Simulating quantum transport in nanoscale transistors: Real versus mode-space approaches

489 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Role of scattering in nanotransistors (2002, background): “For the device dimensions and voltages considered, [22] found the approximation of considering decoupled subbands to hold good for ultra thin body phase coherent MOS-FETs.”
Modeling of Nanoscale Devices (2006, methodology): “s solved in two dimensions and the electron density is computed from Eqs. (212) and (232) using, n(x i,y i,k z,E) = n n(y i,k z,E)|Ψ n(x i,y i)| 2 . (236) When does the mode-space approach fail? Ref. [Ven03] has extensively analysed the regime of validity of the mode space approach. The mode space a”
A Self-Consistent Full 3-D Real-Space NEGF Simulator for Studying Nonperturbative Effects in Nano-MOSFETs (2007, methodology): “This latter matrix is obtained from the contact Green function, which is calculated as in [23].”
Performance Comparison Between p-i-n Tunneling Transistors and Conventional MOSFETs (2008, methodology): “carrier transport is used [33], [45], where we consider the lowest conduction band and the highest valence band with twofold spin and twofold valley degeneracies [31].”
Generalized effective-mass approach for n-type metal-oxide-semiconductor field-effect transistors on arbitrarily oriented wafers (2004, methodology): “In [7] and [12] the coupled- and decoupled-modespace approaches were introduced, and in [13] the coupled-mode-space approach is used in order to assess the effects of channel access geometry and series resistance in nanoscale n-MOSFETs.”