REVIEW

Diamond-Based Photodetectors www.advopticalmat.de

Optoelectronic Diamond: Growth, Properties,

and Photodetection Applications
Ying-Jie Lu, Chao-Nan Lin, and Chong-Xin Shan*

spectral selectivity, high speed, and high

Deep ultraviolet photodetectors have attracted much attention due to their stability are typically employed as the cri-
wide applications in the industrial, military, biological and environmental teria for evaluating the performance of a
photodetector.[8,9]
fields. Diamond has a variety of unique characteristics, including a wide
To date, UV photodetectors have been
bandgap, high thermal conductivity, high breakdown voltage, high carrier prepared using photomultiplier tubes
mobility, and high radiation hardness, which make it a promising candi- (PMTs), charge-coupled devices (CCDs),
date for deep ultraviolet photodetection. With the development of diamond and semiconductor photodiodes. PMTs
synthesis technology, diamond-based photodetectors have been extensively are widely used in UV detection, bene-
studied. This study reviews the recent progress involving various types of fiting from their high-gain and low-noise
characteristics. However, PMTs have sev-
diamond-based photodetectors, including photoconductors, metal–
eral disadvantages, such as fragile vac-
semiconductor–metal photodiodes, Schottky barrier photodiodes, p–n, and uum-tube construction, high-voltage bias
p–i–n photodiodes, heterojunctions, and phototransistors. requirements, magnetic-field sensitivity,
and bulky size. The growing demand for
miniaturized and reliable UV detection
1. Introduction systems for portable applications has driven the development of
solid-state UV photodetectors with semiconductor-based active
The ultraviolet (UV) region of the electromagnetic spectrum layers. As solid-state devices, both semiconductor photodiodes
covers the wavelength range from 10 to 400 nm. UV radia- and CCDs can be operated with moderate bias and are more
tion is commonly divided into four spectral regions: UVA secure and reliable than are PMTs. However, the response of
(400–320 nm), UVB (320–280 nm), UVC (280–200 nm), and the CCD detectors does not depend on the wavelength of inci-
far UV (200–10 nm). Photodetection of UV radiation can be dent illumination, which means that the CCD detectors have
used in a wide range of civil and military applications, such poor spectral selectivity. Semiconductor photodiodes are small,
as biological/chemical analysis, flame sensing, optical com- lightweight, sensitive to light and respond rapidly, thus meeting
munications, emitter calibration, astronomical studies, and the development needs of UV detection systems.[10,11]
environmental monitoring.[1] Photodetectors whose respon- According to their structure, semiconductor photodetec-
sivity is mainly located in the UV range are known as “vis- tors can be divided into the following types: photoconductors,
ible-blind” detectors. The cutoff wavelength of a visible-blind Schottky barrier photodiodes, metal–semiconductor–metal
detector is shorter than 400 nm. Most of the radiation on the (MSM) photodiodes, metal–insulator–semiconductor (MIS)
Earth is from the Sun, and solar radiation with wavelengths structures, p–n and p–i–n photodiodes, heterojunctions, and
shorter than 280 nm cannot reach the Earth’s surface due to phototransistors. Those photodetectors obey the following funda-
strong absorption by ozone, particles, and water vapor in the mental principle: When a semiconductor material is illuminated
atmosphere, which creates a low background window for pre- by photons with energy equal to or greater than its bandgap, the
cise and accurate detection. Photodetectors in this region are photons are absorbed by the semiconductor, and electrons and
thus known as “solar-blind” photodetectors. Solar-blind photo- holes are excited in the semiconductor. The photogenerated elec-
detectors have a higher detection precision and accuracy and a tron–hole pairs can be separated by internal or external electric
lower false alarm ratio than their infrared, visible and near UV fields, thus producing photocurrent that can then be detected by
counterparts; thus, they have versatile potential applications in connecting the semiconductor to an electric circuit.
missile tracking, intersatellite communications, extreme ultra- Silicon with a bandgap in the near-infrared region has been
violet (EUV) lithography, and ozone monitoring.[2–7] The “5S” employed to fabricate UV detectors. UV detection filters are typ-
requirements of high sensitivity, high signal-to-noise ratio, high ically required to block visible and infrared photons, resulting
in increased device size and cost. Additionally, to obtain high
Dr. Y.-J. Lu, C.-N. Lin, Prof. C.-X. Shan sensitivity, these detectors must be cooled to a very low temper-
Henan Key Laboratory of Diamond
Optoelectronic Materials and Devices ature to reduce the dark current or noise. Recently, photodetec-
School of Physics and Engineering tors based on wide-bandgap (WBG) semiconductors have been
Zhengzhou University realized and are recognized as a potential alternative to both
Zhengzhou 450001, China PMTs and silicon-based UV photodetectors. Relative to narrow-
E-mail: cxshan@zzu.edu.cn
bandgap semiconductors, WBG-semiconductor-based photode-
DOI: 10.1002/adom.201800359 tectors have the advantage of being intrinsically visible-blind,

Adv. Optical Mater. 2018, 1800359 1800359  (1 of 16) © 2018 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com www.advopticalmat.de

thus avoiding the use of optical filters and enabling room-

temperature operation. Another advantage of WBG semicon- Ying-Jie Lu received his
ductors is their high radiation hardness, which is important for bachelor degree from Hebei
improving the lifetime of photodetectors. To date, a wide variety University of Technology
of WBG semiconductors have been investigated to design UV in 2010, and then received
photodetectors, such as III-nitrides (cubic boron nitride,[12] his Ph.D. from State Key
GaN,[13–15] AlxGa1−xN[16–18]), II–VI compounds (ZnS,[19,20] Laboratory of Luminescence
ZnO,[21–26] ZnxMg1−xO[5,27–29]), diamond,[30–34] SiC,[35–37] and and Applications, Changchun
gallium oxide (β-Ga2O3).[2,4,8,38–40] Institute of Optics, Fine
Among these WBG semiconductors, diamond has a variety Mechanics and Physics,
of unique characteristics, including a high thermal conduc- Chinese Academy of Sciences
tivity, high breakdown voltage, high carrier mobility, and high in 2015. After that, he joined
saturation velocity. These outstanding properties make dia- Zhengzhou University as a
mond a promising material for high-temperature, high-power, lecturer. His current research interests include CVD dia-
and high-frequency applications. In addition, the bandgap of mond growth, characterization, and fabrication of opto-
diamond is 5.47 eV, corresponding to an absorption edge at electronic devices.
225 nm, making this material a promising candidate for solar-
blind photodetection. Various structures of diamond-based Chao-Nan Lin received her
photodetectors have been fabricated. bachelor degree in 2014 from
In this article, recent progress in different types of diamond- the Xinyang Normal University.
based photodetectors is reviewed, and the main parameters Now she is a doctoral student
of photodetectors, the fundamental properties of diamond, in School of Physics and
the synthesis of diamond, and the doping of diamond are Engineering, Zhengzhou
addressed. This work also reviews some applications of University. Her research inter-
diamond-based photodetectors. ests are mainly focused on
growth of CVD diamond and
2. Parameters of Photodetectors fabrication and characteriza-
tion of CVD diamond-based
The main parameters used to define the performance of a UV solar-blind photodetectors.
photodetector are the quantum efficiency, responsivity, dark cur-
rent, response time, UV/visible rejection ratio and detectivity.
Chong-Xin Shan received his
bachelor degree from Wuhan
2.1. Quantum Efficiency, Responsivity, and Gain
University, and Ph.D. degree
from Changchun Institute of
The responsivity (Rλ) is defined as the ratio of the incident
Optics, Fine Mechanics and
optical power in watts (Pinc) to the photocurrent in amperes
Physics, Chinese Academy
(Ip). The responsivity, which is measured in units of amperes
of Sciences. From 2004 to
per watt (A/W), depends on the wavelength of the incident
2008, he worked in sequence
light. The spectral response of a photodetector can be obtained
as a postdoctoral researcher
by the curve of responsivity as a function of wavelength. The
in The Chinese University
responsivity Rλ is thus given by
of Hong Kong and The
University of Nottingham,
R λ = I p/Pinc (1)
 United Kingdom. He got a professorship in Changchun
Institute of Optics, Fine Mechanics, and Physics. His
The quantum efficiency (η) represents the capability of a
research interest is mainly focused on wide bandgap
photodetector to convert light energy to electrical energy, which
semiconductor materials and optoelectronic devices, espe-
is defined as the probability of creating an electron–hole pair
cially on zinc oxide and diamond-based nanostructures,
from an absorbed photon and is expressed as a percentage. The
light-emitting devices, laser diodes, and photodetectors.
rate G of electron–hole pair generation per unit time is thus
given by[41]
The gain parameter (g) represents the number of charge
G = η ⋅Φ  (2) carriers detected relative to the number of photogenerated
electron–hole pairs. The photocurrent is determined by
where Φ is the luminous flux. At a given wavelength λ, Φ is
Ip = q ⋅G ⋅ g (4)
given by
where q is the elementary charge (1.602 × 10−19 C). From
Φ = Pinc ⋅ λ / (h ⋅ c ) (3) Equations (1)–(4), the responsivity Rλ can be written as

where h is the Planck constant, and c is the speed of light. R λ = I p /Pinc = q ⋅ g ⋅ η ⋅ λ / (hc ) (5)


