Advertisement

Macroscopic Quantum Carrier Transport Modeling

  • Zhiping Yu
  • Robert W. Dutton
  • Danie W. Yergeau
  • Mario G. Ancona

Abstract

It has been established [1]-[4] that the density gradient (DG) model is the lowest order, in terms of ħ, approximation of the Wigner function approach to including quantum mechanical (QM) effects in carrier transport. In this paper, we report a five-equation PDE system (reduced to three-equation at thermal equilibrium) which preserves the numerical stability of classical drift-diffusion (DD) model, yet faithfully manifests QM corrections. Tunneling through the gate oxide (or barrier region) is modeled by ballistic transport with each type of carrier (electrons or holes) further split into forward and backward moving species and solved for separately. The entire device, including semiconductor and barrier regions, is solved self-consistently. Terminal characteristics, either dc or small signal ac for realistic, multi-dimensional device structures can be simulated using this model. An SOI device example is simulated and the comparison with microscopic (Schrödinger/Poisson) results is excellent. A DG prediction of a dipole in the poly gate near the poly/gate-oxide interface is also confirmed by microscopic simulation. Both I-V and C-V for MOS devices including SOI are shown.

Keywords

Wigner Function Gate Oxide Barrier Region Ballistic Transport Boltzmann Transport Equation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    M.G. Ancona and G.J. Iafrate, “Quantum correction to the equation of state of an electron gas in a semiconductor,” p. 9536, Physical Review B, vol. 39, no. 13, 1 May 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    M.G. Ancona and H.F. Tiersten, “Macroscopic physics of the silicon inversion layer,” p. 7959, Physical Review B vol. 35, 1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    H. Tsuchiya and T. Miyoshi, “Quantum transport modeling of ultrasmall semiconductor devices,” p. 880, IEICE Tr. Electronics, vol. E82-C, no. 6, June 1999.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    D. Ferry, R. Akis, and D. Vasileska, “Quantum effects in MOSFETs: Use of an effective potential in 3D Monte Carlo simulation of ultra-short channel devices,” p. 287, IEDM, Dec. 2000, San Francisco, CA.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    M.G. Ancona “Macroscopic description of quantum-mechanical tunneling,” p. 1222, Phys. Rev. B42, 1990.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    C. Bowen, et al., “Physical oxide thickness extraction and verification using quantum mechanical simulation,” p. 859IEDM Digest Dec. 1997, Washington, DC. Also see R. Lake, et al. p. 7845, J. Appl. Phys. 81 1997.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    E.P. Wigner, “On the quantum correction for thermodynamic equilibrium,” p. 749, Physics Review, vol. 40, June 1, 1932.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    M.G. Ancona, Z. Yu, R.W. Dutton, P.J. Vande Voorde, M. Cao, and D. Vook, “Density-gradient analysis of MOS tunneling,” p. 2310, IEEE T-ED Dec. 2000.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    R. Chau, et al. “30nm physical gate length CMOS transistors with 1.0 ps n-MOS and 1.7 ps p-MOS gate delays,” p. 45, IEDM, Dec. 2000, San Francisco.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Wien 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Zhiping Yu
    • 1
  • Robert W. Dutton
    • 1
  • Danie W. Yergeau
    • 1
  • Mario G. Ancona
    • 2
  1. 1.Center for Integrated SystemsStanford UniversityStanfordUSA
  2. 2.Naval Research LaboratoryWashingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations