Applied Physics Letters ARTICLE scitation.

org/journal/apl

Optical and electrical characterizations

of micro-LEDs grown on lower defect density
epitaxial layers
Cite as: Appl. Phys. Lett. 119, 142103 (2021); doi: 10.1063/5.0062032
Submitted: 1 July 2021 . Accepted: 20 September 2021 .
Published Online: 5 October 2021

Srinivas Gandrothula,1,a) Takeshi Kamikawa,1 Pavel Shapturenka,2 Ryan Anderson,1 Matthew Wong,1
3
Haojun Zhang, James S. Speck,1 Shuji Nakamura,1,3 and Steven P. Denbaars1,3

AFFILIATIONS
1
Materials Department, University of California, Santa Barbara, California 93106, USA
2
Department of Chemical Engineering, University of California, Santa Barbara, California 93016, USA
3
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of California, Santa Barbara, California 93106, USA

a)
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed: sgandrothula@ucsb.edu

ABSTRACT
We have fabricated lLEDs of mesa sizes 10  10 and 15  15 lm2 on native (2021) semipolar substrates and on epitaxial lateral overgrown
(ELO) wings of the (2021) substrate. The ELO lLEDs exhibited very low leakage current (less than 1010 A) under forward bias (V < 2 V)
and at reverse bias voltages, which was a reduction in several orders of magnitude when compared with planar lLEDs under the same
fabrication and sidewall passivation scheme. Electrical characterization revealed that the mesa sidewall is less damaged in plasma dry etching
in the ELO lLEDs due to a lower material defect density than the planar lLEDs. Moreover, the ELO lLEDs showed improved optical
performance over the planar lLEDs.
Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0062032

InGaN based lLEDs have been extensively studied for next gen-
eration displays. lLEDs have attractive applications including micro-
displays, projection, and small and low-energy wearables such as AR/
VR (Augmented reality/Virtual reality) headsets, smart watches, and
large format displays for TV. The recent interest in inorganic lLEDs
is attributed to high contrast, fast response, relatively wide color
gamut, low power consumption, and a long lifetime compared to
their counterpart technologies, liquid crystal displays (LCDs), and
organic-LEDs (OLEDs).1–8 Market reports suggest lateral dimensions
of the lLED mesa must be down to 10 lm or less to meet the cost
targets necessary for commercialization.9 Additionally, lLEDs offer-
ing a GHz modulation bandwidth are an attractive platform for
visible-light-communication (VLC) due to their ability to provide
efficient lighting and data-transmission.10,11 In the applications that
require both functionalities, lLEDs must be operated at a higher
operational current density for the increased brightness.
InGaN LEDs commonly suffer a monotonic reduction in the
external quantum efficiency (EQE) with lateral mesa dimensions
below 20 lm due to etch damage resulting from the plasma.12–14 As
the device mesa decreases, the surface area-to-volume ratio of LEDs
increases, leading to a rise in non-radiative Shockley-Read-Hall (SRH)
recombination at the edge of the device active region and a decrease in
EQE. Plasma etching used to define lLED mesas leads to the forma-
tion of various crystallographic defects at the mesa sidewalls, which
can introduce trap states within the bandgap forming a detrimental
leakage current.15,16 Researchers have employed a variety of techniques
to reduce this sidewall damage.17–19 A particularly effective method is
to passivate the sidewall by depositing the dielectric on the mesa side-
wall with atomic-layer deposition (ALD) in combination with potas-
sium hydroxide (KOH) chemical treatment.19
Additionally, reported lLEDs fabricated on polar c-plane sub-
strates suffer from the quantum confined Stark effect (QCSE) due to
the large polarization related electric fields. They demand larger opera-
tional currents to mitigate the QCSE.20,21 Furthermore, at increased
current density, polar c-plane InGaN lLEDs behave with the well-
studied phenomenon of “efficiency-droop.” Non-basal crystallo-
graphic orientations, such as nonpolar and semipolar, were proven to
offer a better path to larger modulation bandwidths than c-plane
LEDs, with minimum droop, even at increased operational current
density. This is due to reduced polarization discontinuities.22,23
However, extremely expensive free-standing semi- or non-polar GaN
substrates and a very limited supply chain are still a hurdle for

Appl. Phys. Lett. 119, 142103 (2021); doi: 10.1063/5.0062032 119, 142103-1
Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing
 Applied Physics Letters
commercialization. We previously reported a cleavable approach to
liftoff semipolar and non-polar crystal orientation epitaxial layers and
devices from their native substrates combining epitaxial lateral over-
grown (ELO) and cryogenic treatment.24–26 In addition to providing
semi- and non-polar devices at low cost, this robust technology can be
leveraged to transfer special crystallographic orientation lLEDs onto
display panels like the present day “pick and place” method.27
In this work, we use epitaxial lateral overgrowth to prepare a
defect-filtered surface for lLED deposition and processing. The semi-
polar (2021) orientation was chosen due to its reduced QCSE and its
ability to achieve wide ELO wings.25 Light–current–voltage (L–I–V)
characteristics of lLEDs with square mesa dimensions 10  10 lm2
and 15  15 lm2 were systematically investigated by placing them on
a native planar semipolar (2021) GaN substrate, called the planar
lLED, and on an ELO wing of the native (2021) semipolar substrate,
termed the ELO lLED. ELO lLEDs made via a simple fabrication pro-
cess were shown to exhibit improved L–I–V characteristics throughout
the measured current density compared to the planar lLEDs, as a
result of the reduced defect density.
A schematic of the reported devices is shown in Fig. 1. A pat-
terned semipolar (2021) substrate prepared for ELO growth is shown
in Fig. 1(a). A 200 nm thick SiO2 ELO mask was patterned on the
semiconducting substrate by opening window stripes parallel to
[1014] (projected c-axis into the substrate surface), each having
dimensions 5 lm in width and 3 mm in length periodically arrayed
55 lm breadthwise. The patterned substrate was then placed in a
FIG. 1. (a) ELO mask design on a native (2021) semi-polar GaN substrate, where ELO open windows are 5 lm wide, and masked regions are 50 lm wide, (b) top-down illus-
tration of grown ELO bars from the open window and the ELOlLEDs on wings, (c) optical microscope image of the ELO lLEDs (mesas: 10  10 and 15  15 lm2), (d) top-
down illustration planar lLEDs on the plain (2021) substrate, and (e) optical microscope image of the planar lLEDs (mesas: 10  10 and 15  15 lm2).
Appl. Phys. Lett. 119, 142103 (2021); doi: 10.1063/5.0062032
Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing
ARTICLE scitation.org/journal/apl
metal-organic chemical vapor deposition (MOCVD) reactor to grow
unintentionally doped n-GaN ELO layers with ammonia (NH3) and
trimethylgallium (TMG) as sources and H2 as the carrier gas. At
100 Torr reactor pressure and 1210  C temperature, and with flow
rates 10 slm, 12 sccm, and 10 slm, respectively, for NH3, TMG and
H2, GaN layers were grown epitaxially from the selectively opened
windows and then grew laterally over the SiO2 ELO mask. Growth
was stopped before the ELO layers from neighboring windows coa-
lesced. A typical epitaxial layer thickness of 25 and 17 lm wide
wings were achieved in a 400-min run. Then, after dissolving the ELO
mask in hydrofluoric acid (HF), the n-GaN ELO sample and a planar
(2021) GaN substrate were placed in the MOCVD reactor to grow a
LED epitaxial structure. The simple p–i–n configuration consists of a
1 lm Si-doped n-GaN contact layer, three periods of InGaN (4 nm)/
GaN (10 nm) multiple quantum wells (MQW) and barriers, a 20 nm
Mg-doped p-AlGaN electron blocking layer (EBL), and a 100 nm Mg-
doped p-GaN layer and a heavily doped p-GaN contact layer. Under
the same epitaxial structure exposure, indium incorporation in a pla-
nar substrate was found to be more resulting slightly longer emission,
430 nm compared to the ELO substrate, 405 nm. Contrary to the
planar GaN substrate, the ELO sample possesses a geometry compris-
ing periodically arrayed 25 lm thick, 40 lm wide n-GaN ELO
layers when introduced in the MOCVD reactor for device epitaxy.
This inequality may cause a difference in indium incorporation in the
quantum wells, resulting in a shift in the emission wavelengths. Two
separate optimized epitaxial runs must be performed to achieve the
119, 142103-2
 Applied Physics Letters
same peak emission wavelength, which will be implemented in our
future studies.
After MOCVD growth, 110 nm of indium tin oxide (ITO) was
deposited using electron beam evaporation as a current spreading layer
to form a transparent p-contact. Square mesa tiles (10  10 and
15  15 lm2) were defined by reactive ion etching (RIE) to etch the
ITO with methane/hydrogen/argon and further down through the n-
GaN layer using SiCl4 gas plasmas. A brief 30 s HF dip was performed