Adv. Optical Mater. 2018, 1800359 1800359  (2 of 16) © 2018 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com
2.2. Dark Current
Dark current (Id), which refers to the photodetector-generated
current under a certain bias voltage without light irradiation, is
an important noise source for photodetectors. A low dark cur-
rent is necessary for photodetectors with a high signal-to-noise
ratio.[10]
2.3. Noise Equivalent Power and Detectivity
The noise equivalent power (NEP) is defined as the minimum
optical power required to produce a photocurrent equal to the
total noise. The detectivity (D*), which is defined as the recip-
rocal of NEP, is typically normalized to the bandwidth and
detector active area. D* is given by the following formula
D * = ( A∆f ) R /in
1/2
(6)
where A (cm2) is the effective area of the detector, and in
(amperes) is the total noise current.
If the shot noise from the dark current is the major contribu-
tion to the total noise that limits the detectivity, then the detec-
tivity of the photodetector can be expressed as follows:[23,42–45]
D * = R λ A 1/2 / ( 2qI d )
1/2
(7)
where Id is the dark current.
2.4. Response Time
Generally, the response time contains two parts: rise time and
decay time. The rise time is the time required for the response
to rise from 10% to 90% of its maximum value, and the decay
time is the time it takes the response to decrease from 90% to
10% of its maximum value. The response speed of a photode-
tector may be limited by capacitive effects, trapping effects, and
the saturation speed of carriers in the semiconductors.
2.5. UV/visible Rejection Ratio
The UV/visible rejection ratio is a unique property of UV photo-
detectors that refers to the ratio of the peak responsivity to the
responsivity at 400 nm (representing the demarcation of visible
and UV light). A higher rejection ratio indicates better spectral
selectivity of the UV photodetectors.
3. Fundamental Properties of Diamond
Diamond is a promising material for future electronic devices
because of its unique semiconductor properties, including its
very favorable chemical stability, high thermal conductivity,
and excellent optical and electrical properties.[46–49] Table 1
lists the fundamental properties of single-crystal diamond;
for comparison, values for selected other semiconductors
are included.[10,11,50,51] The bandgap of diamond is 5.47 eV,
Adv. Optical Mater. 2018, 1800359 1800359  (3 of 16)
www.advopticalmat.de
corresponding to the absorption edge at 225 nm, which makes
it a promising candidate for light-emitting diodes and photode-
tectors operating in the deep ultraviolet (DUV) region (typically
referring to radiation with a wavelength shorter than 300 nm).
Furthermore, a WBG is beneficial to the high-temperature
stability of the device. Single-crystal diamond exhibits both
the highest electron mobilities and hole mobilities among the
wide-bandgap semiconductors, which contribute to its high
response speed. Due to the high electron saturation velocity,
field-effect transistors (FETs) with relatively high frequency can
be fabricated from diamond. Diamond has the highest thermal
conductivity of any natural material, making it suitable for the
fabrication of high-power devices. The high breakdown field is
advantageous for devices that must operate at high voltage. In
addition, due to its high physical/chemical stability, diamond-
based photodetectors can operate in harsh environments that
may include high radiation levels and strongly caustic condi-
tions. Due to the abovementioned favorable characteristics,
high-performance diamond-based devices, such as DUV LEDs,
photodetectors, power devices, and high-frequency FETs, can
be anticipated.
4. Synthetic Diamond
Diamond is a solid form of carbon with a diamond cubic crystal
structure. Two types of diamond exist: natural and synthetic.
Natural diamonds are mined from the Earth, while synthetic
diamonds are manufactured in a laboratory. Currently, syn-
thetic diamonds are prepared by either a high-pressure high-
temperature (HPHT) or a chemical vapor deposition (CVD)
process.
Natural diamonds of electronic grade are very rare, which
limits the application of natural diamonds in the semicon-
ductor industry. HPHT was developed in the 1950s and is the
most extensively used method for fabricating synthetic dia-
monds.[52,53] In the HPHT process, graphite is compressed in
a large-volume high-pressure facility and is transformed into
diamond in the presence of transition metals (Fe, Co, Ni, or a
mixture), which act as a solvent catalyst. The typical pressure
and temperature is 6–7 GPa and 1500–1700 °C, respectively.
The main advantages of the HPHT method are its relatively
low cost and high throughput, and HPHT diamonds are widely
used in abrasives and in cutting and polishing tools. However,
the exact composition of the metal catalyst can have a major
influence on the properties of the synthetic diamond, particu-
larly its semiconducting properties, due to the impurity-related
sensitivity of the semiconductors. Furthermore, nitrogen impu-
rities in the growth environment are hard to avoid, resulting
in high nitrogen impurity concentrations, which make HPHT
diamonds unfavorable for optoelectronic applications.
The development of low-pressure CVD growth methods for
synthetic diamond has changed the state of research and devel-
opment because large-scale, high-pure, low-cost and reproduc-
ible diamond can be obtained through this process. The CVD
process of diamond synthesis was discovered in the 1980s and
is compatible with semiconductor doping and device fabrica-
tion technology.[54] Because graphite is the most stable phase
of carbon under low-pressure conditions, graphite phases are
© 2018 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com www.advopticalmat.de

Table 1.  The semiconducting properties of some semiconductors. method and was widely used for homoepi-
taxial and heteroepitaxial diamond deposition
Natural Single-crystal MgO AlN GaN ZnO Si in the early stages of research. However, this
diamond CVD diamond technique suffers from film contamination
Bandgap [eV] 5.47 5.47 7.83 6.2 3.4 3.37 1.12 with filament materials, which decreases
Breakdown field [MV cm−1] 10 10 – 2 2.6 – 0.3 the quality of the diamond. A high density
of H radicals is generated by a high-energy
Electron mobility [cm 2 V−1 s−1] 200–2800 4500 10 135 1000 170 1400
microwave plasma in MPCVD, which has
Hole mobility [cm2 V−1 s−1] 1800–2100 3800 2 14 30 – 600
no discharging electrode inside the reac-
Thermal conductivity [W cm−1 K−1] 22 24 4.82 3.19 1.3 5.4 1.5 tion chamber. Therefore, MPCVD is the
Electron saturation velocity 2 2 – 1.4 2.5 – 0.3 most widely used method for high-quality
[107 cm S−1] diamond growth, particularly for synthetic
Dielectric constant 5.7 5.7 9.8 8.1 8.9 9.1 11.8 electronic-grade diamond. The commer-
cial MPCVD apparatus typically contains a
microwave generator equipped with micro-
formed on the growth surface together with the diamond phase wave power capability of 5–10 kW for research purposes and
during the low-pressure CVD process. To obtain continuous 50–60 kW for development and production, with corresponding
diamond phases, the graphite must be removed effectively. frequencies of 2.45 GHz and 915 MHz, respectively.
Atomic hydrogen can etch the graphite phases selectively while Relative to polycrystalline diamond, single-crystal diamond
maintaining the diamond phases in a stable state. Therefore, has better electronic properties. However, the lack of a commer-
the carbon source gas must be highly diluted with hydrogen cial wide-area single-crystal diamond substrate limits the scale
during the CVD process. High-purity methane is widely used of the industrial fabrication of devices based on single-crystal
as the carbon source gas for CVD diamonds. The concentra- diamond. To obtain large single-crystal diamonds, researchers
tion of methane is typically lower than 5% in the methane/ have investigated novel methods, and some progress has been
hydrogen mixture. Gas purification, particularly for hydrogen, made. In 2009, half-inch single-crystal diamond plates were suc-
is effective to improve diamond purity. During growth, the sub- cessfully synthesized by Mokuno et al. through a side-surface
strate temperature is typically 700–1000 °C, and the pressure growth technique combined with a lift-off process.[55] How-
in the chamber is 20–100 torr. Higher temperature and higher ever, this method is very inefficient, as thousands of hours of
pressure can increase the diamond growth rate. Both natural effort are required. Another way to obtain large-scale diamonds
and HPHT diamond are typically used for homoepitaxial dia- is the use of a mosaic-type single-crystal diamond wafer as a
mond substrates to obtain single-crystal diamond, while Si, substrate. Figure 1 shows an example of such a process, as
molybdenum, and other substrates can be employed to deposit reported by Yamada et al.[56] First, four single-crystal diamond
polycrystalline diamond. plates with identical characteristics (clone substrates) are pre-
For the CVD method, two techniques are commonly used: pared from one identical seed crystal using a lift-off process
hot filament chemical vapor deposition (HFCVD) and micro- with ion implantation. These four clone substrates are con-
wave plasma chemical vapor deposition (MPCVD). In HFCVD, nected to one tiled-clone substrate, onto which diamond was
hydrogen is cracked thermally by refractory metal filaments deposited. By applying the lift-off process to this tiled clone
heated to a high temperature (>1800 °C) to form H radicals. repeatedly, several clones of the tiled clone are obtained. Then,
Low-pressure CVD diamond is realized using a hot filament by repeating the process described above, a larger diamond

Figure 1.  Repetitive process to efficiently enlarge the wafer size: a) four single-crystal diamond plates were prepared from one identical seed crystal,
with an area of ≈1 cm2 taken from these substrates. b) These four clone substrates were connected to one tiled clone with 1 in. size; by applying the
lift-off process with ion implantation, several clones of this tiled clone were fabricated. c) These clones were again connected to one tiled clone, and
the process above was repeated to obtain freestanding wafers with edge lengths of 1.5 in. Reproduced with permission.[56] Copyright 2013, Elsevier.

