Home Search Collections Journals About Contact us My IOPscience

1.3 µm resonant-cavity InGaAs/GaAs quantum dot light-emitting devices

This content has been downloaded from IOPscience. Please scroll down to see the full text.

2001 Semicond. Sci. Technol. 16 844

(http://iopscience.iop.org/0268-1242/16/10/306)

View the table of contents for this issue, or go to the journal homepage for more

Download details:

IP Address: 130.127.238.233
This content was downloaded on 26/09/2013 at 12:12

Please note that terms and conditions apply.

INSTITUTE OF PHYSICS PUBLISHING SEMICONDUCTOR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Semicond. Sci. Technol. 16 (2001) 844–848 PII: S0268-1242(01)21999-3

1.3 µm resonant-cavity InGaAs/GaAs

quantum dot light-emitting devices
I L Krestnikov1 , N A Maleev1 , A V Sakharov1 , A R Kovsh1 ,
A E Zhukov1 , A F Tsatsul’nikov1 , V M Ustinov1 , Zh I Alferov1 ,
N N Ledentsov1,2 , D Bimberg2 and J A Lott3
1
Ioffe Physico-Technical Institute Russian Academy of Sciences, 26 Polytekhnicheskaya,
St Petersburg, 194021, Russia
2
Technische Universität Berlin, Hardenbergstrasse 36, 10623 Berlin, Germany
3
Air Force Institute of Technology, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
2950 P Street B640, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio USA 45433

Received 14 February 2001, in final form 26 July 2001

Published 31 August 2001
Online at stacks.iop.org/SST/16/844

Abstract
Different types of microcavities for GaAs-based light emitting devices
operating in the 1.3 µm spectral range are analysed. Microcavity
light-emitting diodes (MC LEDs) can be fabricated with different designs of
distributed Bragg reflectors (DBRs), e.g.: top and bottom AlAs/GaAs
semiconductor DBRs; bottom AlAs/GaAs semiconductor and top dielectric
DBRs; and oxidized Alx Oy /GaAs DBRs. MC LEDs operating in the 1.3 µm
spectral range and characterized by spectral width (13 nm) and narrow
far-field pattern (<20 degrees) are reported. In the case of vertical-cavity
surface-emitting lasers (VCSELs), practical implementation of injection
lasing can be only achieved with oxidized Alx Oy /GaAs DBRs, despite the
fact that DBRs with nominally comparable parameters can be fabricated. It
is shown that the 1.3 µm InAs/InGaAs quantum dot (QD) VCSEL exhibits
remarkably low internal losses, compared with QD VCSELs operating near
1 µm. This enables use of high-reflectance DBRs, important for lasing in
low modal gain media, with high (>40%) differential efficiency retained. A
threshold current of <2 mA at 300 K is achieved (λ = 1.304 µm).

1. Introduction substrates instead of the conventional InP-based analogues for

In recent years, light emitting devices operating at 1.3 and
1.55 µm have gained a 70% share of the semiconductor
laser market and demonstrated a 60% annual sales growth
in 1999. In spite of this rapid progress, the lasers currently
sold operate in the edge-emitting mode. At the same
time, 1.3 µm and 1.55 µm VCSELs are very attractive for
TELECOM applications as lasers allowing better coupling
to fibre and ensuring good temperature stability of the
emission wavelength, in contrast to edge-emitting devices.
Currently, 1.3 µm VCSELs are fabricated using structures
based on InGaAsP/InP optical microcavities fused to AlGaAs
distributed Bragg reflectors (DBRs) [1] or employ the optical
pumping of 1.3 µm VCSELs by adjacent electrically injected
0.85 µm VCSELs [2]. These devices may have only limited
application because of the high cost of production. This has
stimulated attempts to use light-emitting devices on GaAs
the same spectral range. During more recent years, several
groups have demonstrated lasing operation at 1.3 µm in edge-
emitting devices on GaAs substrates with various active media:
InGaAs/GaAs quantum dots (QDs) [3, 4]; InGaAsN quantum
wells (QWs) [5, 6]; and GaAsSb QWs [7]. The possibility
of developing 1.3 µm VCSELs with GaAsSb/GaAs [8] or
GaInNAs/GaAs [9] QW active regions has also been reported.
However, in contrast to GaAs-related applications in the 0.85–
1.0 µm range for local networks (see references in [10, 11]),
only few GaAs-based VCSELs have been reported for the
1.3 µm range until very recently [12–14].
This stimulated attempts to find another candidate for
emitters operating in the 1.3 and 1.55 µm ranges, such as
a microcavity light-emitting diode (MC LED) [15]. This
device shows high reliability, low temperature sensitivity and
narrow far-field pattern, is easy to fabricate and possesses no
threshold characteristics. On the other hand, as compared with

0268-1242/01/100844+05$30.00 © 2001 IOP Publishing Ltd Printed in the UK 844

 1.3 µm resonant-cavity InGaAs/GaAs QD light-emitting devices

VCSELs, MC LEDs have lower brightness and efficiency. In SiO2/ZrO2

(a)
this paper, we report on a study of various types of vertical DBR
microcavities with InAs/InGaAs QDs emitting at 1.3 µm. GaAs/GaAlAs ●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
● ● ●

Owing to the relatively small modal gain provided by the DBR ●

●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
● ● ● ●
● ● ● ●
● ● ● ●
● ● ● ●

QD media, only high finesse resonators are to be used in Cavity

●

●
●
●
●
●
●
●

●
●
●
●
▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●

VCSEL fabrication. However, low internal losses may provide with QDs ● ● ●
●
●
●
●
●

a sufficient efficiency.

2. Experimental
GaAs/AlAs
All the structures were grown by molecular beam epitaxy DBR
(MBE) on (001)GaAs substrates in a RIBER 32 chamber.
Test and MC LED structures were equipped with 33-period
bottom AlAs/GaAs distributed Bragg reflectors (DBRs). In
the test structures, three layers of InAs/InGaAs QDs [16] GaAs
separated by 25 nm GaAs spacers were placed at the centre substr.
of a 1λ undoped GaAs cavity (λ is the resonance wavelength).
For MC LED structures, we used a 2λ cavity with the same (b)
active region. On both sides of the active region, short-
period Al0.25 Ga0.75 As/GaAs superlattices (SL) with effective GaAs/AlO
DBR
thickness of λ/4 were placed as emitters. Two last pairs of the
AlAs/GaAs DBR and the bottom part of the cavity (including
the short-period SL) were n-doped with Si, while the top part
of the cavity (including the short-period SL) was p-doped
Cavity ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲▲▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲
with Be. MC LED structures were completed with 2 pairs of with QDs
Al0.25 Ga0.75 As:Be/GaAs:Be DBRs necessary for better current
spreading. The top mirror was formed by thermal deposition of
ZrO2 /SiO2 DBR for both the test and the MC LED structures
(figure 1(a)). In the VCSEL structure, the role of mirrors GaAs/AlO
was played by Alx Oy /GaAs DBRs (5 and 7.5 periods for, DBR
respectively, the top and bottom DBRs) fabricated by post-
growth oxidation of AlAs layers. The symmetrical 5λ cavity
consisted of a 7/4λ GaAs:(Si or Be) layer adjoining the DBRs,
λ/4 AlAs:(Si or Be) layers linearly graded to GaAs on both GaAs
sides and central undoped GaAs layer. Three sheets of QDs substr.
were also placed at the cavity centre (figure 1(b)).
For both the MC LED and the VCSEL devices, intracavity Figure 1. Schematic view of MC LED (a) and VCSEL (b).
contacts were used. In MC LED devices, current confinement
was achieved by proton implantation, with aperture oxidation
states through QD size fluctuations is 55 nm (40 meV). Placing
serving this purpose in the VCSEL structure. In more
the QDs in a microcavity can strongly affect the PL spectra,
detail the device fabrication is described elsewhere [17,
with their broadening depending only on microcavity’s finesse.
18]. Photoluminescence (PL) was excited by an Ar+ laser
Raising the finesse by using a top dielectric DBR with varied
(100 W cm−2 ). The light of a tungsten lamp was used
number of pairs results in a strong narrowing of the PL spectra
for optical reflectivity (OR) measurements. A double-pass
(down to 4 nm) for a high-finesse microcavity (figure 2(a)).
monochromator and a Ge-photodetector were used together
The full width at half-maximum (FWHM) of the PL spectra
with a lock-in detecting system. The laser operated in the
corresponds to that of the dip in the OR spectra (figure 2(b)),
pulse regime with an off-duty factor of 10.
inversely proportional to the microcavity’s finesse.
In these experiments, we observed that the decrease in
3. Results and discussion the FWHM of the dip tends to a constant value of 4 nm
after deposition of 5–6 pairs of dielectric DBRs. This can
3.1. Photoluminescence and optical reflection from be accounted for by the nonideality of the bottom AlAs/GaAs
structures with quantum dots in a microcavity DBR, caused by fluctuations of the quarter-wavelength layer
thickness. The actual reflectance of the mirrors can be obtained
A typical PL spectrum of InAs/InGaAs QDs emitting at 1.3 µm
from the following equation [10]:
is presented in figure 2(a). This spectrum was obtained from a
satellite structure comprising only a QD active region without Nλ/2
any DBR. It can be clearly seen that this PL spectrum consists Rt Rb = 1 − 2π (1)
Q
of two peaks corresponding to the ground and excited states
of QDs (the results of digital peak analysis are represented by where Rt and Rb are the reflectivities of the top and bottom
broken curves). The inhomogeneous broadening of the ground DBRs, Nλ/2 is the effective order of the cavity, and Q is the

845
I L Krestnikov et al
(a)
satellite
Normalized PL intensity
0 pair top DBR
2 pair top DBR
13 pair top DBR
1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.0 1.1
Wavelength (µm) Wavelength (µm)
Figure 2. PL spectra at room temperature for satellite and test
structures with different numbers of pairs in the top DBRs (a) and
OR spectra for the same test structures (b). Broken curves represent
the results obtained on applying digital peak analysis to the
experimental spectrum.
quality factor of the cavity (Q = λ/λ, λ is the resonance
wavelength, and λ is the FWHM of the reflectivity dip). In
the case in question, Nλ/2 ≈ 6 owing to the penetration of
the electromagnetic field into DBRs and Q = 430, and, thus,
the actual value of Rt Rb calculated from (1) is 91% instead
of 99.995% in the ideal case. The ideal and the real values of
Rt Rb can be used to calculate the external optical losses (EOL).
For our MC LED geometry, the effective cavity thickness at
which the electromagnetic field penetration into the DBRs is
to be taken into account equals 2100 nm, and the EOL are 0.1–
0.2 cm−1 for the ideal DBR structure. The estimated real losses
are 250 cm−1 . For lasing to be successfully achieved, this value
should be exceeded by the gain, which is hardly possible for the
practical QD media. Such a high difference between the ideal
and real DBR reflectivities may occur for the following two
reasons: first, in the case under study it is relatively difficult to
match the cavity mode and the DBR reflectivity maximum
because of the molecular flux gradients over the substrate.
Second, the flux transients are rather pronounced for very thick
all-semiconductor DBR structures, and the top DBR periods
differ from those prescribed by the design.
3.2. Design of the device
Figure 3 shows electroluminescence (EL) spectra of
conventional non-resonant LEDs with the same active region.
It can be clearly seen that, with increasing current, the peak
intensity of the QD ground state levels off while the integral
intensity is linear up to the highest current densities. The gain
saturation at the QD ground state wavelength has also been
observed in edge-emitting lasers based on stacked QDs [19].
It has been shown that the modal gain does not exceed a value
of ∼4 cm−1 per QD sheet [20].
To apply this knowledge to the vertical emitting devices,
we first suggest that the QDs have similar material gains for
all directions, which is true if the QD exciton wavefunction
symmetry is nearly spherical. Second, we consider the
difference between the confinement γ -factors for edge- and
vertical-emitting devices, together with the effect of field
enhancement in the cavity. For example, for both the MC
846
10
(b) (a) (b)
EL intensity (arb. units)
8
1
Light power (µW)
Optical reflection
6
1.25 1.30 1.35
1 Wavelength (µm)
4 0
(c) −30 30
D1
1 2
D2
D3
0
0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 60 90 120 150 180
1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 Current (mA) Angle (grad)
Figure 3. L–I characteristics of MC LEDs with different
apertures (a), the spectral characteristics of MC LED (D1) measured
after coupling to an optical fibre at different drive currents (20, 5, 1,
0.3 and 0.15 mA) (b) and the angle distribution of the emission (c).
The broken curve corresponds to the case of a conventional LED
with a cosine radiance pattern. The inset presents the same data in
polar co-ordinates.
LED and the VCSEL practical geometries used in this work,
the modal gain in our vertical-emitting devices is 2 times
less than that in the edge-emitting lasers and does not exceed
10 cm−1 . This value is far too small compared with the EOLs
(200 cm−1 ) for the structure design with bottom semiconductor
AlAs/GaAs and top dielectric DBRs. Laser generation can
hardly be achieved in this case.
To overcome this problem, we used Alx Oy /GaAs DBRs.
These materials have very different refractive indices (1.7 and
3.45 at 1.3 µm for Alx Oy and GaAs, respectively). This
allows use of a DBR with only few periods and drastically
decreases the influence of the cell-depletion effect. On the
other hand, the considerable difference between the refractive
indices also makes it possible to obtain a very broad stop-
band of the DBR, and the displacement of the cavity mode
with respect to the maximum reflectivity wavelength affects
the device performance to a much lesser extent. Calculations
for oxidized DBRs show that EOL amount to 3 cm−1 in the
ideal case. This value is much worse, compared with the EOL
in ideal all-semiconductor DBRs, but is still good enough to
achieve lasing. On the other hand, in spite of the relatively
low EOL, a reasonable differential efficiency can be achieved
if the internal losses are lower. For QD based structures, the
typical value of the internal losses is 1–2 cm−1 [21], which is
much lower than the ideal EOL in the case of the aluminium
oxide DBRs. On the other hand, for GaAs-based QD lasers
emitting at 1 µm, the internal losses are close to 3–5 cm−1 ,
making difficult operation with high differential efficiency and
requiring higher EOL to achieve high differential efficiency.
For example, the differential efficiency was ∼30% for a 1 µm
GaAs-based VCSEL with only a 3-period Alx Oy /GaAs top
DBR and dropped to ∼4% for a 5-period DBR [22].
3.3. Characterization of the light emitting devices
Since no conditions for low EOL are applicable to MC LEDs,
we used only two pairs in the top dielectric DBR. In this
case, the spectral width of the emission is narrow enough
(∼10 nm). Further enhancement of the reflection of this mirror,

