Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T13:02:12.249Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A sensitivity analysis on the electron transport within zinc oxide and its device implications

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 April 2016

Poppy Siddiqua ,
Michael S. Shur  and
Stephen K. O’Leary
Poppy Siddiqua
Affiliation:
School of Engineering, The University of British Columbia, Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada V1V 1V7
Michael S. Shur
Affiliation:
Department of Electrical, Computer, and Systems Engineering, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, New York 12180-3590, U.S.A.
Stephen K. O’Leary*
Affiliation:
School of Engineering, The University of British Columbia, Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada V1V 1V7
*
*(Email: [email protected])
Get access

Abstract

Zinc oxide has recently been touted as a material that may prove useful for high-power and high-frequency electron device applications. Unfortunately, at the present moment at least, zinc oxide’s electron transport results are based upon material parameter selections that remain disputed, i.e., their exact values have yet to be satisfactorily resolved. In order to establish how the expected range of disputed material parameter values influence the corresponding electron transport results, this paper assesses the sensitivity of the electron transport results associated with zinc oxide to variations in these disputed material parameters. The disputed material parameters that we focus on for the purposes of this particular analysis include the non-parabolicity coefficient associated with the lowest energy conduction band valley, the conduction band inter-valley energy separation, and the effective mass associated with the electrons in the upper energy conduction band valleys. For the purposes of this analysis, steady-state electron transport results are the focus of this sensitivity analysis, the velocity-field characteristic associated with zinc oxide being the principal metric of concern. We find that increases in the non-parabolicity coefficient associated with the lowest energy conduction band valley lead to increases in the peak field of the velocity-field characteristic and initially an increase and then a decrease in the peak electron drift velocity of this material. Increases in the conduction band inter-valley energy separation are instead found to result in increases in the peak field and concomitant increases in the peak electron drift velocity. Finally, increases in the effective mass associated with the electrons in the upper energy conduction band valleys are found to lead to a sharpening of the slope of the velocity-field characteristic in the region beyond the peak field, greater effective mass leading to a greater magnitude slope. Based on the magnitude of these variations, we conclude that zinc oxide may indeed be considered as a material for high-power and high-frequency electron device applications even when the variations in these disputed material parameters have been accounted for.

Keywords

electronic materialoxidesimulation
Type
Articles
Information
MRS Advances , Volume 1 , Issue 40: Characterization and Modeling of Materials , 2016 , pp. 2777 - 2782
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Őzgűr, Ű., Alivov, Ya. I., Liu, C., Teke, A., Reshchikov, M. A., Doğan, S., Avrutin, V., Cho, S.-J., and Morkoç, H., J. Appl. Phys. 98, 041301 (2005).Google Scholar
Ferry, D. K., Phys. Rev. B 12, 2361 (1975).Google Scholar
Siddiqua, P., Hadi, W. A., Shur, M. S., and O’Leary, S. K., Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 1805, DOI: 10.1557/opl.2015.577 (2015).Google Scholar
Albrecht, J. D., Ruden, P. P., Limpijumnong, S., Lambrecht, W. R. L., and Brennan, K. F., J. Appl. Phys. 86, 6864 (1999).Google Scholar
Guo, B., Ravaioli, U., and Staedele, M., Comp. Phys. Commun. 175, 482 (2006).Google Scholar
Bertazzi, F., Goano, M., and Bellotti, E., J. Electron. Mater. 36, 857 (2007).Google Scholar
Furno, E., Bertazzi, F., Goano, M., Ghione, G., and Bellotti, E., Solid-State Electron. 52, 1796 (2008).Google Scholar
O’Leary, S. K., Foutz, B. E., Shur, M. S., and Eastman, L. F., Solid State Commun. 150, 2182 (2010).Google Scholar
Lugli, P. and Ferry, D. K., IEEE Trans. Electron Devices 32, 2431 (1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seeger, K., Semiconductor Physics: An Introduction, 9th ed. (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2004).Google Scholar
Siddiqua, P., Hadi, W. A., Shur, M. S., and O’Leary, S. K., J. Mater. Sci.: Mater. Electron. 26, 4475 (2015).Google Scholar