Adv. Optical Mater. 2018, 1800359 1800359  (4 of 16) © 2018 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com
can be produced. Freestanding wafers with edge lengths of
1.5 in. (an area of ≈20 × 40 mm2) were produced in 2013. Subse-
quently, the same group reported a 2 in. mosaic diamond wafer
(40 × 60 mm2), which consisted of 24 single-crystal diamond
plates that were 10 × 10 mm2 in area.[57] However, they found
that cracking is challenging to avoid and that growth nonuni-
formity was significant when the substrate was larger than
1 in. Heteroepitaxial growth of diamond on a substrate such
as SiC or Ir is an alternative method to produce large-scale dia-
monds.[58] In 2017, Schreck et al.[59] reported a diamond single
crystal with a diameter of ≈90 mm and a weight of 155 carats
through heteroepitaxy on an Ir/YSZ (yttria stabilized zirconia)/
Si (001) substrate; this is the largest synthetic diamond reported
to date. As the fabrication process is improved further, larger
synthetic diamonds with higher quality are anticipated.
5. Diamond Doping
The carrier concentration of intrinsic diamond is very low at
room temperature due to the WBG, and thus, intrinsic diamond
is an insulator with a resistivity exceeding 1016 Ω cm. Semicon-
ductivity can be realized through a doping process. However, all
dopants in diamond have high ionization energies, resulting in
low activation at room temperature. The problem of achieving
p- and n-type diamonds has been an important part of the
development of diamond-based semiconductor devices. To date,
p- and n-type diamond has been obtained using boron (B) and
phosphorus (P), respectively, as dopants; however, the quality of
the doped diamonds is far below expectation.
Boron can be effectively introduced into diamond lat-
tices during the CVD process. p-type doping with boron as
the acceptor dopant was first realized by Fujimori et al.,[60]
prompting further research into boron-doped diamond
films. Generally, high-purity diborane or trimethylboron is
used as a doping gas for the boron dopant source during the
CVD diamond process. The activation energy of the boron
acceptor is approximately 0.36 eV, with a solubility exceeding
1021 cm−3. To date, p-type diamond with a hole mobility of
1600–2000 cm2 V−1 s−1, and even up to 3800 cm2 V−1 s−1, has
been obtained from boron-doped homoepitaxial (100) diamond
films at low dopant concentrations.[47,61–63] Due to the large acti-
vation energy of boron, a low percentage of acceptors can be
activated at room temperature, resulting in low hole concentra-
tions of diamond. Although the hole mobility is extremely high,
the conductivity of diamond is still very low. To increase the con-
ductivity, heavy boron-doped diamond has been prepared. The
activation energy reduces with increasing boron doping con-
centration due to the formation of a miniband. When the boron
concentration is above 3 × 1020 cm−3, the activation energy
falls to zero, and the full activation is obtained at room tem-
perature.[64–66] The conductivity can increase above 102 S cm−1.
However, hole mobility decreases rapidly with heavy boron
doping due to crystalline deterioration and impurity scattering.
In addition, superconducting properties have been observed for
heavily boron-doped CVD diamond films.[67–70]
It is well known that n-type doping is extremely challenging
due to the close packing and rigidity of the diamond lattice, which
hinders the incorporation of atoms larger than carbon. Thus far,
Adv. Optical Mater. 2018, 1800359 1800359  (5 of 16)
www.advopticalmat.de
n-type doping has been investigated mainly using phosphorus
as an impurity dopant with an activation energy of 0.57 eV.
Koizumi et al. obtained n-type diamond for the first time using
(111)-plane diamond as a substrate.[71] With the optimization of
growth conditions, the highest Hall mobility of 660 cm2 V−1 s−1
was realized for a film with a phosphorus concentration of
7 × 1016 cm−3. The highest phosphorus concentration can reach
5 × 1019 cm−3, which means that a concentration close to that
enabling miniband formation has been obtained. However, due
to the high activation energy of phosphorus, a low percentage
of donors can be activated at room temperature, which limits
the application of phosphorus-doped films for conventional
semiconductor devices. Although other elements have been
investigated for use as a donor, reproducible results have not
been obtained.[72,73]
6. Diamond-Based Photodetectors
Different types of semiconductor photodetectors exist,
including photoconductors, Schottky barrier photodiodes,
MSM photodiodes, MIS structures, p–n and p–i–n photo-
diodes, and field-effect and bipolar phototransistors.[74] The
schematic structure of these devices is illustrated in Figure 2.
In recent years, various structures of diamond-based photode-
tectors have been fabricated; we now briefly introduce these
research results. Table 2 summarizes diamond-based photo-
detectors with a variety of structures (photoconductors, MSM
photodiodes, Schottky barrier photodiodes, p–i–n photodiodes,
heterojunctions, and phototransistors) and summarizes data
on the responsivity, dark current, rejection ratio between UV
and visible radiation, and response time of diamond-based
photodetectors.
6.1. Photoconductors
Photoconductors, which are the simplest type of photode-
tectors, consist of a semiconductor layer with two Ohmic
Figure 2.  Schematic structures of various semiconductor photodetectors.
© 2018 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com www.advopticalmat.de

Table 2.  Recent diamond based photodetectors with different configurations.

Device structure Diamond Responsivity Rpeak/Rvisible Gain Response time Dark current References
rejection ratio
Photoconductor Natural 2 A W−1 at 210 nm – – 0.25 ms 1-10 pA at 100 V [122]
B doped −1 10 8
33 <10 ns 10−12 [76]
6 A W at 3 V 220 nm A at 20 V
B doped 0.325 A W−1 at 30 V 210 nm – – 1.2 ms 10 pA [123]
Singlecrystal 0.107 A W−1 at 30 V 220 nm – – – ≈150 pAa) [90]
Single crystal 9.94 A W−1 at 5 V 220 nm 10 3
– – 4.72 µA at 5 V [84]
Single crystal 100 A W−1 at 90 V 210 nm 106 – – – [124]
Single crystal 21.8 A W−1 at 50 V 218 nm 8.9 × 103 124 Rise: 310 µs – [77]
Decay: 330 µs
Polycrystalline 0.63 A W−1 at 222 nm 105−106 – – 0.3 nA [125]
Polycrystalline – 10 6
10 6
– <1 nA at 10 V [79]
Polycrystalline – 108 >100 Few seconds – [82]
Polycrystalline ≈0.1 A W−1 – – – 1 pA [126]
MSM photodiode B doped 230 A W−1 106 103 – – [91]
Single crystal – 10 6 – <5 ns – [93]
Single crystal 7.86 mA W−1 at 210 nm about 50a) – – 0.368 pA at 8 V [127]
Type II a natural 0.063 A W−1 103 – – 10−12 A [92]
Polycrystalline 0.02 A W−1 at 220 nm – – – Few pA [128]
Microcrystalline 16.2 A W−1 at 6 V 220 nm – – 6 min ≈0.8 µAa) [95]
Al plasmon/ −1 – – – −12 [94]
0.028 A W at 5 V 225 nm 10 A at 5 V
diamond
Schottky diode B doped 0.99 A W−1 at 220 nm 105 – – 10−12 A at 1 V [129]
B doped −1 2× 106 – <1 s – [99]
10 A W at 220 nm
B doped 18 A W−1 at -23 V 210 nm 108 100 <10 ms 10−14A at −30 V [101]
Polycrystalline 10 A W−1 at 100 V 104–105 500 1-10 ms – [130]
PIN p-type (boron) −1 106 – – 4 × 10−13 A [103]
27 mA W at 200 nm
or n-type
(phosphorus)
Heterojunction TiO2/diamond 0.2 A W−1 at 30 V 220 nm 105 – Rise: 20 µs 0.5 pA at 4 V [107]
Decay: 1000 µs 1.12 pA at 30 V
Graphene/ 1.4 A W−1 (pMCD) 103 – – – [30]
microcrystalline 0.2 A W−1 (MCD) at 5 V
diamond
Ga2O3/diamond 0.2 mA W−1 at 0 V 244 nm 1.4 × 102 – – – [109]

a)Values
of rejection ratio or dark current are calculated by data shown in graphs or are stated in the text of the cited publications.

contacts. A bias voltage is applied between the two contacts,
and a bias current, called the dark current, flows through the
semiconductor layer, following Ohm’s law. Under illumina-
tion, the conductivity of the semiconductor changes with the
intensity of the incident radiation due to the formation of
photogenerated carriers. As a result, a photocurrent supple-
ments the dark current under the effect of the applied elec-
tric field. A main advantage of photoconductors is the large
photoconductive gain, which increases the responsivity of
photoconductors above that of photovoltaic detectors. How-
ever, photoconductors have the drawbacks of a slow response
time and relatively high dark current and are thus widely
used in areas where the response and dark current are not
particularly important. Due to the large barrier heights gen-
erated by most metal electrodes and the lack of high doping
levels for diamond, the major challenge of fabricating dia-
mond-based photodetectors lies in the deposition of low-
resistance Ohmic contacts. There have been multiple reports
on diamond-based photoconductors. An Ohmic contact to
diamond is typically obtained by Au, Ti/Au, Ti/TiN, or Ti/WC
(tungsten carbide).
Diamond-based photodetectors with planar interdigital
electrodes were fabricated using high-quality single-crystal
diamond films by Teraji et al.[75] Three electrode pat-
terns with different spacing were measured, and devices
with 43 µm electrode spacing featured a small NEP of