to clean etching residues from the RIE and was followed by a 300 nm
thick silicon dioxide (SiO2) isolation layer deposition using sputter.
SiO2 apertures were then defined for n-contact pads by HF-based wet
etching, and p-contact pads were placed on the isolation layer. The Ti/
Au (10/500 nm) p-contact pad and Ti/Al/Ni/Au (10/300/100/500 nm)
n-contact pad metal layers were deposited followed by thermal anneal-
ing for 3 min at 500  C in air. Figures 1(b) and 1(c) show the schematic
and optical microscope image of the ELO lLEDs, similarly Figs. 1(d)
and 1(e) are the schematic and optical microscope image of planar
lLEDs. In the present work, device dimensions up to 10  10 lm2 are
studied; however, in the future, dimensions down to 1  1 lm2 will be
investigated to focus on AR/VR applications.
The ELO technique filters defects: above the open window, the
underlying bulk GaN microstructure is reproduced, whereas the later-
ally grown material over the ELO mask is defect-free. The masked
areas stop the propagation of threading dislocations (TDs), which
arises from the bulk GaN substrate because lateral growth proceeds
from defect-free vertical facets. Panchromatic CL (cathodolumines-
cence) measurements revealed TDs on the device mesas; Figs. 2(a)
and 2(b) show the TDs on the ELO lLED mesas 10  10 and
15  15 lm2, respectively, similarly Figs. 2(c) and 2(d), respectively,
show the TDs on the planar lLED mesas 10  10 and 15  15 lm2.
As can be seen, 10  10 lm2 planar lLED mesa has 8 visible disloca-
tions, which translate to a defect density 8  106 cm2, whereas visi-
bly no TD was seen on the ELO lLED mesa; similarly, 15  15 lm2
planar lLED mesa has 16 TDs (defect density 7  106 cm2) and
again no trace of dislocations seen on the ELO lLED mesa.
FIG. 2. Panchromatic CL images (20 kV, 1.6 nA); ELO lLED mesas (a) 10  10 lm2 and (b) 15  15 lm2; planar lLED mesas (c) 10  10 lm2 and (d) 15  15 lm2; SEM
images of ELO lLED mesas (e) 10  10 lm2 and (f) 15  15 lm2; planar lLED mesas (g) 10  10 lm2 and (h) 15  15 lm2.
Appl. Phys. Lett. 119, 142103 (2021); doi: 10.1063/5.0062032
Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing
ARTICLE scitation.org/journal/apl
Occasionally, TDs on the ELO wing are encountered [Fig. 2(a)]; how-
ever, the majority of the defect population resides on the open win-
dow, heavily outnumbering that of the wings. The corresponding
scanning electron micrograph (SEM) images of the mesas are shown
right below the CL images in Figs. 2(e)–2(h).
The current vs voltage (I–V) characteristics were tested under
continuous-wave operation. Injection current density (J) vs voltage
characteristics of planar and ELO lLEDs are shown in Figs. 3(a) and
3(b). The ELO lLEDs’ forward voltage is 2.8 V at 1 A/cm2, but no
sharp turn-on-voltage is seen in the planar lLEDs due to large leakage
current. It is seen that planar lLEDs show a tremendous leakage cur-
rent at reverse biases; however, at the same reverse bias voltage, the
leakage current density in the ELO lLEDs is markedly reduced to
104 A/cm2 even though the LEDs were fabricated with identical proc-
essing methods. Also, at forward voltages below 2 V, the ELO lLEDs’
current density is at least three orders of magnitude suppressed com-
pared to the planar lLEDs. The measured leakage current between the
bias voltages, 4 V < V < 2 V, in ELO lLEDs is in line with a
reported state-of-art 10  10 lm2 blue lLED by Wong et al., in Ref.
19, which was processed on a commercial c-plane InGaN blue LED
epitaxial wafer grown on a patterned sapphire substrate. The state-of-
the-art device structure and the fabrication method are reported else-
where,19 which uses KOH chemical treatment in combination with
the ALD passivation layer to recover sidewall damage. For compari-
son, current voltage characteristics of a state-of-art 10  10 lm2 blue
lLED, termed ref, from the same processing batch as Ref. 19, are mea-
sured and plotted as a gray-solid line in Fig. 3(a) along with the present
device data.
Electroluminescence (EL) spectra of the lLEDs were measured
to evaluate EQEs. The variation of the peak wavelength and the full
width half maxima (FWHM) against the current density for both the
mesa sizes of ELO and planar lLEDs is shown in Figs. 4(a)–4(d).
Blueshift in the EL peak wavelength with the increasing current den-
sity up to 2 kA cm2 is 7 nm in the 10  10 lm2 planar lLED mesa,
but in the ELO lLEDs, blueshift is reduced to 4 nm; similar
119, 142103-3
 Applied Physics Letters
FIG. 3. Current–voltage characteristics of ELO lLEDs and planar lLED mesas (a) 10  10 lm2 and (b) 15  15 lm2. The insets in (a) and (b) show the ELO lLED current
density in a linear scale.
