© 2024 Author(s). Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing.
Published January 28, 2024
| Published
Journal Article
A critical review and meta-analysis of xenon-on-carbon sputter yield data
Abstract
A systematic review and meta-analysis of sputter yield data for xenon ions normally incident on graphite at energies below 2000 eV was undertaken to identify systematic errors, determine the best model parameter values to represent yield as a function of energy, quantify uncertainty, and determine if the data support differences in yields for different types of graphite. A critical examination of the 11 published data sets for high density graphite, pyrolytic graphite, and amorphous carbon showed that, in general, they were carefully controlled to minimize errors. The most significant quantifiable systematic errors were those caused by the neglect of doubly charged ions, chemical erosion, and the impact of secondary electron emission on ion flux measurements. The effects of gas uptake and outgassing on mass loss measurements and unrepresentative surface textures may have biased other experiments, but these effects could not be quantified. The semi-empirical Eckstein model for yield as a function of energy was fit to data for the three graphite types using a hierarchical Bayesian statistical model, producing recommended fit parameters and probability distributions representing uncertainty in yields. The results showed that differences in yield for high density graphite and pyrolytic graphite were not statistically significant. Apparent differences in yield for amorphous carbon disappeared when the single data set available for energies below 150 eV was corrected for reasonable values of double ion content. Recommended procedures to avoid systematic errors and additional experiments and modeling to fill in gaps in our understanding are included.
Copyright and License
Acknowledgement
The research described in this paper was carried out in part at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under a contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The author would like to thank Colleen Marrese-Reading for help collating the data, and John Williams and Seth Thompson at Colorado State University, Russ Doerner at the University of California San Diego, and Daniel Spemann at the Leibniz Institute of Surface Engineering for a number of useful inputs on the experimental methods employed at their respective institutions.
Contributions
James E. Polk: Conceptualization (lead); Data curation (lead); Formal analysis (lead); Funding acquisition (lead); Investigation (lead); Methodology (lead); Project administration (lead); Resources (lead); Software (lead); Validation (lead); Visualization (lead); Writing – original draft (lead); Writing – review & editing (lead).
Data Availability
Data, including parameters for the Stan code to reproduce the fit and samples from the joint posterior distribution, are available from the author upon reasonable request.
Conflict of Interest
The authors have no conflicts to disclose.
Files
Additional details
- ISSN
- 1089-7550
- National Aeronautics and Space Administration