250
200 EL intensity (arb. units)
Optical power (µW)
150
100
50 1.29 1.30 1.31 1.32
Wavelength (µm)
0 0
0.0 0.5
Figure 4. Output power (full curve) and differential quantum
efficiency (broken curve) versus drive current for VCSEL at room
temperature. Inset shows an EL spectrum taken at I = 1.05Ith .
achieved by making larger the number of pairs, results in a
redistribution of the outgoing light to the substrate side, and,
consequently, both the light power and the emission efficiency
of the device decrease. Figure 3(a) shows light–current (L–
I) characteristics for three types of MC LEDs, differing from
each other in the sizes of current and light apertures. The
current apertures are 40×40, 30×30 and 20×20 µm for D1, D2
and D3 devices, respectively, the light apertures being 34×37,
24×27 and 14×17 µm. It can be seen that at low currents
the light power depends on current linearly, with a differential
efficiency of 0.16%, while at higher currents the light output
power tends to a constant value. This partial saturation occurs
at a threshold current density of about 1 kA cm−2 , although the
signal continues to grow at even higher current densities and
the output power reaches 10 µW. The FWHM of the spectra
is 13 nm and remains unchanged with increasing current
density (figure 3(b)). This value exceeds somewhat the FWHM
obtained by digital simulation (10 nm). As mentioned above,
this can be accounted for by the nonuniformity of the bottom
AlAs/GaAs semiconductor DBR. However, the experimental
FWHM of the spectrum, as also the angular distribution of
the emission (figure 3(c)), is already good enough for fibre
coupling applications. In the case under study, the radiance
pattern is very narrow (17◦ ) and most part of the output power
can be coupled to the fibre, whereas the conventional LEDs
have a Lambertian pattern with cosine distribution (dotted
curve in figure 3(c)).
In the case of oxidized Alx Oy /GaAs DBRs, lasing in the
vertical direction is successfully achieved, with a threshold
current of 1.8 mA and peak differential quantum efficiency
of 45% (figure 4). The lasing wavelength is 1.304 µm.
An additional peak on the long-wavelength side of the main
lasing line is due to the laterally confined lasing mode in the
8×8 µm aperture region. More detailed evidence on L–I and
I–V characteristics for structures of this kind can be found
in [23]. We achieve lasing in the CW regime as well by
using Al(Ga)O/GaAs DBR. Up to now devices have operated
more than 1000 hours at 35 ◦ C. Output power is 0.65 mW and
maximum plug-in and different efficiency are 10–15% and 39–
40%, respectively [24].
1.3 µm resonant-cavity InGaAs/GaAs QD light-emitting devices
50 4. Conclusion
Differential quantum efficiency (%)
40 QD MC LEDs operating at 1.3 µm with a spectral bandwidth
of 13 nm and a far-field radiance pattern narrower than
20 have been fabricated. Pulsed lasing at 1.3 µm via the
30
QD ground state has been achieved for GaAs-based VCSEL
containing three uncoupled sheets of InAs/InGaAs QD active
20 layers. The experimental devices operate at room temperature
with threshold currents below 2 mA and differential slope
10 efficiencies exceeding 40%.
Acknowledgments
1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
Current (mA)
This work was supported by NanOp, the Russian Foundation
for Basic Research, the Volkswagen Foundation, INTAS,
and the US Air Force Office of Scientific Research (Dr
H R Schlossberg). NNL acknowledges support from the
DAAD Guest Professorship.
References
[1] Qian Y, Zhu Z H and Lo Y H 1997 Appl. Phys. Lett. 71 25
[2] Jayaraman V, Geske J C, MacDougal M H, Peters F H,
Lowes T D and Char T T 1998 Proc. 11th Annual Meeting
IEEE Lasers and Electro-Optics Society (Orlando, FL
1998) pp 210–211
[3] Huffaker D L, Park G, Zou Z, Shchekin O B and Deppe D G
1998 Appl. Phys. Lett. 73 2564–6
[4] Shernyakov Yu M, Bedarev D A, Kondrat’eva E Yu,
Kop’ev P S, Kovsh A R, Maleev N A, Maximov M V,
Ustinov V M, Volovik B V, Zhukov A E, Alferov Zh I,
Ledentsov N N and Bimberg D 1999 Electron. Lett. 35
898–900
[5] Nakahara D, Kondow M, Kitatani T, Larson M C and Uomi K
1998 IEEE Photon. Technol. Lett. 10 487–8
[6] Egorov A Yu, Bernklau D, Livshits D, Ustinov V, Alferov Zh I
and Riechert H 1999 Electron. Lett. 35 1643–4
[7] Nishi K, Anan T and Sugou S 1999 IEEE/LEOS Summer
Topical Meeting, Workshop on Nanostructures and
Quantum Dots (26–27 July 1999 San Diego, CA, USA)
pp 39–40
[8] Anan T, Nishi K, Sugou S, Yamada M, Tokutome K and
Gomyo A 1998 Electron. Lett. 34 2127–9
[9] Larson M C, Kondow M, Kitatani T, Nakahara K, Tamura K,
Inoue H and Uomi K 1998 IEEE Photon. Technol. Lett. 10
188–90
[10] Vertical-Cavity Surface-Emitting Lasers 1999 eds C Wilmsen,
H Temkin and L A Coldren, (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press)
[11] Gaisler V A, Toropov A I, Bakarov A K, Kalagin A K,
Moshegov N T, Tenne D A, Kachanova M M, Kopp O R,
Nenasheva L A and Medvedev A S 1999 Techn. Phys. Lett.
25 775
[12] Steinle G, Egorov A Yu and Riechert H 2000 Summer School
