerges in
the outer circuit during this process is circuited by the displacement
current through the capacitor.
73
Fig. 4. Dependences of compensation voltage UCB on doses number n of charge
deposited onto surface SiO2 of thickness 8,8 nm. Points • and  are those mea-
sured without and under illumination of the sample, respectively. Arrows show the
transitions from accumulation to inversion (n = 2) and vice versa (n = 17).
(12)
2.2. Experimental research of signal in the circuit of dynamic
capacitor with charged plane in its gap
Functioning of the mechanic-electrical transformation (MET)
has been modeled with using pSi–SiO2 structures. Corona charging
method was used for depositing ions on the surface thermal SiO2
at atmospheric pressure [11,12]. The amount of the charge Q was
gradually increased by adding identical doses controlled by time of
deposition. Compensation voltage values UCB were measured by the
Kelvin method after each adding of the charge. In this experiment,
(13) the oxide served as d2 gap in Fig. 1. Dependence of UCB on number
of doses n of the deposited charge was studied using 20 samples
with SiO2 thickness of 8–25 nm [13]. All the obtained dependencies
demonstrated analogous shapes as that shown in Fig. 3.
In the picture, two parts with opposite inclination are seen at
the UCB (n) dependence: the LHS one was obtained by gradually
increasing of positive charge density Q deposited onto SiO2 surface,
(14)
charge. If a single deposition dose was Qd , so charge Q(n) = nQd
corresponds to every n. Considering this, data of Fig. 3 show the
dependence UCB (Q). It is seen that this dependence is a linear one
and, hence, in the experiments the mechanic-to-electric transfor-
mations are realized in the conditions that meet formula (9). Values
of the single deposition dose Qd are determined from inclinations
of the linear parts of the UCB (Q) dependencies (considering ε2 = 4).
It is ascertained that under the deposition of positive and nega-
tive charges these doses have constituted, respectively, 2,6·1011
and 6,7·1011 elementary charges per cm2 . Note the variation span
of UCB constitutes about 10 V on this structure. For a real Si surface
this span does not exceed 1 V [14–16]. This corresponds to the fact
that thickness of residual oxide on such a surface is by an order of
magnitude lesser than on the studied sample.
(16) Results of investigation of dependencies UCB (n,Q) added with
laser illumination (0.63 ␮m) of the sample are shown in Fig. 4
It is seen that under the illumination, absolute value of
compensation voltage UCB decreases. The incident illumination
leads to initiation of surface photovoltage Uph . In this situation,
UCB = UB + Uph and, therefore, lesser voltage UB must come from
battery B, which is measured by voltmeter V (Fig. 1).
Note, results of such measurements give information on the
semiconductor surface space charge region. The presence of illumi-
nation – induced photovoltage indicates inversion and its absent
shows on accumulation regimes in the region [14]. From data of
Fig. 4, we can conclude that if 2 < n < 17 then an accumulation layer
is formed at the interface of Si–SiO2 , and the inversion layer there’s
inside of this span.
74 Yu.S. Zharkikh, S.V. Lysochenko / Applied Surface Science 400 (2017) 71–76
Fig. 5. Potential difference in dynamic capacitor in the presence of: a) electrons layer
above the studied surface; b) layers of electrons above both the studied surface and
the surface of reference electrode.
3. Discussion
3.1. Interpretation of UCB measurements results in models of
Kelvin and of mechanic-electrical transformation
In the Kelvin’s model it is assumed that the initially existing con-
tact potential difference UCPD is measured. This CPD and voltage UB
are simultaneously applied to alternating capacitance C. This initi-
ate the alternating current ĩC in the circuit of dynamic capacitor:
dq dC
ĩc = = (UCPD − UB ) = ĩCPD − ĩB (17)
dt dt
By means of UB variation, one reduces this current to zero: ĩC = 0.
Herewith it is accepted that UB = UCPD . According to formula (17),
the compensation method of finding UCPD voltage is based upon
comparison of currents ĩCPD and ĩB , which are measured by null –
indicator A (Fig. 1). But UCPD is a built-in potential difference, which
is not supported by any sources of EMF. Therefore, UCPD can’t be a
source of energy and CPD can’t be the initiation cause of current
ĩCPD measured by external device A.
In the MET interpretation, measured voltage UCB is used for com-
pensation the current ĩQ . This current initiated by the mechanism
of mechanic-electrical transformation (for example as in formula
(6) for a charged plane). It has a real electric power and can be
directly measured with ammeter A (Fig. 1). Current ĩQ is caused by
electric charges and dipoles localized inside the dynamic capacitor
above the studied surfaces. The same charged items can participate
in formation of surface potential barrier that prevents electrons to
escape from a solid. In a simplest model, it may be accepted that
potential barrier is associated with a layer of electrons, which is
separated from studied surface by a gap (Fig. 5a).
Various causes were discussed in literature about formation
mechanisms of the electrons layer above an atomically – clean sur-
face of solid. Such a formation may be connected with: i) tails of
electrons wave functions protruding from the bulk, ii) shifting of
the balanced center of charge because of lattice symmetries dif-
ferences between of the bulk and the surface iii) with holding of
escaping electrons due to mirror forces or exchange-coupling and
correlation – interactions forces [17,18].
Work function W is the work which electron must carry out to
overcome the surface potential barrier. As any work, it is deter-
mined by a product of applied force F and traversed path S. In the
present case, on electron there acts the electrostatic deceleration
force F∼Q/0 along d2 path. By using formula (8), it can be esti-
mated the needed electrons density nl in layer to form the barrier
with given work function. Suppose d2 ≈ 5 nm taking in mind that a
narrower gap is transparent for tunneling, whereas a wider one far
exceeds the lattice period. Let us take into consideration that under
d2  d1 and, correspondingly, q2  q1 , value of the compensation
voltage is virtually equal to potential difference Ud2 between bor-
ders of d2 gap. This PD determines work function value W = eUd2 . If
we take, for example, value W = 4.5 eV, which is characteristic for a
number of solids [1], then we obtain nl ≈ 5 · 1012 e/cm2 . In the cal-
culation, it is assumed that dielectric constant inside the gaps is the
same as in vacuum (ε0 ); this assumption is, apparently, incorrect.
Because of this, the obtained value nl can be treated only as an esti-
mated value. This calculation shows that signal of 4.5 V measured
by the compensation method, may be caused by a comparatively
low concentration of electrons inside the repulsion layer (nl is by
two orders of magnitude lesser than concentration of the surface
atoms).
When studying atomically – clean surfaces of solid, the mea-
sured signal usually does not exceed 0.3 V [19–23]. This is explained
by the fact that in a dynamic capacitor there are exist potential
barriers on both of its plates (Fig. 5b), which are characterized by
parameters (nl1 , d21 ) and (nl2 , d22 ). That is why in the mechanic-
electrical transformations two opposite currents arise, and we
obtain the compensation voltage as:
enl1 d21 en d22
UCB = UCB1 − UCB2 = − l2 (18)
ε0 ε0
Thus, measured value UCB characterizes difference in the heights
of surface potential barriers and not the electric PD that may cause
a flow of ohmic current.
If assume d21 = d22 = 5nm, it follows from formula (18) that
signal UCB ≈ 0.3 V can be obtained in condition of nl1 − nl2 ≈ 3 ·
1011 e/cm2 . In this case, nl1 value by 6% only exceeds the value
of nl2 . The method allows us to reveal even a lesser distinction in
nl on investigated and reference surfaces, since the sensitivity of
experimental setups is usually constitutes about 0.01 V [6–9,15].
3.2. Distinction in work function values determined by emission
methods and by the Kelvin method
In principle, Kelvin method determines the difference in work
functions of materials from which the dynamic capacitor plates are
made (W = W1 − W2 ). That is why, to determine the work func-
tion W1 of the examined material, work function of the reference
electrode W2 must be known, and this is obtained from the emis-
sion measurements [1,2]. Therefore, W1 value is established by a
summation of results of two different measurement methods. This
circumstance may be a cause of incorrect values of the work func-
tion.
Let us demonstrate this on an example of influence of dipoles
onto results of W measurements obtained by the emission method
and the dynamic capacitor method. Layer of dipoles above a solid
surface can influence on the height of surface potential barrier. The
dipoles can be formed as the result of redistribution of atoms in
the surface layers of solids [14] or by adsorption of polar molecules
[16,25–27]. PD inside the layer of dipoles of N density is the same
as in a plane-parallel capacitor with gap equal to the dipole length
l:
eN
UC = l (19)
ε0
This potential difference prevents the escape of electrons from
a solid and, hence, it can be found when determining W value by
the emission methods. If investigation is conducted by the method
of dynamic capacitor, then the same layer of dipoles determines
measured PD in accordance with formula (16). In this formula, first
efficient is the same as gives formula (19). Value of the second one
multiplier may take values within interval of 0.2–0.04 in the case if
accept, for estimation calculation, realistic values l = 10−9 m, d1 =
3 · 10−4 m, and d2 should be changing between 10−9 m and 10−8 m.
Therefore, in the dynamic capacitor method, the dipole component
in the surface barrier exerts far lesser influence onto results of work
 Yu.S. Zharkikh, S.V. Lysochenko / Applied Surface Science 400 (2017) 71–76
function measurements as compared with the emission methods.
A simple explanation of this fact is that MET-generated signal in a
dynamic capacitor is caused by the external field of a dipole, which
is essentially weaker than the dipole’s internal field influencing on
the emission currents.
