Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Island nucleation and growth play an important role in thin-film growth. One quantity of particular interest is the exponent χ, which describes the dependence of the saturation island density Nₛₐₜ~(Dₕ/F)^-χ on the ratio Dₕ/F of the monomer hopping rate Dₕ to the deposition rate F. While standard rate equation (RE) theory predicts that χ=i/(i+2) (where i is the critical island size), more recently it has been predicted that in the presence of a strong barrier to the attachment of monomers to islands, a significantly larger value χ=2i/(i+3) may be observed. While this prediction has recently been tested using kinetic Monte Carlo simulations for the case of irreversible growth corresponding to $i=1$, it has not been tested for the case of reversible island growth corresponding to $i>1$. Here we present a mean-field self-consistent RE method which we have used to study the dependence of the effective value of χ on Dₕ/F and barrier-strength for $i=1,2,3$, and 6. Both the no-nucleation-barrier case in which there exists a barrier for monomers to attach to islands larger than the critical island size (but not to smaller islands) and the nucleation-barrier case in which there is a barrier for monomers to attach to islands of all sizes are studied. In all cases, we find that the existence of attachment barriers significantly increases the effective value of χ for a given barrier strength. In addition, for $i=1$ we find good agreement between our extrapolated asymptotic value of χ and the theoretical strong-barrier prediction both with and without a nucleation barrier. In contrast, for $i>1$ the value of χ is significantly larger in the presence of a nucleation barrier than in its absence. In particular, while an asymptotic analysis of our results for $i>1$ also leads to excellent agreement with the strong barrier prediction in the presence of a nucleation barrier, in the absence of a nucleation barrier the asymptotic values are significantly lower.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Smirnov et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: