28 tayangan

Diunggah oleh jlopezsa

A physics-based analytic solution to the surface
potential from the accumulation to the strong-inversion region
has been derived from the complete MOSFET surface potential
equation in this paper without any need for smooth functions or
simplification by dropping some second-order related terms. Its
high accuracy in predicting the surface potential and the transcapacitance
under various bias conditions has also been verified
by a comparison with the numerical results. The explicit surfacepotential
solution not only leads to a more clear understanding
of MOSFET device physics but also provides a better platform to
develop the advanced surface potential-based model for the circuit
simulation.

- 06329920
- Ultra-Low Power VLSI Circuit
- Principles Of Semiconductor Devices.pdf
- Procedure for Wafer-Level DC
- ohthesis7
- Unit - 1
- 2011 ECS Transactions
- Lecture24 MOS Transistors
- Sub Threshold Design
- Pelgrom_Matching_prop.pdf
- Chapter 3
- BS170
- MOS Transistor
- Digital VLSI Design - Lecture 2
- HRF3205 100A, 55V, 0.008 Ohm, N-Channel, Power
- VL Notes.pdf
- Lec_22
- Mos Device Eq Ns
- 06 TCAD Laboratory MOSFET GBB FinalAA13-14
- Lecture 7a

Anda di halaman 1dari 9

9, SEPTEMBER 2006

A Physics-Based Analytic Solution to the MOSFET

Surface Potential From Accumulation to

Strong-Inversion Region

Jin He, Member, IEEE, Mansun Chan, Senior Member, IEEE, Xing Zhang, Member, IEEE,

and Yangyuan Wang, Fellow, IEEE

AbstractA physics-based analytic solution to the surface

potential from the accumulation to the strong-inversion region

has been derived from the complete MOSFET surface potential

equation in this paper without any need for smooth functions or

simplication by dropping some second-order related terms. Its

high accuracy in predicting the surface potential and the tran-

scapacitance under various bias conditions has also been veried

by a comparison with the numerical results. The explicit surface-

potential solution not only leads to a more clear understanding

of MOSFET device physics but also provides a better platform to

develop the advanced surface potential-based model for the circuit

simulation.

Index TermsAnalytic solution, compact modeling, MOSFETs,

surface potential.

I. INTRODUCTION

I

N RECENT compact model formulations, a considerable

attention has been focused on developing the surface

potential-based models [1][6]. This is due to some drawbacks

in the threshold-voltage-based models, such as the disconti-

nuity across different operation regions, negative conductance,

and negative capacitance [3]. A number of surface potential-

based compact models such as MISNAN , MOS-11, HiSIM,

Philips and Penn State (PSP), and Peking University Nano-

Scale IGFET Model (PUNSIM) [1], [7][10] have been devel-

oped based on Brewss charge-sheet model [11] with the claim

that such a model retains the fundamental physics with high

accuracy and continuity.

The core of these models is the boundary surface potential,

which is a key physics-based variable in the development of

various surface potential-based models. The boundary surface

potential cannot be explicitly expressed in terms of the input

Manuscript received January 27, 2006; revised June 1, 2006. This work

was supported in part by the Special Funds for Major State Basic Research

Project and Nature Science Funds of China under Grant 973 and the Nature

Science Funds of China under Grant 90607017 and in part by the competitive

Earmarked Grant HKUST6289/04E from the Research Grant Council of Hong

Kong, SAR. The review of this paper was arranged by Editor M. Miura-

Mattausch.

J. He, X. Zhang, and Y. Wang are with the Nanoscale Device and Cir-

cuit Group, Multi-Project-Wafer (MPW) Center, Institute of Microelectronics,

School of Electronic Engineering and Computer Sciences (EECS), Peking

University, Beijing 100871, China (e-mail: jinhe@ime.pku.edu.cn).

M. Chan is with the Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering,

Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Kowloon, Hong Kong.

Color versions of Figs. 1, 2, and 7 are available online at http://ieeexplore.

ieee.org.

Digital Object Identier 10.1109/TED.2006.880364

voltages, but must be found empirically, approximately, or

numerically. For example, the MANSIM and HiSIM used the

NewtonRaphson to iteratively compute the surface potential

that forms the model framework. Most iteration methods,

however, require a special care in programming and coding

to achieve reasonable computation efciency and simulation

speed [4], [11], which are very critical in the circuit computer

aided-design (CAD) application. On the other hand, various an-

alytical approximations to the solution of the surface potential

problem have also been developed in parallel in the compact

modeling community to simplify the compact model structure.

The MOS-11 model from Phillips used several smooth func-

tions to link the different operation regions of the MOSFET

[5]. The recent PSP model not only uses smooth functions to

get the initial value of the surface potential but also adopts an

iterative-like second-order perturbation method to enhance the

accuracy of the initial [6]. The most important features of these

conventional analytic approximations are the following.

1) The noncomplete surface potential equation has to be

used to get the simple initial values [5], [6]. Such sim-

plication discarded many device physics, and its result

also does not match perfectly with that of the complete

surface potential equation [12].

2) Different smoothing functions have to be used in the

different MOSFET operation regions. For example, PSP

uses at least three smooth functions from the accumu-

lation region to the strong-inversion regions [13]. These

smoothing functions not only degrade the model compu-

tation efciency [14] but also result in high-error [4] and

nonphysics prediction under some forward-bias operation

[15]. Thus, an explicit analytic solution to the MOSFET

surface potential equation with the detail device physics

is highly preferable for the compact model development

and understanding of the detail device physics.

In contrast with the recent PSP model and the previous

MOS-11 model, a physics-based analytic solution to the

MOSFET surface potential from the accumulation to strong-

inversion region has been derived in this paper. The derivation

is based on the complete surface potential equation of the bulk

MOSFETs without replying on any smoothing functions or re-

gional separation of MOSFET operation regions. This analytic

solution has been widely tested and veried with numerical

methods for its correctness and accuracy in the surface potential

and transcapacitance predictions from the accumulation to the

0018-9383/$20.00 2006 IEEE

HE et al.: PHYSICS-BASED ANALYTIC SOLUTION TO THE MOSFET SURFACE POTENTIAL 2009

strong-inversion region. This explicit solution can be adopted

as a basis to understand the fundamental device physics of

advanced MOSFET surface potential model development.

II. DEVELOPMENT OF ANALYTIC SOLUTION OF THE

SURFACE POTENTIAL

In a bulk MOSFET with the p-type uniformly doped sub-

strate, the complete surface potential equation based on Pois-

sons equation solution can be derived from the rst principle

as was done in [16] if the body contact is treated as the zero

potential reference, and the hole quasi-Fermi potential is treated

as the zero quasi-Fermi potential reference. The expression is

given in (1), which is shown at the bottom of the page, where

V

FB

= atband voltage;

s

= surface potential;

t

= (kT/q). Thermal voltage;

f

=

t

ln[(N

a

/n

i

)]. Fermi potential;

n

= quasi-Fermi potential;

= ((t

ox

2q

si

N

a

)/

ox

). Bulk factor.

The sgn() is the signum function that returns 1 if the band

bending is above or at the atband region and 1 when the band

bending is below the atband region.

We would like to stress that (1) is continuous numerically

and correct physically in all MOSFET operation regions. It

produces correct surface potential derivatives with respect to

the gate voltage near and at the atband point for any quasi-

Fermi potential, as shown in the Section III. Thus, there is no

need to make articial modication and addition as in the PSP

model [13], and [17], [18].

To simplify derivation of the analytic surface potential so-

lution, we rst focus on the surface potential above or at the

atband. The surface potential solution of the accumulation

region will be derived using a similar method, which will

be described in the last part of this section. In this case, the

normalized form of (1) can be written as

GB

x

I

= G

_

x

I

+ e

x

I

1 + e

2x

f

x

n

[e

x

I

x

I

1]

(2)

GB

= (V

GB

V

FB

)/

t

. Normalized effective gate

voltage;

x

I

=

s

/

t

. Normalized surface potential above the

atband region;

x

f

=

f

/

t

. Normalized Fermi potential;

x

n

=

n

/

t

. Normalized quasi-Fermi potential;

G = /

t

. Normalized bulk factor.

Following a simple mathematical procedure to obtain the

solution of a quadratic equation, a solution of the sur-

face potential with implicit exponential terms in (2) can be

written as

x

I

=

_

GB

+

G

2

2

_

G

_

GB

+ G

2

/4

1 +

e

x

I

1

GB

+ G

2

/4

+

e

2x

f

x

n

[e

x

I

x

I

1]

GB

+ G

2

/4

. (3)

Please note that our derivation starts from the complete

surface potential equation (2) and includes all related terms

without any simplication. In contrast, MOS-11 and PSP

models have to make necessary simplications to obtain the

initial guess and further corrections. Thus, they used the non-

complete surface potential equation in their surface potential

calculation. Such a simplication may affect the accuracy and

continuity of the surface potential and its derivative calculation.

Moreover, we would like to note that the square-root argu-

ment of (3) is always positive above or at the atband point.

In the accumulation region, if we invert the surface potential

and the effective gate-voltage polarity for convenience in the

mathematical formulation, the square-root argument of (3) is

also always positive even in the accumulation region when (3)

is tested. Such a treatment ensures that the conditions for the

following mathematical transformation can be performed more

conveniently.

The Taylor expansion of the argument inside the second

square root in (3) with only rst-order terms allows (3) to be

rewritten as

x

I

=

_

GB

+

G

2

2

_

G

_

GB

+ G

2

/4

[e

x

I

1]f

A

[e

x

I

x

I

1]f

I

(4)

where f

A

= G/(2

_

GB

sgn() + G

2

/4) and f

I

=

f

A

e

2x

f

x

n

.

The signum function in f

A

makes f

A

also available in the ac-

cumulation region. In fact, f

A

= G/(2

_

GB

sgn() + G

2

/4)

will become f

A

= G/(2

_

GB

+ G

2

/4) above the atband

point, which also comes from the exact result of the Taylor

expansion of (3).

The validity of using the Taylor expansion to approximate

the argument inside the square-root term of (3) will be further

demonstrated in the next section from the surface potential

calculation. In fact, the second term of argument in the second

square root of (3) is always a small value (for example, it is

less than unity once above or at the atband point), thus the

Taylor-expansion condition is justied. The third term of the

argument in the second square root of (3) will become larger

than unity in the strong inversion region, although it is also

less than unity in other operation regions. In such a case, the

Taylor expansion is available in other operation regions besides

V

GB

V

FB

s

= sgn()

S

+

t

exp

_

t

_

t

+ exp

_

2

f

+

n

t

__

t

exp

_

t

_

t

_

(1)

2010 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ELECTRON DEVICES, VOL. 53, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2006

Fig. 1. Comparison of the surface potential calculation between the analytic

surface potential solution (16) and the numerical results for different quasi-

Fermi potential.

the strong inversion and results in some errors in the strong-

inversion region compared with the numerical simulation result.