and European Optical Society Topical Meeting on
Semiconductor Microcavity Photonics (21–25 October
2000) Ascona, Switzerland
[13] Choquette K D, Klem J F, Fisher A J, Blum O, Allerman A A,
Fritz I J, Kurtz S R, Breiland W G, Sieg R, Geib K M,
Scott J W, Naone R L 2000 Electron. Lett. 36 1388
[14] Lott J A, Ledentsov N N, Ustinov V M, Maleev N A,
Kovsh A R, Zhukov A E, Maximov M V, Volovik B V,
Alferov Zh I and Bimberg D 2000 LEOS 2000 (13–16
November 2000 Rio Grande, Puerto Rico) pp 304–5
[15] Hunt N E J, Schubert E F, Logan R A and Zydzik G J 1992
Appl. Phys. Lett. 61 2287
[16] Ustinov V M, Maleev N A, Zhukov A E, Kovsh A R,
Egorov A Yu, Lunev A V, Volovik B V, Krestnikov I L,
847
I L Krestnikov et al
Musikhin Yu G, Bert N A, Kop’ev P S, Alferov Zh I,
Ledentsov N N and Bimberg D 1999 Appl. Phys. Lett. 74
2815–7
[17] Ledentsov N N, Bimberg D, Ustinov V M, Maximov M V,
Alferov Zh I, Kalosha V P and Lott J A 1999 Semicond. Sci.
Technol. 14 99
[18] Maleev N A, Krestnikov I L, Kovsh A R, Zhukov A E,
Ustinov V M, Sakharov A V, Bedarev D A, Passenberg W,
Pawlowski E, Tsatsul’nikov A F, Kunzel H, Ledentsov N N,
Alferov Zh I and Bimberg D 1999 Int. Conf. Semicond.
Quantum Dots (31 July–3 August 2000 Munich, Germany)
Phys. Stat. Sol. at press
[19] Zhukov A E, Kovsh A R, Maleev N A, Mikhrin S S,
Ustinov V M, Tsatsul’nikov A F, Maximov M V,
Volovik B V, Bedarev D A, Shernyakov Yu M, Kop’ev P S,
Alferov Zh I, Ledenstov N N and Bimberg D 1999
Appl Phys. Lett. 75 1926–8
[20] Maximov M V, Shernyakov Yu M, Kaiander I N, Bedarev D A,
Kondrat’eva E Yu, Kop’ev P S, Kovsh A R, Maleev N A,
848
Mikhrin S S, Tsatsul’nikov A F, Ustinov V M, Volovik B V,
Zhukov A E, Alferov Zh I, Ledenstov N N and Bimberg D
1999 Electron. Lett. 35 2038
[21] Zhukov A E, Kovsh A R, Ustinov V M, Shernyakov Yu M,
Mikhrin S S, Maleev N A, Kondrat’eva E Yu, Livshits D A,
Maximov M V, Volovik B V, Bedarev D A, Musikhin Yu G,
Ledentsov N N, Kop’ev P S, Alferov Zh I and Bimberg D
1999 IEEE Photonics Technol. Lett. 11 1345–7
[22] Lott J A, Ledentsov N N, Ustinov V M, Egorov A Yu,
Zhukov A E, Kop’ev P S, Alferov Zh I and Bimberg D 1997
Electron. Lett. 331150
[23] Lott J A, Ledentsov N N, Ustinov V M, Maleev N A,
Kovsh A R, Zhukov A E, Maximov M V, Volovik B V,
Alferov Zh I and Bimberg D 2000 Electron. Lett. 36 1384
[24] Lott J A, Ledentsov N N, Ustinov V M, Maleev N A,
Kovsh A R, Zhukov A E, Maximov M V, Volovik B V,
Alferov Zh I and Bimberg D 2000 Abstract LEOS 2000
(13–16 November 2000 Rio Grande, Puerto Rico) pp 304–5