Fermi, generally vacuum

In the first application of the CASCC method, the external part of the CC operator, T in the CASCC wave function contained only doubles excitations with respect to Fermi s vacuum. We should note that generates external and semi-internal excitations with respect to 0). In the semi-internal excitations electrons are distributed among active (occupied in 0)) and inactive (unoccupied in 0)) orbitals or between inactive (occupied) and active (unoccupied) orbitals. In general, has the following form ... 

The energy reference in each case for the measurements described above is the fermi level and although the exact location of this level in relation to the valence and conduction bands is generally unknown for polymers, as we have noted under the conditions of X-ray irradiation it is possible for an insulator to be in electrical contact with the spectrometer i.e. their fermi levels are the same. Despite the difficulties associated with defining an analytical expression for the fermi level of an insulator, the use of the fermi level as energy reference is operationally convenient. If the work function of the insulator is known we may calculate the binding energy with respect to the vacuum level. 

At equilibrium, the Fermi energy is the same on both sides of the interface. But since this energy is not, in general, the same in the bulk of the materials before contact, relative to vacuum level, the positions of the valence- and conduction-band levels in the semiconductor must adjust band bending occurs. The two most probable cases are sketched in Fig. 23, for a p-type semiconductor, since CPs are generally so. 

Fig. 9.1 shows a schematic diagram of a metal Schottky contact on a semiconductor. In isolation, the metal and the semiconductor generally have different work functions and Og. (The work function is the energy needed to remove an electron from the Fermi energy to the vacuum.) When electrical contact is made between... 

Unfortunately, a problem arises when attempting to compare the electrochemical potential of the solntion and the electrochemical potential of the semiconductor. Like most electronic energy levels for molecules, the Fermi level of the semiconductor is usually determined relative to the vacuum level. Experimental measurements to determine fp.sc for semiconductors (generally through determination of the semiconductor work function and dopant density) yield values that can be related to the energy of an electron in vacuum. However, electrochemical potentials of liquid phases can only be measured as potential differences between the test solution and a solution that is nsed as a reference. Since it is not possible to measure directly the energy of an individual redox couple relative to the vacuum level, it is not possible to determine directly the desired relationship between the energy level on the solid side of the junction and that on the liquid side. 

The reason for this behaviour is the presence of Shockley surface states [176] on the noble metal surfaces. On these surfaces, the Fermi energy is placed in a band gap for electrons propagating normal to the surface. This leads to exponentially decaying solutions both into the bulk and into the vacuum, and creates a two-dimensional electron gas at the surface. The gas can often be treated with very simple quantum mechanical models [177, 178], and much research has been done, especially with regards to Kondo physics [179, 180, 181]. There has also been attempts to do ab initio calculations of quantum corrals [182, 183], with in general excellent results. 

Fig. 7. Generalized binding energy scale diagram where the C (Is) is amalgamated into the level scheme for the sample and due to its nonconducting character, neither AC nor the sample Fermi edge is coupled to that for the spectrometer. Reprinted with permission from T. L. Barr and S. Seal, JVST 13(3), 1239 (1995). Copyright (1995), American Vacuum Society.

---