The error in the strong-inversion region has an amplitude of a

few millivolts, as shown in Fig. 1. This result is good enough to

understand the general MOSFET device physics and predict the

device performance although it is not sufcient for the distor-

tion analysis and the transcapacitance prediction. Corrections

based on the same exact formulation in the inversion region and

accumulation will be further derived to enhance the accuracy of

the analytic solution coming from this Taylor expansion for the

compact model development.

One can nd from a simple observation of (4) that the

rst two terms in (4) are the exact solution of the normalized

surface potential of Poissons equation neglecting the mobile

concentration terms under the depletion approximation

x

D

=

_

GB

sgn() +

G

2

2

_

GB

sgn() + G

2

/4. (5)

Equation (5) matches well with the numerical solution of (1)

in the depletion region. Please note that the signum function

in (5) makes x

D

also available for the explicit solution of the

MOSFET surface potential in the accumulation region.

Substituting (5) into (4) results in

x

D

+ f

I

+ f

A

= [1 f

I

]x

I

+ f

I

e

x

I

+ f

A

e

x

I

. (6)

Since the hole term has only a little effect above the depletion

region, it can be accurately approximated by the depletion

surface potential. In this case, (6) is further simplied to be

x

D

+ f

I

+ f

A

(1 e

x

D

) = [1 f

I

]x

I

+ f

I

e

x

I

. (7)

Performing the identication transformation of (7) results in

x

D

+ f

I

+ f

A

(1 e

x

D

)

1 f

I

+ ln

_

f

I

1 f

I

_

= ln

_

f

I

1 f

I

e

x

I

_

+

f

I

1 f

I

e

x

I

. (8)

It is evident that (8) is a W-Lambert function with the

principal branch, which has the explicit analytic solution

f

I

e

x

I

(1 f

I

)

= W

0

_

f

I

1 f

I

e

x

D

+f

I

+f

A

(1e

x

D)

1f

I

_

(9)

where W

0

[x] is the notation of the principal-branch solu-

tion of the W-Lambert function that is widely available in

the mathematical packages and semiconductor device physics

[19][22]. As a result, the physics-based analytic solution of

the normalized surface potential is obtained in terms of the

W-Lambert function from (8) and (9)

I

=

x

D

+ f

I

+ f

A

(1 e

x

D

)

1 f

I

W

0

_

_

f

I

1 f

I

e

x

D

+f

I

+f

A

(1e

x

D)

1f

I

_

_

. (10)

Following a similar derivation, the analytic solution of the

surface potential in the accumulation region is also obtained

when the effective gate voltage is negative. In this case, the

surface potential solution is derived when we only need to

invert the effective gate voltage into the positive regime and

the exponential surface potential terms in (2) into the opposite

sign for the convenience in the mathematics. As a result, (2)

can also be used in the accumulation region, and an analytical

solution of the surface potential with implicit exponential terms

is written as

x

A

=

_

GB

sgn()+

G

2

2

_

G

_

GB

sgn()+G

2

/4

1+

e

x

A

1

GB

sgn()+G

2

/4

+

e

2x

f

x

n

[e

x

A

+x

A

1]

GB

sgn()+G

2

/4

(11)

where x

A

is the normalized absolute surface potential in the

accumulation region.

A Taylor expansion of the argument in the second square-

root term in (11) up to the rst-order terms in the accumulation

region simplies (11) and it becomes

x

D

+ f

I

+ f

A

= [1 f

I

]x

A

+ f

I

e

x

A

+ f

A

e

x

A

. (12)

Similarly, the electron-related term has a little effect in

the accumulation region, thus it is commonly neglected in

the conventional surface potential model. Here, we also use the

depletion approximation to handle it. As a result, we have

x

D

+ f

I

(1 e

x

D

) + f

A

= [1 f

I

]x

A

+ f

A

e

x

A

. (13a)

Identication transformation of (13a) results in

x

D

+ f

A

+ f

I

(1 e

x

D

)

1 f

I

+ ln

_

f

A

1 f

I

_

= ln

_

f

A

1 f

I

exp(x

A

)

_

+

f

A

1 f

I

exp(x

A

). (13b)

HE et al.: PHYSICS-BASED ANALYTIC SOLUTION TO THE MOSFET SURFACE POTENTIAL 2011

Equation (13) is another W-Lambert function with respect

to the normalized surface potential in the accumulation region.

Transforming (13b) into the standard W-Lambert function, we

obtain the exact analytical solution given as

f

A

e

x

A

(1 f

I

)

= W

0

_

f

A

1 f

I

e

x

D

+f

A

+f

I

(1e

x

D)

1f

I

_

. (14)

The explicit solution of the normalized surface potential

in the accumulation region is also expressed in terms of the

W-Lambert function by considering the nal sign of the surface

potential

A

= W

0

_

f

A

1 f

I

e

x

D

+f

A

+f

I

(1e

x

D)

1f

I

_

_

x

D

+ f

A

+ f

I

(1 e

x

D

)

1 f

I

_

. (15)

Finally, the complete analytic surface potential solution from

the accumulation region to the strong-inversion region is ob-

tained by (16), which is shown at the bottom of the page.