reduction was seen in 15  15 lm2 mesas of the two device types. The
difference in peak emission wavelengths between planar and ELO
devices precludes, attributing the blueshift reduction conclusively to
lower defect density ELO wings without further investigation.
However, FWHM variation with increased current density was
approximately 2 nm in planar lLEDs, compared to 0.3 nm in the
ELO lLEDs.
Electrical pads in the present device configuration do not allow us
to singulate individual die to prepare an encapsulated package for the
exact measurement of EQE in an integrated sphere such as in Ref. 19.
Therefore, all the optical power measurements were carried under DC
biased conditions at room temperature on a wafer as this configuration
imitates how lLEDs are used in displays. The light output power (Lop)
of lLEDs was measured with a calibrated Si photodetector to ensure the
same proportion of emitted light from each lLED was collected to be
comparable to one another. The Si-photodiode was placed in close
proximity, 3 mm, above the emitting surface of the lLED to collect
the Lop with increased current density up to 2 kA cm2 in 10  10 lm2
mesa and up to 0.9 kA cm2 in 15  15 lm2 mesa. As can be seen in
Figs. 4(e) and 4(f), the light output power from the 10  10 lm2 ELO
lLED at 1 and 2 kA cm2 is, respectively, 5 and 8 lW, and is
approximately 9 lW at 0.9 kA cm2 in 15  15 lm2 ELO lLED in
the present measurement setup. The light output power from the
10  10 lm2 ELO lLED increased by 36% and 23% at 1 and 2 kA
cm2, respectively, when compared to the same size of planar lLED
mesa. Similarly, a nearly 28% increase is seen in 15  15 lm2 ELO
lLEDs compared to the planar lLEDs at 0.9 kA cm2. Due to large
leakage below 0.1 kA cm2, no light was detected in planar lLEDs.
At each current injection density (J), Lop and the EL peak emission
wavelength were measured, and thus, the EQE could be calculated as
Lop  k
EQE ¼ ; redshift resulting from the temperature-induced fundamental energy
JA
 hc
q
where h (Planck’s constant), c (speed of light), and q (electron charge)
are the fundamental constants, Lop is the light output power, J is the
Appl. Phys. Lett. 119, 142103 (2021); doi: 10.1063/5.0062032
Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing
ARTICLE scitation.org/journal/apl
current density, k is the peak EL emission wavelength, and A is the
light emitting mesa area. As can be seen in Figs. 4(g) and 4(h), the
measured EQEs are relatively low due to limited light collection from
the measurement setup. However, to get an estimation on the actual
EQE, ref device, a 10  10 lm2 blue lLED from the same batch
reported by Wong et al. in Ref. 19, was measured using the present
setup, and the data are plotted as triangles along with the EQEs of the
present ELO and planar lLEDs. Peak EQE of the ref device was
reported to be 22% when measured from an encapsulated packaging
in an integrated sphere.19 As can be seen, peak EQE of the ELO lLED
is roughly half of the ref device peak EQE and approached the ref
device EQE at higher current density. The ELO lLEDs’ EQE peaks at
low current density, 70 A cm2, and then drops with increased cur-
rent injection. The efficiency droop, defined as (EQEpeak  EQEJ)/
EQEpeak, is found to be 26% and 36% of the peak value, respectively, at
1 and 2 kA cm2 in the 10  10 lm2 ELO lLED, and is 20% of the
peak value at 0.9 kA cm2 in the 15  15 lm2 ELO lLED mesa.
The advantage of semi-polar devices becomes apparent in these
results; the reduction of polarization-related electric fields in the QWs
minimizes the blue shift, improving the radiative recombination rate
relative to conventional c-plane emitters. However, thermal effects
also need to be considered in the present testing configuration. ELO
lLEDs on the ELO bar are, in fact, extensively separated from the
growth surface by 200 nm of air space due to removal of the ELO
mask before LED epitaxy. The lack of a thermally conductive path
leads to higher temperature operation, thus contributing to thermal
droop in the device. This partially explains the observed difference in
droop of the ELO lLED with the relatively low droop in the planar
lLEDs, which show nearly flat EQEs at higher current densities. A
better comparison of the droop can be obtained if the ELO lLEDs are
separated from the substrate and measured. It is noteworthy that the
gap shrinkage of GaN and InGaN quantum well epilayers and the
reduced QCSE from lower indium containing ELO lLED quantum
wells could all play a role in the measured lower blueshift in the ELO
lLEDs. Furthermore, a better understanding of the EL dependency on
119, 142103-4
 Applied Physics Letters ARTICLE scitation.org/journal/apl

FIG. 4. Peak wavelength and FWHM against injected current density: (a) 10  10 lm2 planar lLED, (b) 10  10 lm2 ELO lLED, (c) 15  15 lm2 planar lLED, and (d)
15  15 lm2 ELO lLED; light output curves against the linear scale current density of ELO and planar lLEDs: (e) 10  10 lm2 mesa and (f) 15  15 lm2 mesa; EQE curves
plotted against the semi-log scale current density axis: (g) 10  10 lm2 mesa and (h) 15  15 lm2 mesa.

dislocations will be established if the present device mesas are prepared
with the same thermal management design and indium composition
quantum wells. We believe further improvements, such as thick active
regions, optimized epitaxial structures, and better thermal manage-
ment designs, will lead to even better light output powers with a mini-
mum droop, which will be the topic of a forthcoming study.
In conclusion, we have fabricated lLEDs down to 10  10 lm2
on the ELO wing of a native semipolar (2021) GaN substrate and
compared light–current–voltage characteristics between ELO lLEDs
and the lLEDs fabricated on planar substrates. Under the exact same
sidewall fabrication and passivation procedures, the ELO lLED leak-
age current was markedly reduced compared to planar lLEDs owing

Appl. Phys. Lett. 119, 142103 (2021); doi: 10.1063/5.0062032 119, 142103-5
Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing
 Applied Physics Letters
to the lower defect density crystalline layers of the ELO wings.
Improved light output powers and higher efficiency were observed in
ELO lLEDs relative to planar lLEDs. By combining ELO lLEDs with
previously reported liftoff methods, a promising route exists for high-
quality semi-polar crystal orientation lLED displays utilizing a simple
fabrication method.
This work was supported by the Solid State Lighting and
Energy Electronics Center (SSLEEC) at UCSB. A portion of this
work was done at the UCSB nanofabrication facility. The authors
acknowledge Aidan Taylor for the useful help in CL measurements.
DATA AVAILABILITY
The data that support the findings of this study are available
within the article.
REFERENCES
1 19
Z. Gong, E. Gu, S. R. Jin, D. Massoubre, B. Guilhabert, H. X. Zhang, M. D.
Dawson, V. Poher, G. T. Kennedy, P. M. W. French, and M. A. A. Neil, Physica
D 41, 094002 (2008).
2 21
S-l Park, Y. Xiong, R.-H. Kim, P. Elvikis, M. Meitl, D.-H. Kim, J. Wu, J. Yoon,
C.-J. Yu, Z. Liu, Y. Huang, K-c Hwang, P. Ferreira, X. Li, K. Choquette, and J.
A. Rogers, Science 325, 977 (2009).
3 190 (2013).
J. Day, J. Li, D. Y. C. Lie, C. Bradford, J. Y. Lin, and H. X. Jiang, Appl. Phys.
Lett. 99, 031116 (2011).
4
A. R. Lingley, M. Ali, Y. Liao, R. Mirjalili, M. Klonner, M. Sopanen, S.
Suihkonen, T. Shen, B. P. Otis, H. Lipsanen, and B. A. Parviz, J. Micromech.
Microeng. 21, 125014 (2011).
5 25
H. X. Jiang and J. Y. Lin, Opt. Express 21, A475 (2013).
6
Z. J. Liu, W. C. Chong, K. M. Wong, K. H. Tam, and K. M. Lau, IEEE
Photonics Technol. Lett. 25, 2267 (2013).
7
T. Wu, C. W. Sher, Y. Lin, C. F. Lee, S. Liang, Y. Lu, S. W. H. Chen, W. Guo,
H. C. Kuo, and Z. Chen, Appl. Sci. 8, 1557 (2018).
8
Y. Huang, E. L. Hsiang, M. Y. Deng, and S. T. Wu, Light Sci. Appl. 9, 105
(2020).
Appl. Phys. Lett. 119, 142103 (2021); doi: 10.1063/5.0062032
Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing
ARTICLE scitation.org/journal/apl
9
A. Paranjpe, J. Montgomery, S. M. Lee, and C. Morath, SID Symp. Dig. Tech.
49, 597 (2018).
10
R. P. Green, J. J. D. McKendry, D. Massoubre, E. Gu, M. D. Dawson, and A. E.
Kelly, Appl. Phys. Lett. 102, 091103 (2013).
11
S. Rajbhandari, J. J. D. McKendry, J. Herrnsdorf, H. Chun, G. Faulkner, H.
Haas, I. M. Watson, D. O’Brien, and M. D. Dawson, Semicond. Sci. Technol.
32, 023001 (2017).
12
P. Tian, J. J. D. McKendry, Z. Gong, B. G. M. Watson, E. Gu, Z. Chen, G.
Zhang, and M. D. Dawson, Appl. Phys. Lett. 101, 231110 (2012).
13
D. Hwang, A. Mughal, C. D. Pynn, S. Nakamura, and S. P. DenBaars, Appl.
Phys. Express 10, 032101 (2017).
14
F. Olivier, S. Tirano, L. Dupre, B. Aventurier, C. Largeron, and F. Templier,
J. Lumin. 191, 112 (2017).
15
D. P. Han, D. G. Zheng, C. H. Oh, H. Kim, J. I. Shim, D. S. Shin, and K. S. Kim,
Appl. Phys. Lett. 104, 151108 (2014).
16
K. A. Bulashevich and S. Y. Karpov, Phys. Status Solidi RRL 10, 480 (2016).
17
H. Guo, X. Zhang, H. Chen, H. Liu, P. Zhang, Q. Liao, S. Hu, H. Chang, B. Sun,
S. Wang, and Y. Cui, Appl. Phys. Express 6, 072103 (2013).
18
M. S. Wong, D. Hwang, A. I. Alhassan, C. Lee, R. Ley, S. Nakamura, and S. P.
DenBaars, Opt. Express 26, 21324 (2018).
M. S. Wong, C. Lee, D. J. Myers, D. Hwang, J. A. Kearns, T. Li, J. S. Speck, S.
Nakamura, and S. P. DenBaars, Appl. Phys. Express 12, 097004 (2019).
20
F. Bernardini, V. Fiorentini, and D. Vanderbilt, Phys. Rev. B 56, R10024 (1997).
V. Fiorentini, F. Bernardini, F. D. Sala, A. D. Carlo, and P. Lugli, Phys. Rev. B
60, 8849 (1999).
22
D. F. Feezell, J. S. Speck, S. P. DenBaars, and S. Nakamura, J. Disp. Technol. 9,
23
M. Monavarian, A. Rashidi, A. A. Aragon, S. H. Oh, A. K. Rishinaramangalam,
S. P. DenBaars, and D. Feezell, Appl. Phys. Lett. 112, 041104 (2018).
24
T. Kamikawa, S. Gandrothula, M. Araki, H. Li, V. B. Oliva, F. Wu, D. Cohen, J.
S. Speck, S. P. Denbaars, and S. Nakamura, Opt. Express 27, 24717 (2019).
S. Gandrothula, T. Kamikawa, M. Araki, D. Cohen, J. S. Speck, S. Nakamura,
and S. P. DenBaars, Appl. Phys. Express 13, 041003 (2020).
26
S. Gandrothula, T. Kamikawa, J. S. Speck, S. Nakamura, and S. P. DenBaars,
Appl. Phys. Express 14, 031002 (2021).
27
R. S. Cok, M. Meitl, R. Rotzoll, G. Melnik, A. Fecioru, A. J. Trindade, B.
Raymond, S. Bonafede, D. Gomez, T. Moore, C. Prevatte, E. Radauscher, S.
Goodwin, P. Hines, and C. A. Bower, J. Soc. Inf. Disp. 25, 589 (2017).
119, 142103-6