• Opto-Electronic Advances
  • Vol. 4, Issue 10, 210039-1 (2021)
Shreeniket Joshi and Amirkianoosh Kiani*
Author Affiliations
  • Silicon Hall: Micro/Nano Manufacturing Facility, Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science, Ontario Tech University, 2000 Simcoe St N, Oshawa, Ontario L1G 0C5, Canada
  • show less
    DOI: 10.29026/oea.2021.210039 Cite this Article
    Shreeniket Joshi, Amirkianoosh Kiani. Hybrid artificial neural networks and analytical model for prediction of optical constants and bandgap energy of 3D nanonetwork silicon structures[J]. Opto-Electronic Advances, 2021, 4(10): 210039-1 Copy Citation Text show less
    Schematic of fabrication set-up. Figure reproduced with permission from ref.6, Elsevier.
    Fig. 1. Schematic of fabrication set-up. Figure reproduced with permission from ref.6, Elsevier.
    Filtered reflectance data.
    Fig. 2. Filtered reflectance data.
    Filtered transmittance data.
    Fig. 3. Filtered transmittance data.
    Model validation with experimental transmittance.
    Fig. 4. Model validation with experimental transmittance.
    Refractive index as a function of wavelength.
    Fig. 5. Refractive index as a function of wavelength.
    Extinction coefficient as a function of wavelength.
    Fig. 6. Extinction coefficient as a function of wavelength.
    PUMA model validation with analytical refractive index (n); R_Puma: Simulation results when only reflectance was input; B_Puma: Simulation results when both reflectance and transmittance were inputs.
    Fig. 7. PUMA model validation with analytical refractive index (n); R_Puma: Simulation results when only reflectance was input; B_Puma: Simulation results when both reflectance and transmittance were inputs.
    PUMA model validation with analytical extinction coefficient (k).
    Fig. 8. PUMA model validation with analytical extinction coefficient (k).
    PUMA model validation with analytical extinction coefficient (k).
    Fig. 9. PUMA model validation with analytical extinction coefficient (k).
    PUMA model evaluation with experimental transmittance.
    Fig. 10. PUMA model evaluation with experimental transmittance.
    PUMA model evaluation with experimental reflectance.
    Fig. 11. PUMA model evaluation with experimental reflectance.
    Flowchart for deep learning algorithm.
    Fig. 12. Flowchart for deep learning algorithm.
    Deep Learning Model developed.
    Fig. 13. Deep Learning Model developed.
    Comparison of model-predicted extinction coefficient with analytical values.
    Fig. 14. Comparison of model-predicted extinction coefficient with analytical values.
    Comparison of model-predicted refractive index with analytical values.
    Fig. 15. Comparison of model-predicted refractive index with analytical values.
    Absorption regions for fabricated silicon thin film.
    Fig. 16. Absorption regions for fabricated silicon thin film.
    Tauc’s Plot for determining optical bandgap.
    Fig. 17. Tauc’s Plot for determining optical bandgap.
    K_Mean absolute error0.000418969
    K_Mean squared error2.6281E-07
    Sum_K.sq error9.93422E-05
    R20.987741346
    Table 1. Prediction of extinction coefficient (k).
    N_Mean absolute error0.023172839
    N_Mean squared error0.000574442
    Sum_N.sq error0.217139095
    R20.867649736
    Table 2. Prediction of refractive index (n)
    Frequency (kHz)Pulse duration (ps)Temperature (°C)
    Sample 1600150RT
    Sample 2900150200
    Sample 31200150RT
    Sample 41200150600
    Sample 512005000RT
    Table 3. Manufacturing parameters.
    SampleMSE of TransmittanceMAE of kMAE of nMSE of kMSE of nR2 value of kR2 value of n
    11.91E–095.47E–048.33E–024.77E–071.39E–020.980.97
    29.65E–117.74E–049.70E–021.00E–061.50E–020.970.97
    31.87E–096.67E–041.04E–016.55E–072.20E–020.970.96
    46.44E–101.04E–032.22E–011.79E–066.86E–020.900.88
    53.97E–107.48E–041.05E–019.58E–071.79E–020.970.97
    Table 4. Validation of proposed methodology.
    SemiconductorsCrystal structureEg (T=300K) Type of band gap
    SiDiamond1.12Indirect
    a-Si:HAmorphous1.7 to 1.8Indirect
    SiC(α) Wurtzite2.9Indirect
    Table 5. Band gap information for various silicon structures7
    Shreeniket Joshi, Amirkianoosh Kiani. Hybrid artificial neural networks and analytical model for prediction of optical constants and bandgap energy of 3D nanonetwork silicon structures[J]. Opto-Electronic Advances, 2021, 4(10): 210039-1
    Download Citation