Energy distribution of channel electrons and its impacts on the gate leakage current in graphene field-effect transistors
Article
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:
- 109 Downloads
- 3 Citations
Abstract
The linear energy–momentum relation results in more high-energy electrons in 2D (two-dimensional) graphene FETs (field-effect transistor) than those in silicon FETs that features parabolic energy–momentum relation if the same surface electron density has been assumed in all FETs. The numerical calculations demonstrate that, under such assumption, the gate leakage currents in graphene FETs are much larger than that in silicon FETs. The results illustrate that if the conduction band offset between graphene and gate oxide is lower than 3.55 eV, the gate leakage currents in graphene electronics are more significant than those in the silicon electronics.
Keywords
Barrier Height Gate Oxide Momentum Relation Effective Electron Mass Channel Electron
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.
References
- 1.C. Berger, Z. Song, X. Li, X. Wu, N. Brown, C. Naud, D. Mayou, T. Li, J. Hass, A.N. Marchenkov, E.H. Conrad, P.N. First, W.A. de Heer, Science 312, 1191 (2006) CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
- 2.K.S. Novoselov, A.K. Geim, S.V. Morozov, D. Jiang, Y. Zhang, S.V. Dubonos, I.V. Crigorieva, A.A. Firsov, Science 306, 666 (2004) CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
- 3.K.S. Novoselov, A.K. Geim, S.V. Morozov, D. Jiang, M.I. Katsnelson, I.V. Grigorieva, S.V. Dubonos, A.A. Firsov, Nature 438, 197 (2005) CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
- 4.M.C. Lemme, T.J. Echtermeyer, M. Baus, H. Kurz, IEEE Electron Device Lett. 28, 282 (2007) CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
- 5.Y.B. Zhang, Y.W. Tan, H.L. Stormer, P. Kim, Nature 438, 201 (2005) CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
- 6.L.F. Mao, X.J. Li, Z. O Wang, J.Y. Wang, IEEE Electron Device Lett. 29, 1047 (2008) CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
- 7.A. Das, S. Pisana, B. Chakraborty, S. Piscanec, S.K. Saha, U.V. Waghmare, K.S. Novoselov, H.R. Krishnamurthy, A.K. Geim, A.C. Ferrari, A.K. Sood, Nat. Nanotechnol. 3, 210 (2008) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.Q. Zhang, T. Fang, H. Xing, A. Seabaugh, D. Jeana, IEEE Electron Device Lett. 29, 1344 (2008) CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
- 9.V. Ryzhii, M. Ryzhii, A. Satou, T. Ostuji, J. Appl. Phys. 103, 094510 (2008) CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
- 10.G. Gu, S. Nie, R.M. Feenstra, R.P. Devaty, W.J. Choyke, W.K. Chan, M.G. Kane, Appl. Phys. Lett. 90, 253507 (2007) CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
- 11.Y.Q. Wu, P.D. Ye, M.A. Capano, Y. Xuan, Y. Sui, M. Qi, J.A. Cooper, T. Shen, D. Pandey, G. Prakash, R. Reifenberger, Appl. Phys. Lett. 92, 092102 (2008) CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
- 12.W.K. Chim, P.S. Lim, J. Appl. Phys. 91, 1577 (2002) CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
- 13.F. Buonocore, F. Trani, D. Ninno, A. Di Matteo, G. Cantele, G. Iadonis, Nanotechnology 19, 02571 (2005) Google Scholar
- 14.D. Bohm, Quantum Theory (Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 1951) Google Scholar
- 15.Z.A. Weinberg, J. Appl. Phys. 53, 5052 (1982) CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
Copyright information
© Springer-Verlag 2009