The surface potential predicted by (16) matches well with

the numerical solution in the depletion region while giving

some millivolt errors in the strong accumulation and strong-

inversion region due to the application of Taylor expansion of

the argument inside the second square-root term in (3) and (11),

as shown in Fig. 1. This result is good enough for understanding

the device physics and predicting the MOSFET performance,

although it is not sufcient for distortion analysis and tran-

scapacitance calculation. In order to improve the accuracy of

(16), corrections based on the same exact formulation in both

inversion region and accumulation region are used as described

in the Appendix. In such case, the complete solution of the

physics-based normalized surface potential with the precise in

the nanovolt range can be expressed as

s

=

_

I

+ [f

I

, f

I

,

2

f

I

]

+[a

I

, b

I

, c

I

] for V

GB

V

FB

0

A

+ [f

A

, f

A

,

2

f

A

]

+[a

A

, b

A

, c

A

] for V

GB

V

FB

0

(17)

where

=

f/f

1 0.5 f

2

f/f/f

(18)

with

f

I,A

=

_

gb

I,A

G

_

2

[

I,A

+ e

i,A

1]

+ e

x

n

2x

f

[e

i,A

I,A

1] (19)

f

I,A

=

_

e

i,A

2(

gb

I,A

)/G

2

_

e

x

n

2x

f

(e

I,A

1

) 1 (20)

2

f

I,A

=2/G

2

e

i,A

e

I,A

x

n

2x

f

(21)

and

=

c

sgn() +

b

a

(1b

2

/2a)c

asgn()+b

. (22)

Above atband, we have

a

I

=(

gb

I

I

)

2

G

2

(

I

+

I

1 + e

I

(

I

+

I

)e

x

n

2x

f

e

x

n

2x

f

) (23)

b

I

=2(

gb

I

I

)

G

2

(e

I

+ e

x

n

2x

f

1) (24)

c

I

= ln

_

a

I

/G

2

_

(

I

+

I

) + x

n

+ 2x

f

(25)

and below atband, we have

a

A

=(

gb

A

)

2

G

2

(

A

+

A

1 + e

A

+

A

x

n

2x

f

(

A

+

A

)e

x

n

2

f

e

x

n

2x

f

) (26)

b

A

=2(

gb

A

)

G

2

_

(

A

+

A

)e

x

n

2x

f

1

_

(27)

c

A

= ln

_

a

A

/G

2

_

+ (

A

+

A

). (28)

III. RESULT AND DISCUSSION

The surface potential and its derivatives in different operation

regions under various bias and different geometrical dimen-

sions can be predicted from the analytic solution in (17). The

comparison of the proposed analytic solution of the MOSFET

surface potential with the numerical result of (1) from the accu-

mulation, through the weak inversion, and nally to the strong-

inversion region is shown in Fig. 2. An excellent agreement

is achieved between the analytic solution and the numerical

results from the weak inversion to the strong accumulation

and the strong inversion over a wide range of the quasi-Fermi

potential.

The preciseness of the surface potential calculation is highly

desirable in the weak and moderate inversion regions where

the current expression of the charge-sheet model easily leads

to the numerical issue. The error analysis between the analytic

solution and the numerical results demonstrates that the analytic

s

=

_

I

= sgn()

_

x

D

+f

I

+f

I

(1e

x

D)

1f

I

W

0

_

f

I

1f

I

e

x

D

+f

I

x

D

+f

I

+f

I

(1e

x

D)

1f

I

__

for V

GB

V

FB

0

A

= sgn()

_

x

D

+f

A

+f

I

(1e

x

D)

1f

I

W

0

_

f

A

1f

I

e

x

D

+f

A

+f

I

(1e

x

D)

1f

I

__

for V

GB

V

FB

0

(16)

2012 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ELECTRON DEVICES, VOL. 53, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2006

Fig. 2. Comparison of the surface potential calculation between the analytic

surface potential solution (17) and the numerical results for different quasi-

Fermi potential.

Fig. 3. Error of the analytic surface potential solution (17) compared with the

numerical results.

solution is accurate enough in the whole MOSFET operation

regions, as shown in Fig. 3, where the error is in the nanovolt

range. Such a high precision is good enough for the compact

modeling development to avoid the numerical issue. Compared

with the recent PSP surface potential analytic approximation,

the new analytic solution does not have any need for the smooth

function and different region algorithms from the subthreshold

to the inversion regions. More importantly, the new analytic

solution is more stable and accurate than the PSP code that

may encounter the complex and breakpoint issues close to the

atband due to the numerical overow, as shown in Figs. 811.

A key issue in the MOSFET device physics and the surface

potential-based models is the continuity of the various charges.

Fig. 4 shows the predicted gate charge, inversion charge, and

bulk charge versus the gate voltage for a constant quasi-Fermi

potential. The numerical results are also plotted in these curves

for comparison. It is evident that all charges are not only smooth

and continuous in all MOSFET operation regions, but also

match the numerical results very well.

One important test of MOSFET surface potential solution is

the high-precision requirement to display the transcapacitance

characteristics. Fig. 5 shows the comparison of the values of

Fig. 4. Comparison of the gate charge, bulk charge, and the inversion-charge

calculations between the analytic surface potential solution method and the

numerical results.

Fig. 5. Comparison of the transcapacitances based on both analytic surface

potential solution (17) and numerical method for the different quasi-Fermi-

potential conditions.

the transcapacitance (e.g., C

gg

and C

bg

) between the analytic

solution and the numerical result. These results indicate that

the accuracy of the new analytic solution of the surface po-

tential and its partial derivative is satisfactory for the com-

pact modeling and general device-performance calculation. The

conventional surface potential approximations such as that used

in MOS-11 and SP may result in errors in the calculation of

the surface potential, and nonphysical results may be obtained

in predicting the surface potential derivatives for the forward

bulk bias conditions [4], [15]. These issues come from the fact

that MOS-11 and SP have to ignore the hole-related terms off

above the atband while neglecting the electron-related terms

below the atband. The use of the incomplete surface potential

equation to get the closed-form approximations gives rise to

these errors. This kind of simplication does not only degrade

the accuracy of the surface potential, but also results in the poor

prediction of the transcapacitances and the incorrect result for

the surface potential at the source and drain ends under forward

bias [4], [14], [15]. In contrast, the physics-based analytic

HE et al.: PHYSICS-BASED ANALYTIC SOLUTION TO THE MOSFET SURFACE POTENTIAL 2013

Fig. 6. Comparison of the surface potential calculations between the analytic

solution (17) and the numerical results for reverse and forward bulk bias

conditions.

Fig. 7. Surface potential derivative calculations based on the analytic solution

(17) for reverse and forward bulk bias conditions.

solution of the surface potential obtained in this paper results

in the correct surface potential and its derivatives, as shown in

Figs. 6 and 7.

One interesting result in this paper is that the analytic

solution predicts the correct surface potential and its derivative

scaling characteristic for the different substrate doping con-

centration, as shown in Figs. 811, respectively. For the zero

quasi-Fermi potential and atband voltage, the predicted sur-

face potential curve and the corresponding derivative for the

intrinsic body region show a perfect symmetry with respect

to the gate voltage as expected from the device physics. This

model behavior is very important for nonclassical CMOS de-

vices such as ultrathin body (UTB) and SOI modeling, where

the lightly doped or undoped body is used for the mobility

improvement and reduction of the uctuation of statistical

dopant distribution. We would like to point out that even the

latest PSP algorithm [13] cannot pass this test, and the surface

potential derivative shows some splits and peaks near the at-

band regions. Such a result of the PSP model comes from the

fact that the smoothing functions and the regional evaluation of

the surface potential are used in the PSP surface potential codes.

The results of the PSP model for the same conditions are also

shown in Figs. 10 and 11 for comparison.

Fig. 8. Surface potential scaling calculation based on the new analytic

solution (17) for different substrate doping concentrations.

Fig. 9. Scaling characteristic of the surface potential derivative with respect to

the gate voltage based on the new analytic solution (17) for different substrate

doping concentrations.

Fig. 10. Surface potential scaling calculation based on the latest PSP code for

different substrate doping concentrations.

IV. CONCLUSION

The physics-based analytic solution to the MOSFET sur-

face potential from the accumulation region to the strong-

inversion region has been derived in this paper, and its

accuracy has been widely veried from the surface potential,

charge, and transcapacitance calculation. The analytic solution

eliminates the need for the complex iterative computation and

tedious smooth-function-based analytical approximation of the

2014 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ELECTRON DEVICES, VOL. 53, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2006

Fig. 11. Scaling characteristic of the surface potential derivative with respect

to the gate voltage based on the PSP code for different substrate doping

concentrations.

MOSFET surface potential. This explicit solution is thus useful

for the understating of the MOSFET device physics and the

development of the next-generation advanced surface potential

model.

APPENDIX

A. Derivation of the Correction Function and

Its Related Coefcients [23]

In order to derive the correction function available in both

the accumulation and the inversion region, an identication

transformation has to be performed to (2), and the result is

given as

f =

_

GB

x

G

_

2

_

x + e

x

1 + e

2x

f

x

n

(e

x

x 1)

.

(A1)

Assuming that is the initial value of the normalized surface

potential, the Schroder series of (A1) results in the surface

potential expression

x=

f

f

2

f

2f

_

f

f

_

2

+

(3

2

f)

2

f

3

f

6(f)

2

_

f

f

_

3

.

(A2)

The rst- and second-order derivative terms in (A2) are

considered in order to simplify the nal correction function. In

such a case, (A2) is further simplied as

= x =

f

f

_

1 +

2

f

2f

f

f

_

(A3)

Since = x = f/f is the rst-order correction and

[1 + (

2

f/2f)(f/f)] is another correction over the rst-

order correction, it is evident that

_

1 +

2

f

2f

f

f

_

1. (A4)

Making use of (A4), a more accurate and more robust

correction is obtained from the approximated equivalent

variation of (A3)

=

f/f

1 0.5 f

2

f/f/f

. (A5)

The correction function is available in both inversion

region and accumulation region; the same coefcient formu-

lations, e.g., f, f, and

2

f can also be obtained from (A1) via

the initial value and the derivative rule. For example

f =

_

GB

G

_

2

_

+ e

1 + e

2x

f

x

n

(e

1)

(A6)

f =

_

e

2(

gb

)/G

2

e

x

n

2x

f

(e

1) 1 (A7)

2

f =2/G

2

e

e

x

n

2x

f

. (A8)

B. Derivation of the Correction Function and

Its Related Coefcients [23]

Equation (2) is transformed into the following form for the

correction-function derivation.

(

GB

x)

2

G

2

_

x + e

x

1 + e

2x

f

x

n

(e

x

x 1)

_

.

(B1)

Assuming that + is the initial value of the surface

potential and substituting this initial into (B1) by setting

x = + + . (B2)

Above or at the atband point, some symbols are used to

simplify the mathematical result and the electron contribution

term taking the logarithm-function form, we obtain

= c

I

+ ln

_

1

b

I

I

+

2

I

_

(B3)

where the symbol notations have the following expressions

a

I

=(

gb

)

2

G

2

( + 1 + e

( + )e

x

n

2x

f

e

x

n

2x

f

) (B4)

b

I

=2(

gb

)

G

2

(e

+ e

x

n

2x

f

1) (B5)

c

I

= ln

_

a

I

/G

2

_

( + ) + x

n

+ 2x

f

. (B6)

A Taylor expansion of (B3) up to the second-order terms

results in

= c

I

b

I

I

+

b

2

I

2

2a

2

I

+

2

I

. (B7)

HE et al.: PHYSICS-BASED ANALYTIC SOLUTION TO THE MOSFET SURFACE POTENTIAL 2015

From (B7), we get formulation solution with the implicit

terms

=

c

I

b

I

b

2

I

2a

2

I

+

I

+ 1

. (B8)

The in the implicit terms of (B8) is given by the rst-

order Taylor expansion of (B3)

=

c

I

b

I

I

+ 1

. (B9)

Thus, the closed-form expression of is nally obtained

=

c

I

b

I

a

I

(1b

2

I

/2a

I)c

I

a

I

+b

I

+ 1

. (B10)

Similarly, we can get the closed-form equation of the correc-

tion function beyond and at the atband point following the

same mathematical method. With some symbols being used to

simplify the mathematical result and the hole contribution term

in (B1) taking the logarithm-function form, we obtain

= c

A

+ ln

_

1

b

A

A

+

2

A

_

(B11)

where the symbol notations have the following expressions

a

A

=(

gb

A

)

2

G

2

(

A

+

A

1 + e

A

+

A

x

n

2x

f

(

A

+

A

)e

x

n

2

f

e

x

n

2x

f

) (B12)

b

A

=2(

gb

A

)

G

2

_

(

A

+

A

)e

x

n

2x

f

1

_

(B13)

c

A

= ln

_

a

A

/G

2

_

+ (

A

+

A

). (B14)

A Taylor expansion of (B11) up to the second-order terms

results in

= c

A

b

A

A

+

b

2

A

2

2a

2

A

+

2

A

. (B15)

From (B15), we get formulation solution with the implicit

terms

=

c

A

b

A

b

2

A

2a

2

A

+

A

1

. (B16)

The in the implicit terms of (B16) is given by the rst-

order expansion of (B11)

=

c

A

b

A

A

1

. (B17)

Thus, the closed-form expression of in the accumulation

region is nally obtained

=

c

A

b

A

a

A

(1b

2

A

/2a

A)c

A

a

A

+b

A

1

. (B18)

Since (B10) and (B18) have the exact function formulation

with only different signs and coefcients, we can use the unied

equation in both inversion and accumulation region for the

correction function

=

c

sgn() +

b

a

(1b

2

/2a)c

asgn()+b

(B19)

where the coefcients have different values above and below

the atband point, as shown in (B4) and (B5) and (B12B14).

REFERENCES

[1] A. R. Boothroyd, S. W. Tarasewicz, and C. Slaby, MISNANA

physically based continuous MOSFET model for CAD applications,

IEEE Trans. Comput.-Aided Des. Integr. Circuits Syst., vol. 10, no. 12,

pp. 15121529, Dec. 1991.

[2] M. Miura Mattausch, U. Feldmann, A. Rahm, M. Bollu, and

D. Savignac, Unied complete MOSFET model for analysis of digital

and analog circuits, IEEE Trans. Comput.-Aided Des. Integr. Circuits

Syst., vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 17, Jan. 1996.

[3] K. Joardar, K. K. Gullapalli, C. McAndrew, M. E. Burnham, and

A. Wild, An improved MOSFET model for circuit simulation, IEEE

Trans. Electron Devices, vol. 45, no. 1, pp. 134148, Jan. 1998.

[4] R. Rios, S. Mudanai, W.-K. Shih, and P. Packan, An efcient surface

potential algorithm for compact MOSFET models, in IEDM Tech. Dig.,

2004, pp. 755758.

[5] R. Van Langevelde and F. M. Klaassen, An explicit surface potential

based MOSFET model for circuit simulation, Solid State Electron.,

vol. 44, no. 3, pp. 409418, Mar. 2000.

[6] T. L. Chen and G. Gildenblat, Analytical approximation for the MOSFET

surface potential, Solid State Electron., vol. 45, no. 2, pp. 335339,

Feb. 2001.

[7] MOS-11. [Online]. Available: http://www.semiconductors.philips.com/

Philips_Models

[8] HISIM. [Online]. Available: http://www.starc.jp/kaihatu/pdgr/hisim/

index-e.html

[9] PSP Model. [Online]. Available: http://pspmodel.ee.psu.edu

[10] J. He, Y. Song, X. Niu, G. Zhang, X. Zhang, M. Chan, and Y. Wang,

Benchmark tests on conventional surface potential based charge-sheet

models and the advanced PUNSIM development, in Proc. Nanotech,

WCM, Boston, MA, May 2006, vol. 3, pp. 616621.

[11] J. R. Brews, A charge-sheet model of the MOSFET, Solid State

Electron., vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 345355, Feb. 1978.

[12] J. He, X. Zhang, G. Zhang, M. Chan, and Y. Wang, Benchmark tests

on surface potential based charge-sheet models, Solid State Electron.,

vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 263267, Feb. 2006.

[13] G. Gildenblat, T.-L. Chen, X. Gu, H. Wang, and X. Cai, SP: An advanced

surface potential-based compact MOSFET model, in Proc. IEEE CICC,

San Jose, CA, Sep. 2003, pp. 233240.

[14] I. Pesicin Commercial SPICE vendor perspectives on what makes a good

model, Nov. 20, 2005. SILVACO report, Silvaco, CA, CMC website of

Next Generation MOSFET Model Standard Phase-III Evaluation Results.

[Online]. Available: http://www.eigroup.org/CMC

[15] HISIM team, Important Features of HISM and Comparison With PSP,

Nov. 10, 2005. HISIM team report, Hiroshima, JP, CMC website of

Next Generation MOSFET Model Standard Phase-III Evaluation Results.

[Online]. Available: http://www.eigroup.org/CMC

[16] J. He, X. Zhang, and Y. Wang, Comments on Modeling MOSFET

surface capacitance behavior under non-equilibrium, Solid State Elec-

tron., vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 259262, Feb. 2006.

[17] C. C. McAndrew and J. J. Victory, Accuracy of approximations in

MOSFET charge models, IEEE Trans. Electron Devices, vol. 49, no. 1,

pp. 7281, Jan. 2002.

[18] W. Wu, T. L. Chen, G. Gildenblat, and C. C. McAndrew, Physics based

mathematical conditioning of the MOSFET surface potential equation,

IEEE Trans. Electron Devices, vol. 49, no. 7, pp. 11961199, Jan. 2004.

[19] R. M. Corless, G. H. Gonnet, D. E. Hare, D. J. Je.rey, and

D. E. Knuth, On the Lambert W function, Adv. Comput. Math., vol. 5,

no. 1, pp. 329359, Dec. 1996.

[20] A. Ortiz-Conde, F. J. Garca-Snchez, and S. Malobabic, Analytic solu-

tion of the channel potential in undoped symmetric dual-gate MOSFETs,

IEEE Trans. Electron Devices, vol. 52, no. 7, pp. 16691672, Jul. 2005.

2016 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ELECTRON DEVICES, VOL. 53, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2006

[21] T. C. Banwell, Bipolar transistor circuit analysis using the Lambert

W-function, IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. I, Fundam. Theory Appl., vol. 47,

no. 12, pp. 16211633, Dec. 2000.

[22] C. Banwell and A. Jayakurmar, Exact analytical solution for current

ow through diode with series resistance, Electron. Lett., vol. 36, no. 4,

pp. 291292, Feb. 2000.

[23] J. He, Y. Song, X. Zhang, M. Chan, and Y. Wang, PUNSIM Documents-2:

The Analytic Calculation of the Surface Potential in the PUNSIM Model.

Beijing, China: Electron. Eng. Comput. Sci., Peking Univ. (internal

document, to be provided by the requirement).

Jin He (M04) received the B.S. degree from Tianjin

University, Tianjin, China, in 1988, and the M.S.

and Ph.D. degrees from the University of Electron

Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, in 1993

and 1999, respectively.

From 1999 to 2001, he worked as a Postdoctoral

and an Associate Professor with the Institute of Mi-

croelectronics, Peking University, China. From 2001

to 2005, he worked with the University of California,

Berkeley, as a Visiting Scholar and Research Engi-

neer in the Department of Electrical Engineering and

Computer Sciences (EECS). He was a main contributor to BSIM4.3.0, which is

an international industrial standard MOSFET model. He independently devel-

oped the core model for BSIM5, which is the next-generation BSIM MOSFET

compact model for mixed-signal application, including the hydrodynamic and

quasi-ballistic transport mechanisms. In August, he came back to the Institute

of Microelectronics, EECS, Peking University as a Full Professor and started

up the Nanoscale and Terahertz Device and Circuit Group. He is the most

main contributor and developer of Peking University Nano-Scale IGFET Model

(PUNSIM), which is an advanced surface potential-based compact MOSFET

model for the 6532-nm-technology very large scale integration (VLSI) circuit

simulation. He has published more than 120 technical papers in international

journals and conferences and coauthored three books.

Mansun Chan (S92M95SM01) received the

B.S. degree (highest honors) in electrical engineering

and the B.S. degree (highest honors) in computer

science from University of California at San Diego,

La Jolla, in 1990 and 1991, respectively, and the M.S.

and Ph.D. degrees from the University of California

at Berkeley, in 1994 and 1995, respectively.

During his undergraduate study, he was with

Rockwell International Laboratory, working on

heterojunction bipolar transistor (HBT) modeling,

where he developed the self-heating Simulation Pro-

gram with Integrated Circuits Emphasis (SPICE) model for HBTs. His research

at Berkeley covered a broad area in silicon devices ranging from process

development to device design, characterization, and modeling. A major part of

his work was on the development of record-breaking silicon-on-insulator (SOI)

technologies. He has also maintained a strong interest in device modeling and

circuit simulation. He is one of the major contributors to the unied BSIM

model for SPICE, which has been accepted by most U.S. companies and

the Compact Model Council (CMC) as the rst industrial standard MOSFET

model. In January 1996, he joined the Electrical and Electronics Engineering

(EEE) Faculty at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology,

Kowloon, Hong Kong. Between July 2001 and December 2002, he was a

Visiting Professor at the University of California at Berkeley and the Codirector

of the BSIM program. He is still currently consulting on the development of

next-generation compact models. His research interests include nanodevice

technologies, image sensors, SOI technologies, high-performance IC, three-

dimensional (3-D) circuit technology, device modeling, and Nano biological

microelectromechanical systems (BIOMEMS) technology.

Dr. Chan was the recipient of the UC Regents Fellowship, the Golden Keys

Scholarship for Academic Excellence, the SRC Inventor Recognition Award,

a Rockwell Research Fellowship, the R&D 100 Award (for the BSIM3v3

project), the Teaching Excellence Appreciation Award in 1999, and the Dis-

tinguished Teaching Award in 2004, among others.

Xing Zhang (M95) was born in Shandong, China,

in 1965. He received the B.S. degree in physics from

Nanjing University, Nanjing, China, in 1986, and

the M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in microelectronics from

Shaanxi Microelectronics Institute, Xian, China, in

1989 and 1993, respectively.