Adv. Optical Mater. 2018, 1800359 1800359  (6 of 16) © 2018 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com www.advopticalmat.de

less than 1 pW for 220 nm UV light, which is four orders smaller than
that of Si-based UV photodetectors. The UV/visible rejection
ratio was ≈104. Subsequently, Liao and Koide reported a
high-performance MSM planar photoconductor based on
undoped homoepitaxial diamond thin films.[76] The respon-
sivity was ≈6 A W−1 at 220 nm at a 3 V bias with a gain of
33. The UV/visible rejection ratio was as high as 108, with a
dark current as low as 10−12 A. The response time was less than
10 ns. MSM photoconductors exhibit much higher photocur-
rent and responsivity than do MSM photodiodes (see Figure 3).
Recently, Lin et al. fabricated all-carbon diamond-based
photo­­detectors with interdigitated graphite as electrodes.[77]
A schematic illustration of the device is shown in Figure 4a.
The graphite electrodes were prepared via graphitizing the
diamond using a laser direct-writing process. Figure 4b,c
illustrates Raman mapping based on a graphite G-band
peak and diamond peak, respectively, which confirms the
production of diamond-based all-carbon photodetectors.
The I–V characteristics of the photodetector show a linear
relationship, indicating the formation of Ohmic contacts
between diamond and graphite electrodes. The response

Figure 4.  a) Schematic illustration of an all-carbon photodetector. Raman

mapping based on b) the graphite G-band peak and c) diamond peak
intensity. Reproduced with permission.[77] Copyright 2018, Wiley-VCH.

peak is located at ≈218 nm, with a sharp cutoff wavelength

Figure 3.  Performance comparison of a photoconductor and an MSM
photodiode. a) Photocurrent under 220 nm and b) spectral responsivity.
Reproduced with permission.[76] Copyright 2006, American Institute of
Physics.
at 225 nm. At a 50 V bias, the peak responsivity and detec-
tivity is 21.8 A W−1 and 1.39 × 1012 cm Hz1/2 W−1, respectively.
The UV/visible rejection ratio is ≈104. The high perfor-
mance of the device can be attributed to the high crystalline
quality of the diamond wafer and the good Ohmic contact
between the diamond and graphite electrodes. Both the
planar and transverse configuration of photoconductors
based on diamond were fabricated by Sio et al.[78] They found
that the sensitivity of the photoconductors with transverse
configuration was at least 300-fold higher than that with a
coplanar configuration. Polycrystalline diamond films depos-
ited on silicon were used to fabricate photoconductors,[79]
and planar interdigitated contact configurations were real-
ized.[80,81] The responsivity of the photodetectors based on

Adv. Optical Mater. 2018, 1800359 1800359  (7 of 16) © 2018 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com www.advopticalmat.de

polycrystalline diamond is typically lower than that of single-

crystal ones due to the low quality of the polycrystalline dia-
mond, which contains multiple grain boundaries. Backside
contacts were introduced to optimize the spectral collection
efficiency, and the performance of these devices improved
significantly.[82,83]
Another method to enhance the charge collection efficiency
is to construct 3D devices with interdigitated electrodes. Rela-
tive to the photodetector with a planar structure, a 3D elec-
trode structure has better charge collection efficiency.[84,85]
The 3D graphite electrodes in the diamond bulk were first
fabricated by ion or laser direct writing for both nuclear par-
ticles and photon detection.[86–89] In 2015, Forneris et al. fab-
ricated a photodetector based on CVD single-crystal diamond
with 3D interdigitated electrodes using the reactive ion etching
technique.[85] The experimental results showed a significant
increase in the charge collection efficiency. In 2016, Liu et al.
Figure 6.  a) White light interferometer image. Part of the pattern with a
reported the fabrication of a 3D diamond photodetector through groove at higher magnification; b) pseudocolor presentation and c) gray
a top-down approach in which the diamond epitaxial layer was presentation. Reproduced with permission.[90] Copyright 2017, Elsevier.
grown between metal electrodes. A schematic of the device is
shown in Figure 5a.[84] At a 5 V bias, the responsivity of the UV/visible rejection ratio of 103 (Figure 5b). A groove-shaped
photodetector can reach 9.94 A W−1 under 220 nm, with a 3D diamond photodetector with Ti/Au electrodes was fabricated
by Liu et al.[90] A white light interferometer image of the groove
shape is shown in Figure 6a–c. The side walls of the groove are
not strictly vertical, with a width of the top and bottom of ≈10 and
4  µm, respectively. Relative to the planar structure device, the
responsivity of the 3D electrode structure increased by 50% in
the DUV spectral range.

6.2. MSM Photodiodes

An MSM photodiode can be prepared by forming two back-to-

back Schottky barrier diodes. The Schottky electrodes are typi-
cally in the shape of interdigital fingers, leaving an uncovered
semiconductor surface between the fingers of the two contacts,
which act as the active region to absorb irradiation. When a
bias voltage is applied, one of the Schottky junctions is reverse

Figure 5.  a) Schema of a 3D diamond photodetector. b) Spectral response Figure 7. Quantum efficiencies of MSM detectors based on different
of the device. Reproduced with permission.[84] Copyright 2016, American types of diamond with a bias of 100 V. Reproduced with permission.[92]
Institute of Physics. Copyright 1993, Elsevier.

Adv. Optical Mater. 2018, 1800359 1800359  (8 of 16) © 2018 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com
Figure 8.  Spectral response of a Schottky photodiode at zero bias, with
a rejection ratio of 105. Reproduced with permission.[31] Copyright 2006,
American Institute of Physics.
biased, and the other junction is forward biased. Without light
irradiation, the reverse-biased junction can prevent the current
from flowing through the device, which can reduce the dark
Figure 9.  a) Schematic of an interdigital Schottky photodiode based on
a p-diamond epilayer. b) Spectral response of interdigital finger photo-
diode at forward bias (−10 V) and reverse bias (20 V). Reproduced with
permission.[101] Copyright 2007, American Institute of Physics.
Adv. Optical Mater. 2018, 1800359 1800359  (9 of 16)
www.advopticalmat.de
Figure 10. a) Photograph of a diamond p–i–n photodiode. b) Time
response of p–i–n and MSM devices (200 nm). Reproduced with
permission.[104] Copyright 2006, Elsevier.
current effectively. With light irradiation, the photogenerated
carriers are swept to the two electrodes by the applied electric
field, resulting in an electronic output signal. The advantages
of MSM photodiodes include a low dark current, high speed,
and high signal-to-noise ratio.[91] In addition, this sort of device
has the advantage of simple preparation and requires only an
undoped or a single dopant active layer, which is particularly
suitable for WBG semiconductor materials that are challenging
to dope. The main limitation of MSM photodiodes is their rel-
atively lower external quantum efficiency caused by electrode
shadowing.
In 1993, Binari et al. fabricated MSM diamond photo-
detectors using natural IIa, synthetic type Ib, and CVD
polycrystalline diamond as active layers.[92] The natural
diamond detectors show greater quantum efficiency (see in
Figure 7) and a higher response than do the polycrystalline
and synthetic diamond detectors. Low-quality polycrystal-
line diamond crystals and high impurity concentrations in
Ib diamond lead to poor photodiode performance based on
synthetic diamond. With the development of MPCVD tech-
nology, high-quality CVD diamond was obtained, and the
© 2018 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com www.advopticalmat.de

Figure 11.  a) Schematic illustration of diamond/β-Ga2O3 photodetector. b) Spectral response of a diamond/β-Ga2O3 photodetector at zero bias.
c,d) Optical photograph and schematic diagram of graphene/microcrystalline diamond photodetector. (a,b) Reproduced with permission.[109]
Copyright 2018, Royal Society of Chemistry publishing group. (c,d) Reproduced with permission.[30] Copyright 2017, Wiley-VCH.

performance of the diamond photodetectors was improved
greatly. In 2005, Balducci et al. fabricated an MSM photode-
tector with interdigitated Al contacts.[93] The UV/visible rejec-
tion ratio was ≈106, and the response time was less than 5 ns.
The extreme-UV He spectrum was measured, and the He II
(30.4) nm and He I (58.4 nm) emission lines were detected
with high signal-to-noise ratios, which demonstrated that
diamond-based photodetectors have potential application
in the field of extreme-UV detection. Another MSM photo-
detector was constructed based on the grown boron-doped
homoepitaxial diamond.[91] The hydrogen-terminated films
constituted a high-conductivity p-type conduction layer near
the surface. The photocurrent of the photodetector at 220 nm
was seven orders of magnitude higher than the dark current,
verifying that this photodetector offers high sensitivity. In
2016, Shi et al. designed and constructed a localized surface
plasmon-enhanced MSM interdigital photodetector based on
boron-doped homoepitaxial diamond with crescent-shaped
aluminum nanoarrays on the surface of the diamond films.[94]
The photodetector had a high spectral selectivity for the solar-
blind region, with a rejection ratio over 103 between 225 and
280 nm. With Al nanoarrays, the responsivity of the detector
at 225 nm was 10-fold larger than that of the detector. This
enhancement was attributed to near-field optical coupling
between the Al-localized surface plasmon and diamond exci-
tons through improved optical absorption in the semicon-
ductor layer.
In recent years, the quality of polycrystalline diamond has
also improved. Wang et al. fabricated an MSM photodetector
based on microcrystalline diamond films with Al interdigi-
tated finger electrodes.[95] The responsivity of the device was
16.2 A W−1 at 6 V bias under 220 nm monochromatic light
with an external quantum efficiency of 92. However, the
response time was relatively long, with a rise time of 6 min
and decay time of 23 min. These results revealed that the
minority carrier trapping effect of shallow levels may play an
important role in photodetectors, resulting in a slow response
time, high photoresponsivity, and high gain.
6.3. Schottky Barrier Photodiodes
Schottky diodes, another type of photodetector with a simple
structure, consist of a semiconductor layer with a Schottky
contact and an Ohmic contact. The Schottky junction is
formed due to the difference in the work functions of the
metal electrode and semiconductor. An electrostatic barrier
appears between the metal and the semiconductor, resulting
in the rectifying behavior of the photodiodes. Benefiting from
the rectifying effect of the contacts, Schottky barrier photodi-
odes have low dark current and can be operated in photovoltaic
mode without bias voltage. Furthermore, relative to photocon-
ductors and MSM photodiodes, the advantages of Schottky
photodiodes include their high quantum efficiency, high

Adv. Optical Mater. 2018, 1800359 1800359  (10 of 16) © 2018 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com
Figure 12.  a) Schematic representation of a phototransistor. b) Respon-
sivity of an optically activated field-effect transistor as function of the
illuminating wavelength and drain–source voltage. Reproduced with
permission.[111] Copyright 1999, American Institute of Physics.
signal-to-noise ratio, and high response speed.[96,97] However,
the light reflection of the metal contacts severely affects device
performance, and the semitransparent top contacts must be
fabricated to enhance the responsivity of the photodetectors.
Diamond Schottky photodiodes were fabricated using a thin
Au Schottky contact and a Ti/Ag/Au Ohmic contact on a poly-
crystalline diamond film.[98] The diode showed a low leakage
current of less than 0.1 nA and a UV/visible rejection ratio of
106. Contacts with strong thermal stability are essential to fab-
ricate thermally stable photodetectors. Metal compounds such
as metal carbide and nitride, which do not react with diamond
at high temperature, are well suited for the fabrication of ther-
mally stable diamond-based photodetectors. In 2006, Koide et al.
constructed photodiodes using WC or HfN Schottky and Ti/WC
Ohmic contacts on homoepitaxial p-diamond films.[99] Such pho-
todiodes show favorable thermal stability and can be annealed
up to 500 °C. The responsivity of the WC photodiode increases
to 10 A W−1, and the UV/visible rejection ratio is as large as 106.
In addition, Koide et al. found that B doping affects the persis-
tent photoconductivity behavior significantly. The response time
decreases with decreasing B concentration.[100] In addition, the
photodiodes can operate in photovoltaic mode, and a respon-
sivity of 0.5 mA W−1 at 220 nm can be obtained with a UV/visible
rejection ratio of 105 at zero bias. The spectral response is
Adv. Optical Mater. 2018, 1800359 1800359  (11 of 16)
www.advopticalmat.de
shown in Figure 8.[31] The photodiode exhibits a rapid response
time of less than 0.3 s. The existing planar Schottky photodiodes
of diamond are typically constructed from an Ohmic contact
and a semitransparent dotted Schottky contact. These devices
have the drawback of photon absorption in the Schottky metal
contact, resulting in reduced quantum efficiency. To solve this
problem, Liao et al. designed a Schottky photodiode with inter-
digital finger Ohmic and Schottky contacts. The schematic of
the interdigital finger photodiode is shown in Figure 9a.[101]
This type of device can be operated in both photoconductive
mode with a large photocurrent gain and depletion mode with
a fast response speed. At a forward bias of −23 V, a responsivity
greater than 18 A W−1 is obtained. The response spectra of the
devices under bias are shown in Figure 9b. The UV/visible rejec-
tion ratio is as high as 108 at a forward bias of −10 V. Relative
to conventional Schottky photodiodes, the photosensitivity and
spectral response of such devices are greatly improved.
6.4. p–i–n and p–n Junction Photodetectors
The ideal structure of photodiodes is one with p–n and p–i–n
junctions. The p–n junctions are constructed by combining
an n-type semiconductor contact with a p-type semiconductor.
In equilibrium, a space-charge region is generated around the
junction, which acts as the active layer of the detector. A built-
in electric field in this region forms an energy barrier between
the n-type semiconductor and the p-type semiconductor. With
irradiation, electron–hole pairs produced in the space-charge
region are separated by the internal electric field of the junc-
tion, which contributes to the photocurrent. This phenomenon
suggests that this type of photodetector can operate in photovol-
taic mode with no dark current. Under reverse bias, the height
of the energy barrier of the junction increases and the space-
charge region widens, which significantly improves the effi-
ciency of the separation of electron–hole pairs by increasing the
electric field within the junction. Another way to increase the
width of the space-charge region is to introduce a thin layer of
intrinsic semiconductor material between the n and p regions.
This type of junction is known as a p–i–n junction. Relative
to p–n diodes, the p–i–n diode has an additional high-field
layer between the p and n regions to absorb the incident light.
Photon-generated carriers in the junction region are rapidly
separated, resulting in a fast response speed.[96] The advantages
of p–n and p–i–n junctions include their low dark current, fast
response time, high UV/visible rejection ratio, and sharp spec-
tral cutoff.
The fabrication of diamond devices with p–n and p–i–n
structure requires the development of a reliable and repro-
ducible doping technology. Although n-type doping of dia-
mond remains a challenge, diamond-based p–n and p–i–n
junctions have been obtained. In 2001, a diamond p–n junc-
tion light-emitting diode was constructed successfully by Koi-
zumi et al.[102] using a P-doped n-type layer and a boron-doped
p-type layer. The p–n junction exhibited satisfactory diode
characteristics, and the UV light emission at 235 nanometers
was observed, which was attributed to free-exciton recombina-
tion. In 2006, p–i–n diamond photodetectors were developed
by BenMoussa et al. consisting of P-doped (n-type), undoped
© 2018 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com www.advopticalmat.de

Figure 13.  a) Schematic illustration of an imaging system employing a diamond photodetector as a sensing pixel. Object b) with hollow letters (ZZU)
and c) image of an all-carbon photodetector based on diamond used as point-like sensing pixel in an imaging system. d,e) Gray value along lines
marked in (b) and (c). Reproduced with permission.[77] Copyright 2018, Wiley-VCH.

(intrinsic) and B-doped (p-type) diamond layers, with two
Ohmic contacts: Ti/Al for the p-type layer and an Al layer for
the n-type layer.[103,104] A photograph of the diamond p–i–n pho-
todiode is shown in Figure 10a. The responsivity of the p–i–n
detectors was 27.2 mA W−1 at 200 nm, with a UV/visible rejec-
tion ratio of 106. The detector showed favorable stability over a
long period. The time response curves of the p–i–n photodiode
and an MSM structure photodetector are shown in Figure 10b.
Relative to the MSM structure, the p–i–n photodiode exhibits a
significantly faster response speed.
6.5. Heterojunction Photodetectors
Although diamond p–n and p–i–n junctions have been estab-
lished, the performance of these devices is severely limited by
the poor quality of the n-type diamond. It is well known that
n-type doping is a bottleneck problem for diamond research.
In this context, some researchers have tried to construct het-
erojunction photodetectors by combining diamond with other
materials, such as ZnO, TiO2, NiO, and graphene. In 2007,
Liu et al. fabricated ZnO/diamond photodetectors by depos-
iting ZnO films onto freestanding polycrystalline diamond
films.[105] Due to the carrier trapping effect of polycrystal-
line ZnO films, the response time of the photodetector was
as long as 10 min. The grain size of ZnO affects the perfor-
mance of such photodetectors, and photodetectors with a lower
dark current and higher photocurrent can be obtained using
ZnO with a larger grain size. Nanostructured ZnO typically
has suitable crystallization properties, and ZnO nanorods/
diamond-based photodetectors were recently reported. ZnO
nanorods were fabricated on p-type boron-doped diamond
films using a hydrothermal method by Wan et al. to construct
heterojunction photodetectors.[106] The I–V characteristic of the
heterojunction showed a typical rectifying property with a high
rectification ratio of 370 at 3 V bias. The photocurrent-to-dark
current ratio (Ilight/Idark) was more than 40 at a bias of −3 V
under 365 nm irradiation. The photodetector’s rapid response
speed (with a rise time of 4.9 s and decay time of 6.4 s) was
attributed to the rapid separation of photogenerated electron–
hole pairs arising from the heterojunction effect. Liu et al.
fabricated TiO2/diamond photodetectors by preparing TiO2
films on single-crystal CVD diamond films.[107] The respon-
sivity of the photodetectors was ≈0.2 A W−1 at a bias of 30 V
under 220 nm light illumination, and the UV/visible rejection
ratio was ≈102. Liu et al. found that decreasing the thickness of
TiO2 films can improve the time response behavior of the pho-
todetector.[108] The bandgap of ZnO and TiO2 is 3.37 and 3.2 eV,
respectively, which is much narrower than that of diamond;
thus, the cutoff wavelength of these heterojunction photodetec-
tors redshifts into the UVA region, resulting in the loss of solar-
blind detection performance.
To obtain solar-blind photodetectors, Chen et al. constructed
diamond/β-Ga2O3 heterojunctions.[109] A schematic illustration
of the resulting photodetector is shown in Figure 11a. Due to
the generation of a built-in electric field between diamond and
Ga2O3, the photodetector can operate as a self-powered device. As
shown in Figure 11b, the peak responsivity is ≈0.2 mA W−1 at
zero bias. The cutoff wavelength is 270 nm with a UV/visible
rejection ratio of more than 102, which indicates that the photo­
detector response is mainly due to solar-blind irradiation. The
device has favorable stability and has been used as a sensing
pixel in imaging systems. Flexible graphene/micro­­crystalline
diamond photodetectors were fabricated by Wei et al.[30]
An optical photograph and a schematic diagram of the device
are shown in Figure 11c,d, respectively. The graphene is trans-
parent in the UV range and operates as a transparent elec-
trode. The I–V characteristic curve shows obvious rectification

Adv. Optical Mater. 2018, 1800359 1800359  (12 of 16) © 2018 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com
Figure 14.  a) Photograph of a 36-pixel array detector mounted on a sample holder. b) Top view
and 3D view of the beam profile of a single excimer laser pulse (ArF). Reproduced with permis- tors as promising candidates for solar-blind
sion.[115] Copyright 2012, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers.
behavior due to the establishment of a Schottky-like heterojunc-
tion at the interface between graphene and diamond. Under a
5 V reverse bias, the responsivity of the graphene/ microcrystal-
line diamond and graphene/B-doped microcrystalline diamond
photodetector is 0.2 and 1.4 A W−1, respectively.
6.6. Phototransistor Photodetectors
Phototransistors are light-sensitive transistors with the same
general structure as normal transistors. The phototransistor
typically has a much larger base and larger collector areas than
a normal transistor to enable it to absorb sufficient quantities of
light. Phototransistors offer the advantages of high photocon-
ductive gain resulting from the transistor action. However, one
of the main disadvantages of the phototransistor is its relatively
long response time.[110]
Diamond-based phototransistors fabricated by H-terminated
p-type diamonds have been reported.[111,112] Enhancement-
mode metal-semiconductor FETs were constructed using Al
Schottky gates and Au source and drain contacts. A schematic
illustration of the phototransistor is shown in Figure 12a.
The photoresponse of the gate Schottky diode is amplified
by the transistor effect, as shown in Figure 12b. Under DUV
Adv. Optical Mater. 2018, 1800359 1800359  (13 of 16)
www.advopticalmat.de
wavelength (<220 nm) irradiation, the gain of
the detector is ≈4, but the gain decreases to
unity near 300 nm.
7. Application of Photodetectors
With the development of diamond device
technology, prototype detectors, such as
single-pixel detectors, position-sensitive detec-
tors and sensor arrays detectors, have been
realized. The detectors can be used for solar
UV radiation analysis, excimer laser beam
positioning for photolithography and eye sur-
gery, and imaging.[113–116] Circular PIN photo­
diodes were fabricated by BenMoussa et al.
on HPHT Ib diamond substrates with
5 mm diameter and 0.5 mm thickness.[103]
These detectors were selected for launch
onboard a satellite for solar UV radiation
analysis due to the advantages of radiation
hardness, solar blindness, high sensitivity, fast
response, high uniformity, temperature, and
long-term stability, and low intrinsic dark cur-
rent and noise. An all-carbon photodetector
based on diamond fabricated by Lin et al.
was used as a point-like sensing pixel in an
imaging system (shown in Figure 13a), and
a clear image of solar-blind UV light was
obtained, as shown in Figure 13b–e. This
result establishes diamond-based photodetec-
imaging.[77] Position-sensitive detectors con-
structed using a mono- or bidimensional
array of discrete light-sensing elements have wide applications
for measuring the movement of a beam or the distance traveled
by an object or as feedback-sensing elements for alignment sys-
tems in optics. Diamond-based 1D and 2D photodetectors have
been fabricated for positioning DUV and synchrotron radia-
tion.[117,118] In such a class, four-quadrant sensors are typically
used for in situ and real-time beam monitoring. The light spot
position can be determined by comparing the output signal of
the four detectors. When all four detectors at each quadrant
output have the same value, the light beam intersects the center
of the device.
At present, the market for excimer laser beam profiling sys-
tems is dominated by CCD cameras based on silicon, as silicon
is a mature technology with high spatial resolution. How-
ever, Si-based devices have very low hardness, and attenuators
should be adopted to avoid damage induced by high-power,
high-fluence radiation sources.[119] Relative to silicon, diamond-
based devices offer excellent radiation hardness and solar blind-
ness, making them suitable for direct imaging of high-power
UV radiation without wavelength converters or attenuators.
Due to the commercial availability of large-scale substrates,
polycrystalline diamond is well suited to realize pixel detectors
for UV laser beam imaging. In 2012, Girolami et al.[115] fabri-
cated a complete beam profiling detecting system based on
© 2018 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com
Figure 15.  Fabricated mosaic detector. Reproduced with permission.[116]
Copyright 2015, Wiley-VCH.
a 10 × 10 mm2, 270 µm thick polycrystalline diamond with a
36-pixel array detector (750 × 750 µm2, 150 µm spacing). A pho-
tograph of the device is shown in Figure 14a. Figure 14b shows
a beam profile relative to a single excimer laser pulse. Due to
diamond’s excellent properties (specifically, its response speed
and high throughput of read-out electronics), single pulses can
be collected and processed individually at high repetition rates.
These results show that diamond-based pixel detectors can
compete with commercial silicon-based devices. To improve the
associated performance, Ti/Au multilayer and metal-less gra-
phitic contacts have been employed to successfully replace the
Ag contacts of devices.[116,120] In this way, the sensitivity and sta-
bility can be improved, making the resulting devices suitable to
monitor a wide range of radiation types, including UV excimer
lasers, X-rays, neutrons, and charged particles. Single-crystal
diamonds have better electronic properties than do polycrystal-
line diamonds, and thus, higher-performance devices that use
single-crystal diamond as active layers are anticipated. How-
ever, this approach is limited by the lateral dimensions of
the diamond. Mosaic pixelated detectors based on a 12-pixel
single-crystal diamond matrix were constructed in 2015.[121]
The prototype device is shown in Figure 15. However, this solu-
tion is relatively expensive, and the spatial resolution is very
low, which limits broad implementation in imaging systems.
8. Conclusion
The WBG of diamond, along with favorable semiconductor
properties, make diamond an ideal material for DUV detection.
A variety of structural photodetectors have been prepared from
single-crystal and polycrystalline diamond. The reported devices
typically have a high signal-to-noise ratio, high UV/visible rejec-
tion ratio, acceptable responsivity, high thermal stability, and
high radiation hardness, enabling potential applications for
UV detection. However, n-type doping remains a bottleneck
Adv. Optical Mater. 2018, 1800359 1800359  (14 of 16)
www.advopticalmat.de
problem for diamond that limits its application in the semicon-
ductor field. In addition, commercially available single-crystal
diamond substrates are not much larger than 8–10 mm square,
far below the needs of the semiconductor industry. Thus, chal-
lenging problems remain in the field of diamond material syn-
thesis and device preparation.
Acknowledgements
Y.-J.L. and C.-N.L. contributed equally to this work. This work was
financially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of
China (61604132 and U1604263) and the China National Funds for
Distinguished Young Scientists (61425021).
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Keywords
diamond, photodetectors, solar-blind devices
Received: March 20, 2018
Revised: July 1, 2018
Published online:
[1] H. Chen, H. Liu, Z. Zhang, K. Hu, X. Fang, Adv. Mater. 2016, 28,
403.
[2] W. Y. Kong, G. A. Wu, K. Y. Wang, T. F. Zhang, Y. F. Zou,
D. D. Wang, L. B. Luo, Adv. Mater. 2016, 28, 10725.
[3] J. Lu, X. Sheng, G. Tong, Z. Yu, X. Sun, L. Yu, X. Xu, J. Wang, J. Xu,
Y. Shi, K. Chen, Adv. Mater. 2017, 29, 1700400.
[4] B. Zhao, F. Wang, H. Chen, L. Zheng, L. Su, D. Zhao, X. Fang, Adv.
Funct. Mater. 2017, 27, 1700264.
[5] M. M. Fan, K. W. Liu, X. Chen, Z. Z. Zhang, B. H. Li, D. Z. Shen,
RSC Adv. 2017, 7, 13092.
[6] T. Oshima, T. Okuno, N. Arai, N. Suzuki, S. Ohira, S. Fujita, Appl.
Phys. Express 2008, 1, 011202.
[7] Q. An, X. Meng, K. Xiong, Y. Qiu, Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 4885.
[8] R. Zou, Z. Zhang, Q. Liu, J. Hu, L. Sang, M. Liao, W. Zhang, Small
2014, 10, 1848.
[9] X. G. Liu, D. Y. Geng, Z. D. Zhang, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2008, 92,
243110.
[10] Z. Alaie, S. M. Nejad, M. H. Yousefi, Mater. Sci. Semicond. Process.
2015, 29, 16.
[11] E. Monroy, F. Omnès, F. Calle, Semicond. Sci. Technol. 2003, 18,
R33.
[12] M. Rivera, R. Velázquez, A. Aldalbahi, A. F. Zhou, P. Feng, Sci. Rep.
2017, 7, 42973.
[13] D. Li, X. Sun, H. Song, Z. Li, Y. Chen, H. Jiang, G. Miao, Adv.
Mater. 2012, 24, 845.
[14] Z. Xing, R. X. Wang, Y. M. Fan, J. F. Wang, B. S. Zhang, K. Xu,
Mater. Sci. Semicond. Process. 2017, 57, 132.
[15] H. Morkoç, A. D. Carlo, R. Cingolani, Solid-State Electron. 2002, 46,
157.
[16] F. Xie, H. Lu, D. Chen, X. Ji, F. Yan, R. Zhang, Y. Zheng, L. Li,
J. Zhou, IEEE Sens. J. 2012, 12, 2086.
[17] G. Bao, D. Li, X. Sun, M. Jiang, Z. Li, H. Song, H. Jiang, Y. Chen,
G. Miao, Z. Zhang, Opt. Express 2014, 22, 24286.
© 2018 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com
[18] M. Brendel, M. Helbling, A. Knauer, S. Einfeldt, A. Knigge,
M. Weyers, Phys. Status Solidi A 2015, 212, 1021.
[19] L. Hu, J. Yan, M. Liao, H. Xiang, X. Gong, L. Zhang, X. Fang, Adv.
Mater. 2012, 24, 2305.
[20] H. R. Azimi, M. Ghoranneviss, S. M. Elahi, R. Yousefi, Ceram. Int.
2016, 42, 14094.
[21] X. Wang, K. Liu, X. Chen, B. Li, M. Jiang, Z. Zhang, H. Zhao,
D. Shen, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2017, 9, 5574.
[22] L. Su, Y. Zhu, D. Yong, M. Chen, X. Ji, Y. Su, X. Gui, B. Pan,
R. Xiang, Z. Tang, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2014, 6, 14152.
[23] X. Liu, L. Gu, Q. Zhang, J. Wu, Y. Long, Z. Fan, Nat. Commun.
2014, 5, 4007.
[24] X. L. Du, Z. X. Mei, Z. L. Liu, Y. Guo, T. C. Zhang, Y. N. Hou,
Z. Zhang, Q. K. Xue, A. Y. Kuznetsov, Adv. Mater. 2009, 21, 4625.
[25] Z. Guo, L. Zhou, Y. Tang, L. Li, Z. Zhang, H. Yang, H. Ma,
A. Nathan, D. Zhao, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2017, 9, 31042.
[26] Y. J. Lu, Z. F. Shi, C. X. Shan, D. Z. Shen, Chin. Phys. B 2017, 26,
047703.
[27] M. M. Fan, K. W. Liu, Z. Z. Zhang, B. H. Li, X. Chen, D. X. Zhao,
C. X. Shan, D. Z. Shen, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2014, 105, 011117.
[28] K. Koike, K. Hama, I. Nakashima, G. Takada, K. Ogata, S. Sasa,
M. Inoue, M. Yano, J. Cryst. Growth 2005, 278, 288.
[29] I. Takeuchi, W. Yang, K. S. Chang, M. A. Aronova, T. Venkatesan,
R. D. Vispute, L. A. Bendersky, J. Appl. Phys. 2003, 94, 7336.
[30] M. Wei, K. Yao, Y. Liu, C. Yang, X. Zang, L. Lin, Small 2017, 13,
1701328.
[31] M. Liao, Y. Koide, J. Alvarez, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2006, 88, 033504.
[32] M. Liao, Y. Koide, J. Alvarez, M. Imura, J. P. Kleider, Phys. Rev. B
2008, 78, 045112.
[33] M. Liao, J. Alvarez, Y. Koide, Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 2005, 44, 7832.
[34] X. Chang, Y. Wang, X. Zhang, Z. Liu, J. Fu, S. Fan, R. Bu,
J. Zhang, W. Wang, H. Wang, J. Wang, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2018,
112, 032103.
[35] X. Chen, H. Zhu, J. Cai, Z. Wu, J. Appl. Phys. 2007, 102, 024505.
[36] A. Aldalbahi, E. Li, M. Rivera, R. Velazquez, T. Altalhi, X. Peng,
P. X. Feng, Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 23457.
[37] B. Sun, Y. Sun, C. Wang, Small 2018, 14, 1703391.
[38] B. Zhao, F. Wang, H. Chen, Y. Wang, M. Jiang, X. Fang, D. Zhao,
Nano Lett. 2015, 15, 3988.
[39] D. Guo, H. Liu, P. Li, Z. Wu, S. Wang, C. Cui, C. Li, W. Tang, ACS
Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2017, 9, 1619.
[40] X. Chen, K. Liu, Z. Zhang, C. Wang, B. Li, H. Zhao, D. Zhao,
D. Shen, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2016, 8, 4185.
[41] D. Decoster, J. Harari, Optoelectronic Sensors, ISTE, London
2009.
[42] X. Gong, M. Tong, Y. Xia, W. Cai, J. S. Moon, Y. Cao, G. Yu,
C. L. Shieh, B. Nilsson, A. J. Heeger, Science 2009, 325, 1665.
[43] L. X. Qian, Z. H. Wu, Y. Y. Zhang, P. T. Lai, X. Z. Liu, Y. R. Li, ACS
Photonics 2017, 4, 2203.
[44] X. Zhou, Q. Zhang, L. Gan, X. Li, H. Li, Y. Zhang, D. Golberg,
T. Zhai, Adv. Funct. Mater. 2016, 26, 704.
[45] H. Chen, P. Yu, Z. Zhang, F. Teng, L. Zheng, K. Hu, X. Fang, Small
2016, 12, 5809.
[46] P. Calvani, A. Bellucci, M. Girolami, S. Orlando, V. Valentini,
R. Polini, D. M. Trucchi, Carbon 2016, 105, 401.
[47] J. Isberg, J. Hammersberg, E. Johansson, T. Wikström,
D. J. Twitchen, A. J. Whitehead, S. E. Coe, G. A. Scarsbrook,
Science 2002, 297, 1670.
[48] I. Aharonovich, A. D. Greentree, S. Prawer, Nat. Photonics 2011, 5,
397.
[49] E. Granados, M. Martinez Calderon, M. Gomez, A. Rodriguez,
S. M. Olaizola, Opt. Express 2017, 25, 15330.
[50] D. R. Kania, M. I. Landstrass, M. A. Plano, L. S. Pan, S. Han,
Diamond Relat. Mater. 1993, 2, 1012.
[51] C. J. H. Wort, R. S. Balmer, Mater. Today 2008, 11, 22.
Adv. Optical Mater. 2018, 1800359 1800359  (15 of 16)
www.advopticalmat.de
[52] F. P. Bundy, H. T. Hall, H. M. Strong, R. H. Wentorf, Nature 1955,
176, 51.
[53] R. S. Balmer, J. R. Brandon, S. L. Clewes, H. K. Dhillon,
J. M. Dodson, I. Friel, P. N. Inglis, T. D. Madgwick, M. L. Markham,
T. P. Mollart, N. Perkins, G. A. Scarsbrook, D. J. Twitchen,
A. J. Whitehead, J. J. Wilman, S. M. Woollard, J. Phys.: Condens.
Matter 2009, 21, 364221.
[54] J. C. Angus, C. C. Hayman, Science 1988, 241, 913.
[55] Y. Mokuno, A. Chayahara, H. Yamada, N. Tsubouchi, Diamond
Relat. Mater. 2009, 18, 1258.
[56] H. Yamada, A. Chayahara, Y. Mokuno, N. Tsubouchi, S. Shikata,
Diamond Relat. Mater. 2013, 33, 27.
[57] H. Yamada, A. Chayahara, Y. Mokuno, Y. Kato, S. Shikata, Appl.
Phys. Lett. 2014, 104, 102110.
[58] H. Yamada, A. Chayahara, Y. Mokuno, H. Umezawa, S. Shikata,
N. Fujimori, Appl. Phys. Express 2010, 3, 051301.
[59] M. Schreck, S. Gsell, R. Brescia, M. Fischer, Sci. Rep. 2017, 7,
44462.
[60] N. Fujimori, H. Nakahata, T. Imai, Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 1990, 29,
824.
[61] V. Mortet, M. Daenen, T. Teraji, A. Lazea, V. Vorlicek, J. D’Haen,
K. Haenen, M. D’Olieslaeger, Diamond Relat. Mater. 2008, 17,
1330.
[62] T. Teraji, H. Wada, M. Yamamoto, K. Arima, T. Ito, Diamond Relat.
Mater. 2006, 15, 602.
[63] P. N. Volpe, J. Pernot, P. Muret, F. Omnès, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2009,
94, 092102.
[64] J. P. Lagrange, A. Deneuville, E. Gheeraert, Diamond Relat. Mater.
1998, 7, 1390.
[65] R. S. Sussmann, CVD Diamond for Electronic Devices and Sensors,
John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, UK 2009.
[66] S. Koizumi, C. Nebel, M. Nesladek, Physics and Applications of CVD
Diamond, Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, Germany 2008.
[67] V. A. Sidorov, E. A. Ekimov, E. D. Bauer, N. N. Mel’nik, N. J. Curro,
V. Fritsch, J. D. Thompson, S. M. Stishov, A. E. Alexenko,
B. V. Spitsyn, Diamond Relat. Mater. 2005, 14, 335.
[68] Y. Takano, M. Nagao, T. Takenouchi, H. Umezawa, I. Sakaguchi,
M. Tachiki, H. Kawarada, Diamond Relat. Mater. 2005, 14, 1936.
[69] Y. Takano, T. Takenouchi, S. Ishii, S. Ueda, T. Okutsu, I. Sakaguchi,