In the mechanism of surface barrier formation, see Fig. 5a, elec-
trons of the charged layer do not take part in formation of the
dipoles. The electrons can free moving in the plane of this layer.
MET-generated PD value UCB in this case meets formula (8). It is
seen that UCB depends only on parameters of the layer (Q and d2 )
that forms the surface potential barrier. The barrier’s height cor-
responds to electron affinity energy , which is necessary for the
electron to escape from the conduction zone to vacuum.
In the emission methods, work function W is measured from
Fermi level energy EF . For the thermal emission, electron takes
energy from a heated solid, first to transit from the Fermi level
to the conduction zone and after that add energy  for subsequent
exit to vacuum (W =  + EF ).
During the study of metals, both the methods must give the
same results, since in metals the edge of conduction zone practically
coincides with the Fermi level and W ≈ . In semiconductors, EF
may be essentially below the conduction zone edge, and that is
why W values obtained by the two methods may considerably be
different.
When studying materials of different EF , only electron affin-
ity energy  is determined by the dynamic capacitor method. The
physical reason of this is as follows. The external mechanical vibra-
tor is the only energy source, which invokes the current flowing
through the dynamic capacitor, but there are not employing the
intrinsic energy of solid. That is why the Fermi level position must
not affect the value of measured signal. Therefore, in studying
surfaces of semiconductors by means of the dynamic capacitor
method, one virtually determines the affinity energy  as in the
case of metallic surfaces investigations. Note that absence of EF
influence on value of signal measured by the Kelvin method has
been repeatedly observed when studying atomically – clean sur-
faces of various semiconductors [19–23]. However, this has been
explained by the pinning effect [24], which does not need to be
attracted for results explanation in the MET model.
All the expounded factors give ground to consider the asser-
tion that the Kelvin method is the best one for determination
of semiconductors’ work function [1], does not correspond to
reality. However, this is not an obstacle for effective applica-
tion of the dynamic capacitor method to solve technological and
research problems. The high sensitivity of the method to the
presence of charged objects is used for: control quality of a sur-
face chemical processing [15], investigation of surface charging of
dielectrics, semiconductors, nanostructures [11,13,14], researches
the adsorption-desorption processes [16,27,28], development of
various sensors [12] and improvement of solar cell characteristics
[12,14,29].
4. Conclusions
1. Dynamic capacitor is a mechanic-electrical transformer (MET).
Inside it, mechanical energy of the plate motions transforms
into the energy of alternating electric current of electrons flow-
ing through the outer circuit, and this current is closed by the
displacement current inside the capacitor. The principal require-
ment for generation of the current is presence of charged objects
between the plates.
2. Possibility the existence of such objects with necessity follows
from the fact that only an electric interaction forces can prevent
free electrons to escape from a solid. The work function depends
on both the charge value and the width of electrostatic decel-
75
eration region. The same parameters also determine the MET
signal value. Compensation voltage, measured by the dynamic
capacitor method, reflects only properties of the surface poten-
tial barrier (the electron affinity energy), and does not depend
on electro-physical characteristics of solids body. Independence
of the work function on the doping degree of semiconductors is
ascertained in a series of studies of atomically – clean surfaces.
3. Dipoles of the potential barrier differently affect on the work
function and on value of voltage measured by the dynamic
capacitor method: work function which determined by the emis-
sion methods depends on inside dipole electric field strength,
whereas the MET signal is determined by a far weaker outer
field of the dipole. This may lead to incorrectness of the Kelvin
method, since the work function is established by superposi-
tion of results of two fundamentally different methods: values of
emission work function of the reference electrode are combined
with MET signal values.
4. The dynamic capacitor method provides an effective means for
elucidation of charges distribution above the surface of a solid.
Its technological application is based upon the high sensitivity
of the method to detection of charges.
References
[1] J.C. Riviere, Work function. Measurement and results, in: M. Green (Ed.), Solid
State Surface Science, Vol. 1, M. Dekker, New York, 1969, chap. 4.
[2] A. Many, Y. Goldstein, N.B. Grover, Semiconductor Surfaces, 2nd ed.,
Amsterdam, North-Holland, 1971.
[3] U. Klein, W. Vollman, P.J. Abatti, Contact potential differences measurement:
short history and experimental setup for classroom demonstration, IEEE
Trans. Educ. 46 (3) (2003) 338–344.
[4] W. Melitz, J. Shen, A.C. Kummel, S. Lee, Kelvin probe force microscopy and its
application, Surf. Sci. Rep. 66 (2011) 1–27.
[5] A.N. Matveev, Electricity and Magnetism, Mir Publishers, Moscow, 1986.
[6] N.A. Surplice, R.J. D’Arcy, A critique of the Kelvin method of measuring work
function, J. Phys. E Sci. Instrum. 3 (7) (1970) 477–482.
[7] J.S.W. de Boer, H.J. Krusemeyer, N.C. Burhoven Jaspers, Analysis and
improvement of the Kelvin method for measuring differences in work
function, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 44 (8) (1973) 1003–1008.
[8] M.G. McKay, R.C. Dougal, A simple modification of the Kelvin method of
measuring differences in work function, J. Phys. E: Sci. Instrum. 8 (1) (1975)
71–73.
[9] B. Ritty, F. Wachtel, R. Manquenouille, F. Ott, J.B. Donnet, Conditions necessary
to get meaningful measurements from the Kelvin method, J. Phys. E: Sci.
Instrum. 15 (3) (1982) 310–317.
[10] L.D. Landau (Ed.), The Classical Theory of Fields, 2, Elsevier, 2013.
[11] D.K. Schroder, Contactless surface charge semiconductor characterization,
Mater. Sci. Eng. B 91–92 (2002) 196–210.
[12] Yu.S. Zharkikh, S.V. Lysochenko, O.V. Tretiak, Application of the dynamic
capacitor method in semiconductor sensorics, Sens. Electron. Microsyst.
Technol. 10 (3) (2013) 36–43.
[13] L.N. Abessonova, Yu.S. Zharkikh, A.D. Evdokimov, V.N. Schetkin, The
dependence of the physical parameters of the thermal silicon oxide films on
their thickness, Microelectronics 20 (5) (1991) 461–469.
[14] L. Kronik, Y. Shapira, Surface photovoltage phenomena: theory, experiment
and applications, Surf. Sci. Rep. 37 (1999) 1–206.
[15] Yu.S. Zharkikh, S.V. Lysochenko, S.S. Novikov, O.V. Tretiak, The surface of
silicon wafers control after chemical treatments, New Technol. 1–2 (4–5)
(2004) 18–20.
[16] Yu.S. Zharkikh, V.V. Piatnitsky, O.V. Tretiak, Effect of the weak form of
adsorption on the Si surface charge, Appl. Surf. Sci. 6 (1998) 48–53.
[17] W. Jaegermann, The semiconductor/electrolyte interface: a surface science
approach, Mod. Aspects Electrochem. 30 (1996) 1–186.
[18] K. Jakobi, Work function data, in: Electronic and Vibrational Properties,
Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1994, pp. 56–68.
[19] G.W. Gobely, F.G. Allen, Photoelectric properties and work function of cleaved
germanium surfaces, Surf. Sci. 2 (1964) 402–408.
[20] F.G. Allen, G.W. Gobely, Comparison of the photoelectric properties of cleaved,
heated, and sputtered silicon surfaces, J. Appl. Phys. 35 (3) (1964) 597–605.
[21] A. Huijser, J. Van Laar, Work function variations of gallium arsenide cleaved
single crystals, Surf. Sci. 52 (1) (1975) 202–210.
[22] Huijser, J. Van Laar, T.L. Van Rooy, Electronic surface properties of
uhv-cleaved III–V compounds, Surf. Sci. 62 (2) (1977) 472–486.
[23] A. Ismail, A.B. Brahim, J.M. Palau, L. Lassabatère, Comparison between GaAs
(110) and InP (110) surface properties induced by cleavage defects and by
oxygen adsorption, Surf. Sci. 162 (1) (1985) 195–201.
76 Yu.S. Zharkikh, S.V. Lysochenko / Applied Surface Science 400 (2017) 71–76

[24] J.M. Palau, E. Testemale, L. Lassabatere, Fermi level pinning on (110) GaAs
surfaces studied by CPD and SPV topographies, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. 19 (2)
(1981) 192–200.
[25] N.E. Christensen, Dipole effects and band offsets at semiconductor interfaces,
Phys. Rev. B 37 (9) (1988) 4528–4535.
[26] W.R.L. Lambrecht, B. Segall, O.K. Anderson, Self-consistent dipole theory of
heterojunction band offsets, Phys. Rev. B 41 (5) (1990) 2813–2817.
[27] Noriyuki Miyata, Tetsuji Yasuda, Yasuhiro Abe, Kelvin probe study of dipole
formation and annihilation at the HfO2 /Si interface, Appl. Phys. Express 3 (5)
(2010) 054101.
[28] D.Y. Li, Wen Li, Electron work function: a parameter sensitive to the adhesion
behavior of crystallographic surfaces, Appl. Phys. Lett. 79 (26) (2001)
4337–4338.
[29] A. Castaldini, D. Cavalcoli, A. Cavallini, M. Rossi, Scanning Kelvin probe and
surface photovoltage analysis of multicrystalline silicon, Mater. Sci. Eng. B
91–92 (2002) 234–238.