He is a Professor with the Institute of Mi-

croelectronics, Peking University, Beijing, China.

His research elds include novel electron devices,

device physics, SOI technology, CMOS process,

and application-specied-integrated-circuit (ASIC)

design. He has authored or coauthored 3 books and more than 200 papers.

Yangyuan Wang (SM87F01) was born in

Zhejiang, China, in 1935. He received the degree

from Peking University, Beijing, China, in 1958.

Currently, he is an Academician with the Chinese

Academy of Science, Professor, and Director of the

Institute of Microelectronics, Peking University. He

is currently engaged in the investigation of the new

processes, new devices, and new structure of VLSI.

He conducted several research projects such as the

oxidation kinetics of polysilicon lm in VLSI/ULSI,

the device modeling and simulation of SOI/CMOS,

and the reliability of thin-oxide lm in deep submicrodevices and ICs. He has

published 7 books and more than 230 papers and is the holder of 9 invention

patents.

- 06329920Diunggah olehSudhakar Spartan
- Ultra-Low Power VLSI CircuitDiunggah olehRockstar_rohith
- Principles Of Semiconductor Devices.pdfDiunggah olehRamKumar
- Procedure for Wafer-Level DCDiunggah olehMirna
- ohthesis7Diunggah olehRoshdy AbdelRassoul
- Unit - 1Diunggah olehShalini Jadala
- 2011 ECS TransactionsDiunggah olehShruti Mehrotra
- Lecture24 MOS TransistorsDiunggah olehVenky Karusala
- Sub Threshold DesignDiunggah olehRavinder Kumar
- Pelgrom_Matching_prop.pdfDiunggah olehSajeendran Saji B S
- Chapter 3Diunggah olehAhmad Shdifat
- BS170Diunggah olehAndres
- MOS TransistorDiunggah olehsiva
- Digital VLSI Design - Lecture 2Diunggah olehgobinath
- HRF3205 100A, 55V, 0.008 Ohm, N-Channel, PowerDiunggah olehZxdIaminxXzlovewithzxXzyouzx
- VL Notes.pdfDiunggah olehJan
- Lec_22Diunggah olehRavi Raj
- Mos Device Eq NsDiunggah olehtechiealyy
- 06 TCAD Laboratory MOSFET GBB FinalAA13-14Diunggah olehvishalwins
- Lecture 7aDiunggah olehBernard Mkumbwa Jr.
- Reliability Design of Source/Drain Adaptive Layers in an HV Power nLDMOSDiunggah olehSEP-Publisher
- FetDiunggah olehTanvi Sethia
- Transistor EsDiunggah olehAlex Satuquinga
- Farchild semicondutoresDiunggah olehOtávioBalbino
- MIP0226Diunggah olehperaja12
- innoswitch-ep_family_datasheet.pdfDiunggah olehanand shekhawat
- My Lec MOSFET All f MineDiunggah olehArun Jaga
- Datasheet 2SK3797 Mosfet Fuente Proyector Viewsonic PJD5123Diunggah olehRubén Nicanor Sandoval Bascuñan
- MosfetDiunggah olehSukandar Tea
- 002072099102800410Diunggah olehEnzo Karol Velásquez

- JCB 802.7super MINI EXCAVATOR Service Repair Manual SN（747211 Onwards）.pdfDiunggah olehfjksemfmmd
- Boose1989, A Survey of Knowledge Acquisition Techniques and ToolsDiunggah olehOluwafemi Shawn Ogunseye
- Vice President Marketing Communications in New York City Resume Andrew KritzerDiunggah olehAndrewKritzer
- ActiveXperts_SMS_MessagingServer_manual.pdfDiunggah olehYamie Rezpector
- 6Diunggah olehChakradhar Bezawada
- BS en 196-3, 1995-Cement Setting Time and SoundnessDiunggah olehcemsavant
- Sap Solman TutorialDiunggah olehAshish Agarwal
- Vinay 3+JAVA ResumeDiunggah olehKasi Nagarjuna
- 11. Energy harvesting from a vehicle suspension system.pdfDiunggah olehChela Rodriguez
- Part 14 Chapter04Diunggah olehPradeep Shiva
- CV Jayaram MRDiunggah olehJayaramRamanarayanan
- BCRK-CSR100vDiunggah olehmof199
- GATE 2011 - Graduate Aptitude Test in EngineeringDiunggah olehSurekha Athikesavan
- Blow MouldingDiunggah olehXubair Wajid
- Hanson Railroad CrossingDiunggah olehdjprasad
- Electron TransistorsDiunggah oleh4gen_7
- De-Dev - Michigan7 2014Diunggah olehJohnBoals
- omjDiunggah olehChow Khee Yew
- BK500_final Assy MEIDiunggah olehKiran Veesam
- Lo960ServiceDiunggah olehkayoken
- Class of 2004 10 Year InvitationDiunggah olehfafdsaf
- Elbow Joint DislocationDiunggah olehstefanVas
- pwc-10minutes-update-coso-committee-sponsoring-organizations-treadway-commission.pdfDiunggah olehWesley Charlotte
- 1410-7471-1-PBDiunggah olehGisella Cuello
- CIO DashboardDiunggah olehRamesh Radhakrishnaraja
- Descripción de señales MID 128.pdfDiunggah olehDavid Fierro
- 13_1946Diunggah olehSoubhagya Kumar Sahoo
- 26476271-Riveted-Joints.pptDiunggah olehSk.Abdul Naveed
- reflective essayDiunggah olehapi-407084549
- Manual Da Agenda Casio SF-4900ERDiunggah olehPaulo de Camargo