H. Umezawa, H. Kawarada, M. Tachiki, Diamond Relat. Mater.
2007, 16, 911.
[70] Y. Takano, M. Nagao, I. Sakaguchi, M. Tachiki, T. Hatano,
K. Kobayashi, H. Umezawa, H. Kawarada, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2004,
85, 2851.
[71] S. Koizumi, M. Kamo, Y. Sato, H. Ozaki, T. Inuzuka, Appl. Phys.
Lett. 1997, 71, 1065.
[72] S. C. Eaton, A. B. Anderson, J. C. Angus, Y. E. Evstefeeva,
Y. V. Pleskov, Diamond Relat. Mater. 2003, 12, 1627.
[73] E. Gheeraert, N. Casanova, A. Tajani, A. Deneuville, E. Bustarret,
J. A. Garrido, C. E. Nebel, M. Stutzmann, Diamond Relat. Mater.
2002, 11, 289.
[74] M. Razeghi, A. Rogalski, Appl. Phys. Rev. 1996, 79, 7433.
[75] T. Teraji, S. Yoshizaki, H. Wada, M. Hamada, T. Ito, Diamond Relat.
Mater. 2004, 13, 858.
[76] M. Y. Liao, Y. Koide, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2006, 89, 113509.
[77] C. N. Lin, Y. J. Lu, X. Yang, Y. Z. Tian, C. J. Gao, J. L. Sun, L. Dong,
F. Zhong, W. D. Hu, C. X. Shan, Adv. Opt. Mater. 2018, https://
doi.org/10.1002/adom.201800068.
[78] A. De Sio, J. Achard, A. Tallaire, R. S. Sussmann, A. T. Collins,
F. Silva, E. Pace, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2005, 86, 213504.
[79] R. D. Mckeag, R. B. Jackman, Diamond Relat. Mater. 1998, 7, 513.
[80] W. Jiang, J. Ahn, C. Y. Chuen, L. Y. Loy, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 1999, 70,
1333.
[81] C. R. Lin, D. H. Wei, M. K. BenDao, W. E. Chen, T. Y. Liu, Int.
J. Photoenergy 2014, 2014, 492152.
© 2018 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com
[82] E. Pace, R. D. Benedetto, S. Scuderi, Diamond Relat. Mater. 2000,
9, 987.
[83] F. Spaziani, M. C. Rossi, S. Salvatori, G. Conte, P. Ascarelli, Appl.
Phys. Lett. 2003, 82, 3785.
[84] Z. C. Liu, J. P. Ao, F. N. Li, W. Wang, J. J. Wang, J. W. Zhang,
H. X. Wang, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2016, 109, 153507.
[85] J. Forneris, P. Traina, D. G. Monticone, G. Amato, L. Boarino,
G. Brida, I. P. Degiovanni, E. Enrico, E. Moreva, V. Grilj, N. Skukan,
M. Jakšić, M. Genovese, P. Olivero, Sci. Rep. 2015, 5, 15901.
[86] E. Alemanno, M. Martino, A. P. Caricato, M. Corrado, C. Pinto,
S. Spagnolo, G. Chiodini, R. Perrino, G. Fiore, Diamond Relat.
Mater. 2013, 38, 32.
[87] B. Caylar, M. Pomorski, P. Bergonzo, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2013, 103,
043504.
[88] E. Alemanno, A. P. Caricato, G. Chiodini, M. Martino, P. M. Ossi,
S. Spagnolo, R. Perrino, Appl. Phys. B 2013, 113, 373.
[89] J. Forneris, A. Battiato, D. Gatto Monticone, F. Picollo, G. Amato,
L. Boarino, G. Brida, I. P. Degiovanni, E. Enrico, M. Genovese,
E. Moreva, P. Traina, C. Verona, G. Verona Rinati, P. Olivero, Nucl.
Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. B 2015, 348, 187.
[90] K. Liu, B. Dai, V. Ralchenko, Y. Xia, B. Quan, J. Zhao, G. Shu,
M. Sun, G. Gao, L. Yang, P. Lei, J. Han, J. Zhu, Sens. Actuators
A 2017, 259, 121.
[91] J. Alvarez, M. Liao, Y. Koide, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2005, 87, 113507.
[92] S. C. Binari, M. Marchywka, D. A. Koolbeck, H. B. Dietrich,
D. Moses, Diamond Relat. Mater. 1993, 2, 1020.
[93] A. Balducci, M. Marinelli, E. Milani, M. E. Morgada, A. Tucciarone,
G. Verona-Rinati, M. Angelone, M. Pillon, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2005,
86, 193509.
[94] X. Q. Shi, Z. M. Yang, S. C. Yin, H. B. Zeng, Adv. Perform. Mater.
2016, 31, 544.
[95] L. Wang, X. Chen, G. Wu, W. Guo, Y. Wang, S. Cao, K. Shang,
W. Han, Phys. Status Solidi A 2010, 207, 468.
[96] U. Schühle, J. F. Hochedez, in Observing Photons in Space: A
Guide to Experimental Space Astronomy, Springer, New York 2013,
pp. 467–477.
[97] Y. Koide, M. Y. Liao, J. Alvarez, Mater. Trans. 2005, 46, 1965.
[98] M. D. Whitfield, R. D. Mckeag, L. Y. S. Pang, S. S. M. Chan,
R. B. Jackman, Diamond Relat. Mater. 1996, 5, 829.
[99] Y. Koide, M. Y. Liao, J. Alvarez, Diamond Relat. Mater. 2006, 15,
1962.
[100] Y. Koide, M. Y. Liao, Diamond Relat. Mater. 2007, 16, 949.
[101] M. Y. Liao, Y. Koide, J. Alvarez, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2007, 90, 123507.
[102] S. Koizumi, K. Watanabe, M. Hasegawa, H. Kanda, Science 2001,
292, 1899.
[103] A. BenMoussa, U. Schühle, F. Scholze, U. Kroth, K. Haenen,
T. Saito, J. Campos, S. Koizumi, C. Laubis, M. Richter, V. Mortet,
A. Theissen, J. F. Hochedez, Meas. Sci. Technol. 2006, 17, 913.
[104] A. BenMoussa, J. F. Hochedez, U. Schuehle, W. Schmutz,
K. Haenen, Y. Stockman, A. Soltani, F. Scholze, U. Kroth,
V. Mortet, A. Theissen, C. Laubis, M. Richter, S. Koller, J. M. Defise,
S. Koizumi, Diamond Relat. Mater. 2006, 15, 802.
Adv. Optical Mater. 2018, 1800359 1800359  (16 of 16)
www.advopticalmat.de
[105] J. Liu, Y. Xia, L. Wang, Q. Su, W. Shi, Appl. Surf. Sci. 2007, 253,
5218.
[106] Y. Wan, S. Gao, L. Li, J. Zhang, H. Fan, S. Jiao, J. Wang, Q. Yu,
D. Wang, J. Mater. Sci.: Mater. Electron. 2017, 28, 11172.
[107] Z. Liu, F. Li, S. Li, C. Hu, W. Wang, F. Wang, F. Lin, H. Wang, Sci.
Rep. 2015, 5, 14420.
[108] Z. Liu, J. P. Ao, F. Li, W. Wang, J. Wang, J. Zhang, H. X. Wang,
Mater. Lett. 2017, 188, 52.
[109] Y. C. Chen, Y. J. Lu, C. N. Lin, Y. Z. Tian, C. Gao, L. Dong,
C. X. Shan, J. Mater. Chem. C 2018, 6, 5727.
[110] W. Y. Weng, S. J. Chang, C. L. Hsu, T. J. Hsueh, ACS Appl. Mater.
Interfaces 2011, 3, 162.
[111] S. P. Lansley, H. J. Looi, Y. Wang, M. D. Whitfield, R. B. Jackman,
Appl. Phys. Lett. 1999, 74, 615.
[112] K. Tang, L. Wang, J. Huang, B. Ren, Q. Zeng, K. Qin, L. Shi, Y. Xia,
Surf. Coat. Technol. 2013, 228, S401.
[113] G. Mazzeo, S. Salvatori, M. C. Rossi, G. Conte, M. C. Castex, Sens.
Actuators A 2004, 113, 277.
[114] J. Schein, K. M. Campbell, R. R. Prasad, R. Binder, M. Krishnan,
Rev. Sci. Instrum. 2002, 73, 18.
[115] M. Girolami, P. Allegrini, G. Conte, D. M. Trucchi, V. G. Ralchenko,
S. Salvatori, IEEE Electron Device Lett. 2012, 33, 224.
[116] M. Girolami, A. Bellucci, P. Calvani, C. Cazzaniga, M. Rebai,
D. Rigamonti, M. Tardocchi, M. Pillon, D. M. Trucchi, Phys. Status
Solidi A 2015, 212, 2424.
[117] S. Salvatori, A. Della Scala, M. C. Rossi, Electron. Lett. 2001, 37,
519.
[118] P. Bergonzo, A. Brambilla, D. Tromson, R. D. Marshall, C. Jany,
F. Foulon, C. Gauthier, V. A. Solé, A. Rogalev, J. Goulon, Diamond
Relat. Mater. 1999, 8, 920.
[119] S. Salvatori, M. Girolami, P. Oliva, G. Conte, A. Bolshakov,
V. Ralchenko, V. Konov, Laser Phys. 2016, 26, 084005.
[120] M. Girolami, G. Conte, S. Salvatori, P. Allegrini, A. Bellucci,
D. M. Trucchi, V. G. Ralchenko, J. Instrum. 2012, 7, C11005.
[121] M. Rebai, C. Cazzaniga, G. Croci, M. Tardocchi, E. P. Cippo,
P. Calvani, M. Girolami, D. M. Trucchi, G. Grosso, G. Gorini,
J. Instrum. 2015, 10, C03016.
[122] E. V. Gorokhov, A. N. Magunov, V. S. Feshchenko, A. A. Altukhov,
Instrum. Exp. Tech. 2008, 51, 280.
[123] Y. Iwakaji, M. Kanasugi, O. Maida, T. Ito, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2009, 94,
223511.
[124] M. Bevilacqua, R. B. Jackman, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2009, 95, 243501.
[125] J. J. Yu, I. W. Boyd, Diamond Relat. Mater. 2007, 16, 494.
[126] V. I. Polyakov, A. I. Rukovishnikov, N. M. Rossukanyi, V. G. Ralchenko,
F. Spaziani, G. Conte, Diamond Relat. Mater. 2005, 14, 594.
[127] Z. C. Liu, F. N. Li, W. Wang, J. W. Zhang, F. Lin, H. X. Wang, MRS
Adv. 2016, 1, 1099.
[128] S. Salvatori, A. D. Scala, M. C. Rossi, G. Conte, Diamond Relat.
Mater. 2002, 11, 458.
[129] M. Y. Liao, Y. Koide, J. Alvarez, Appl. Phys. Lett. 2005, 87, 022105.
[130] S. Salvatori, E. Pace, M. C. Rossi, F. Galluzzi, Diamond Relat.
Mater. 1997, 6, 361.
© 2018 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim