Abstract:Piezoresponse force-microscopy (PFM) has become the standard tool to investigate ferroelectrics on the micro- and nanoscale. However, reliability of PFM signals is often problematic and their quantification is challenging and thus not widely applied. Here, we present a study of the reproducibility of PFM signals and of the so-called PFM background signal which has been reported in literature. We find that PFM signals are generally reproducible to certain extents. The PFM signal difference between 180° domains on periodically-poled lithium niobate (PPLN) is taken as the reference signal in a large number of measurements, carried out in a low frequency regime (30-70 kHz). We show that in comparison to Pt coated tips, diamond coated tips exhibit improved signal stability, lower background signal and less imaging artifacts related to PFM which is reflected in the spread of measurements. This is attributed to the improved mechanical stability of the conductive layer. The average deviation of the mean PFM signal is 38.3%, for a diamond coated tip. Although this deviation is relatively high, it is far better than values from literature which showed a deviation of approx. 73.1%. Additionally, we find that the average deviation of the background signal from 0 is 11.6% of the PPLN domain contrast. Thus, the background signal needs to be taken into account when quantifying PFM signals and should be subtracted from PFM signals. Those results are important for quantification of PFM signals, since PPLN might be used for this purpose when PFM signals measured on PPLN are related to its macroscopic d33 coefficient. Finally, the crucial influence of sample polishing on PFM signals is shown and we recommend to use a multistep polishing route with a final step involving 200 nm sized colloidal silica particles.

Revisiting contrast mechanism of lateral piezoresponse force microscopy

Non-piezoelectric effects in piezoresponse force microscopy

Force-Electric Coupling of Nanoscale Ferroelectric Domains Based on Piezoelectric Force Microscopy (PFM)

Decoupling competing electromechanical mechanisms in dynamic atomic force microscopy

Reply to “comment on ‘origin of Piezoelectric Response under a Biased Scanning Probe Microscopy Tip Across a 180° Ferroelectric Domain Wall’”

Electrostatic effect on off-field ferroelectric hysteresis loop in piezoresponse force microscopy

Differentiating Ferroelectric and Nonferroelectric Electromechanical Effects with Scanning Probe Microscopy.

Piezoresponse phase as variable in electromechanical characterization

Defining ferroelectric characteristics with reversible piezoresponse: PUND switching spectroscopy PFM characterization

Quantitative Lateral and Vertical Piezoresponse Force Microscopy on A Pbtio3 Single Crystal

In-plane Polarization Contribution to the Vertical Piezoresponse Force Microscopy Signal Mediated by the Cantilever “Buckling”

Choice of tip, signal stability and practical aspects of Piezoresponse-Force-Microscopy

Accurate Vertical Nanoelectromechanical Measurements

Piezoresponse Force Spectroscopy of Ferroelectric Materials

Piezoresponse Force Microscopy Imaging and Its Correlation with Cantilever Spring Constant and Frequency

Nanoelectromechanics of Piezoresponse Force Microscopy

Local Probing of the Non-Uniform Distribution of Ferrielectric and Antiferroelectric Phases

Accurate 3D Nanoscale Electromechanical Imaging with a Metrological Atomic Force Microscope

Probing Electromechanical Behaviors by Datacube Piezoresponse Force Microscopy in Ambient and Aqueous Environments

Electrostatic contribution to hysteresis loop in piezoresponse force microscopy