{"id":"ee4f2813-cffa-4d48-b698-b14482c5b998","arxiv_id":"2608.12214","paper_version":1,"verdict":"CONDITIONAL","confidence":"MODERATE","novelty_score":6.0,"correctness_risk":"medium","formal_verification":"none","parameter_count":6,"one_line_summary":"A model of a 1.6 nm silicon nanosheet transistor finds that phonon boundary conditions swing the predicted mobility between 160 and 1060 cm2/Vs, with the realistic clamped case giving 200 to 360 cm2/Vs when remote phonons are included.","lead":"Scientists simulated electron flow in a 1.6 nm-thick silicon transistor channel and found that the way phonon vibrations are trapped by the surrounding insulators changes the predicted electron mobility by more than a factor of six. They also found that adding hafnium oxide gate insulators barely hurts transistor speed and can even help at high voltages.","discovery_kind":"new_application","skeptic_critique":{"model":"deepseek-v4-flash","headline":"The m-independent penetration depth z0 in Sec. III.B may shift the headline mobility: exact roots of Eq. (20) vary between 49% and 91% of the adopted value, and Table III shows mobility changes by ~6.6x across boundary-condition choices.","rationale":"The reader identified the elastic-continuum confinement model and the m-independent z0 approximation as the weakest assumption; I agree and sharpen it. What must be true for the abstract's central claim is that the specific choice of clamped boundaries at the SiO2/HfO2 interfaces and the approximate penetration depth z0 ~ t1(c_Si/c_SiO2)^2 gives quantitatively reliable mobility and velocity values. The paper itself supplies the evidence that this is the least secure link: Table III shows a 6.6x spread between FSBC and CBC@Si/SiO2, and Sec. III.B states the exact z0 roots deviate from the adopted value by up to a factor of ~2. Since z0 enters the mode spacing, branch count, and normalization of the electron-phonon matrix elements, the computed scattering rates and the resulting 260/360/200 cm2/Vs mobilities are not pinned down. The proposed check is inexpensive and internal: solve Eq. (20) exactly for each m instead of using the asymptotic value, and compare Table III. I do not see a reason to move the verdict: the qualitative conclusions (phonon confinement lowers mobility relative to the bulk elastic approximation, IPP scattering slightly reduces mobility but increases saturation velocity, primed-subband transfer explains low saturation velocity) are supported by the calculations and by experimental context cited in Sec. VI, so the paper remains acceptable as a conditional theoretical study. The lack of code/data and the absence of direct validation of the confinement model are already reflected in the CONDITIONAL verdict.","tokens_in":35824,"tokens_out":6005,"duration_ms":52021,"concrete_test":"Recompute the Table III rows for CBC@SiO2/HfO2 (unscreened, screened, and with IPPs) using z0(m) obtained as the smallest root of Eq. (20) separately for each branch index m (dilatational and flexural sound velocities), with all other parameters unchanged. If the resulting mobilities and saturated velocities stay within 10% of 260, 360, and 200 cm2/Vs and of the corresponding velocities, the approximation is harmless; if they shift by more than ~30%, the headline numbers and the comparison to the bulk-phonon value of 700 cm2/Vs need to be re-reported with an uncertainty band.","verdict_should_be":"UNCHANGED","load_bearing_attack":"The central quantitative claim (abstract, Sec. VI) is that clamping acoustic phonons at the SiO2/HfO2 interfaces gives 260 cm2/Vs unscreened and 360 cm2/Vs screened, versus 700 cm2/Vs for bulk elastic phonons. Within the authors' own elastic-continuum model, the load-bearing input is the penetration depth z0: it sets the quantized wave vectors q_z,m = mπ/(t_s + 2z0), the number of acoustic branches (~16), and the normalization N_m in Eqs. (21)-(23). In Sec. III.B the authors replace the branch-dependent smallest root of Eq. (20) by the single asymptotic value t1(c_Si/c_SiO2)^2 (2.5t1 dilatational, 3.1t1 flexural), while stating that actual roots for m=1..16 lie between 49% and 91% of that value. Because the low-field mobility is extremely sensitive to the confinement model (160 cm2/Vs for FSBC vs 1060 cm2/Vs for CBC@Si/SiO2, a factor of ~6.6), a factor of ~2 error in z0 can plausibly move the headline 260/360/200 cm2/Vs values by tens of percent. The physical choice of clamped BCs at SiO2/HfO2 is argued from elasticity tables, but the m-independent replacement is an internal, testable approximation, and the abstract's comparison to the bulk value depends on it. No code or data is provided to check this numerically.","agreement_with_reader":"agree"},"referee_report":{"model":"deepseek-v4-flash","summary":"The paper reports a full-band Monte Carlo study of low-field mobility and high-field drift velocity in a 1.6 nm-thick double-gated (100) Si nanosheet with SiO2/HfO2 gate stacks. The electron band structure is obtained from local empirical pseudopotentials, confined acoustic phonons are described by an elastic continuum model under three boundary-condition choices, and interface plasmon-phonon (IPP) scattering is treated in the dielectric continuum limit. The central quantitative claims are that the realistic assumption of acoustic phonons clamped at the SiO2/HfO2 interfaces yields a room-temperature phonon-limited mobility of about 260 cm2/Vs (360 cm2/Vs with static dielectric screening and about 200 cm2/Vs with IPP scattering), much lower than the 700 cm2/Vs obtained with bulk phonons in the elastic high-temperature approximation; that the saturation velocity is reduced below the bulk value because electrons transfer into the flat primed subbands; and that IPP scattering, while lowering the low-field mobility, increases the saturation velocity.","tokens_in":36200,"tokens_out":3898,"duration_ms":37031,"significance":"If the quantitative results are robust, the paper provides a plausible explanation for the long-standing observation of reduced saturation velocity in Si inversion layers and a careful account of remote-phonon effects in extremely scaled nanosheet transistors. The strengths include the use of full-band pseudo-potential electronic structure, explicit treatment of the hybridization of 2DEG plasmons with insulator optical phonons, selection rules for IPP scattering, and a comparison with available experimental data for ultra-thin Si films. However, the headline mobility and velocity numbers rest on an approximate elastic-continuum phonon-confinement model whose key parameter, the penetration depth z0, is replaced by a single m-independent value while the manuscript itself states that the exact roots of Eq. (20) vary between 49% and 91% of that value. Since Table III shows that the mobility changes by a factor of about 6.6 across boundary-condition choices, the central numerical claims are not yet anchored without a sensitivity analysis. No code or tabulated data are provided to make the numerical results independently checkable.","major_comments":[{"comment":"The m-independent replacement z0 ≈ t1(c_Si/c_SiO2)^2 is load-bearing for the headline mobility values. The text states that the smallest roots of Eq. (20) for m = 1..16 lie between 49% and 91% of this adopted value, and Eqs. (21)-(23) as well as the number of acoustic branches (~16) depend directly on z0. Because Table III shows that the mobility varies from 160 to 1060 cm2/Vs depending on the boundary-condition choice, a factor-of-two uncertainty in z0 can plausibly shift the central 260/360/200 cm2/Vs numbers by tens of percent. Please recompute the low-field mobility and saturation velocity using the exact branch-dependent roots of Eq. (20), or at least provide a sensitivity study over the stated 0.49-0.91 range, and report how the conclusions change.","section":"Sec. III.B, Eq. (20)"},{"comment":"The comparison between the 'realistic' CBC@SiO2/HfO2 results and the bulk-phonon value of 700 cm2/Vs conflates two separate approximations: the choice of phonon boundary conditions and the static-screening approximation. The manuscript acknowledges in Sec. IV that static screening is expected to give an upper bound for the mobility, but no uncertainty estimate is attached to the quoted 260/360/200 cm2/Vs values. Because the physical choice of clamped boundary conditions at SiO2/HfO2 is argued from elasticity tables rather than validated against experiment or atomistic simulation for this specific 1.6 nm geometry, the quantitative strength of the claim that the realistic mobility is 'much smaller' than the bulk value needs to be demonstrated by showing the range of mobility obtained when the elastic parameters in Table I and the screening model are varied within their accepted uncertainties.","section":"Sec. VI, Table III"},{"comment":"The normalization constant Nm in Eqs. (21) and (22) is approximated by the m-independent form in Eq. (23) in the same spirit as the z0 approximation. This approximation enters directly into the deformation-potential matrix element of Eq. (25), and its accuracy is not separately checked. Since the claimed reduction of the electron-phonon coupling relies on the increased effective mass density of the Si/SiO2 sandwich, a quantitative check of Eq. (23) against the full expression in Eq. (22) for the relevant m values should be reported.","section":"Sec. III.B, Eqs. (21)-(23)"}],"minor_comments":[{"comment":"There are numerous typographical errors that should be corrected, e.g., 'fogr' after Eq. (23), 'SO2' instead of 'SiO2' in Sec. III.B and in the Fig. 10 caption, 'cmn/s' in Sec. VII, and 'A pgpl' in Ref. [63].","section":"Throughout"},{"comment":"The phrase 'a high-kappainsulator' in the discussion of Table III is missing a space and should read 'a high-kappa insulator'.","section":"Sec. VI"},{"comment":"The saturated-velocity values are given as '≳5.6' and '≳8.9' in Table III, but the text quotes specific values (5.5×10^6 and 8.9×10^6 cm/s). Please make the reporting consistent and clarify whether the tabulated entries are lower bounds or converged Monte Carlo estimates.","section":"Sec. VI, Fig. 11 and Table III"},{"comment":"The static-screening correction in Eq. (33) is acknowledged to be an approximation, but the direction of the error is stated only qualitatively as 'presumably obtaining a lower bound for the scattering rates.' It would be helpful to state explicitly whether the screened form factor is always ≤1 for the matrix elements used, because the Monte Carlo implementation relies on this inequality.","section":"Sec. IV, Eq. (32)"},{"comment":"The statement that the results for the saturated velocity are 'the first to predict' the lower experimental values would be easier to evaluate if the paper briefly explained why the earlier effective-mass-based Monte Carlo studies cited in Refs. [84]-[88] failed to capture the primed-subband effect, given that the primed-subband dispersion was already known in that literature.","section":"Conclusions"}],"recommendation":"major_revision","confidential_remarks":"The paper is within scope for cond-mat.mes-hall and contains a substantial calculation, but the central quantitative claims depend strongly on the approximate phonon-confinement model in Sec. III.B. The authors' own text acknowledges that the key z0 parameter varies by roughly a factor of two across branches, and Table III shows the mobility is extremely sensitive to the boundary-condition choice. I would ask for a sensitivity analysis before accepting the numbers; with that added, the paper could be a valuable contribution. The citation pattern is appropriate and there is no evidence of circular fitting of parameters to the predicted mobilities."},"author_rebuttal":null,"desk_editor":{"model":"deepseek-v4-flash","letter":"The thing worth knowing about this paper is that it gives a physically plausible mechanism for the long-standing discrepancy between measured saturation velocities (5–6.5e6 cm/s) and earlier theoretical predictions near 1e7 cm/s in Si inversion layers and nanosheets. That mechanism—transfer into flat, fourfold-degenerate primed subbands at high field—comes out of a full-band Monte Carlo calculation with empirical pseudopotentials, and it is not present in the cited theoretical literature. The paper also treats remote-phonon (IPP) scattering in the full SiO2/HfO2 double-gate stack, including dynamic screening and Landau damping, and finds the effect on mobility is modest because the SiO2 interlayer and metal gates screen the high-k contribution. That is a useful, credible result for device people.\n\nCredit where due: the calculation is internally consistent, the equations in Sections III–V support the reported trends, and the authors are refreshingly candid about the sensitivity of their mobility to boundary conditions. They do not fit any free parameter to the predicted mobility or velocity; material parameters are imported from the bulk literature. The comparison with experimental mobility values is honest—they note they cannot draw exact quantitative conclusions because of extrinsic scattering.\n\nThe soft spot is real and the stress-test note gets it right: the headline mobility numbers (260–360 cm2/Vs) are set not by the electron-phonon formalism but by the elastic-continuum phonon confinement model, specifically the boundary conditions and the m-independent penetration depth z0 replacing the actual roots of Eq. (20). The paper states those roots vary between 49% and 91% of the adopted value, and Table III shows a factor of ~6.6 spread across boundary-condition choices. That means the quantitative values should be treated with caution. The qualitative ordering—bulk > clamped-at-outer-interface > free-standing—is probably right, and the saturation-velocity explanation does not depend strongly on z0, since it follows from subband structure and occupation. But the mobility numbers could shift by tens of percent under a better-justified choice of z0.\n\nThe lack of code or data is a minor annoyance, not a fatal flaw. The citation pattern is fine: the authors build on their own earlier work, but the central claim is not circular.\n\nThis paper deserves a serious referee. I would send it to review, and the main request to the authors should be validation or at least a sensitivity study of the phonon boundary-condition model—ideally against atomistic simulations—and, if possible, release of the simulation code. The saturation-velocity result is important enough that it should not be buried by uncertainty in the mobility numbers.","headline":"A careful full-band Monte Carlo study whose main qualitative result—low saturation velocity from transfer into flat primed subbands—is likely right, while the quantitative mobility numbers depend on an approximate phonon boundary-condition model that needs independent validation.","tokens_in":723,"tokens_out":877,"would_cite":true,"duration_ms":21469,"reading_group":"yes","serious_thinker":"yes","would_accept_peer_review":true},"rs_alignment":null,"lean_confirmation":null,"pith_extraction":{"msc":[],"pacs":[],"model":"deepseek-v4-flash","headline":"For a 1.6 nm double-gated (100) silicon nanosheet, phonon confinement and interface plasmon-phonon scattering set the room-temperature mobility near 200–360 cm²/Vs and can lower the saturation velocity below bulk silicon.","keywords":["phonon confinement","electron mobility","silicon nanosheet","remote phonon scattering","interface plasmon-phonon modes","saturation velocity","full-band Monte Carlo","high-k gate dielectrics"],"falsifier":"Measure the low-field electron mobility of a 1.6 nm double-gated (100) Si nanosheet with the exact 0.6 nm SiO₂/1.2 nm HfO₂ stack; a value well above $360\\ \\mathrm{cm^2/Vs}$ would show that the clamped outer-interface model over-suppresses phonon scattering. A complementary atomistic calculation of the phonon dispersions and electron-phonon couplings for the same stack would settle whether the elastic-continuum clamping picture is quantitatively correct.","tokens_in":35636,"feed_emoji":"⚡","tokens_out":11859,"duration_ms":92690,"temperature":0.7,"pith_summary":"Electrons in today's nanoscale transistors move through silicon sheets only a few atoms thick, and this work asks which scattering processes actually limit their speed. For a 1.6 nm double-gated (100) silicon nanosheet with SiO₂/HfO₂ gate stacks, the authors argue that phonons themselves are confined by the surrounding insulators, and that the way they are pinned at material interfaces matters more than any other modeling choice. With acoustic phonons clamped at the SiO₂/HfO₂ interfaces and optical phonons at the Si/SiO₂ interfaces, the computed room-temperature phonon-limited mobility is about $260\\ \\mathrm{cm^2/Vs}$ ($360\\ \\mathrm{cm^2/Vs}$ with dielectric screening), well below the $700\\ \\mathrm{cm^2/Vs}$ obtained from the usual bulk-phonon, elastic high-temperature approximation. Interface plasmon-phonon scattering lowers the low-field mobility further, to about $200\\ \\mathrm{cm^2/Vs}$, but raises the saturated drift velocity above $2\\times10^7\\ \\mathrm{cm/s}$. The paper also predicts a saturation velocity below bulk silicon in the absence of such scattering, and explains it by high-field transfer into flat primed subbands; if correct, these results mean high-κ gate stacks need not degrade nanosheet transistors, but phonon confinement must be included in transport models.","feed_headline":"Phonon confinement drops 1.6 nm silicon mobility to 260 cm2/Vs","feed_subtitle":"Realistic phonon clamping gives 260 cm2/Vs, far below the 700 cm2/Vs bulk estimate.","key_machinery":"The load-bearing object is the elastic-continuum model of confined acoustic phonons, with branch-specific quantized transverse wave vectors $q_{z,m}=m\\pi/(t_s+2z_0)$, where $t_s$ is the sheet thickness and $z_0$ is an effective penetration depth of the vibration into the SiO₂ layers, fixed by stress continuity at the interfaces. The electron-phonon coupling is carried by shape functions $G_m(z)$ derived from the divergence of the ionic displacement field; different boundary conditions — free-standing, clamped at Si/SiO₂, clamped at SiO₂/HfO₂ — change these shape functions and the number and zero-point energy of the acoustic branches. The second mechanism is the dielectric-continuum treatment of interface plasmon-phonon modes, where a secular equation yields symmetric and antisymmetric hybrid-mode dispersions and the scattering potential is quantized by equating the time-averaged field energy to the oscillator ground-state energy. A full-band empirical-pseudopotential band structure and a Monte Carlo transport solver complete the machinery, so the flat primed-subband dispersion that controls the saturation velocity is resolved directly rather than through an effective-mass approximation.","core_discovery":"The central claim is that phonon confinement, not just electron confinement, controls transport in a 1.6 nm silicon nanosheet. Depending on how the confined acoustic phonons are pinned, the room-temperature mobility ranges from about $160\\ \\mathrm{cm^2/Vs}$ (free-standing boundary conditions at the Si/SiO₂ interfaces) to about $1060\\ \\mathrm{cm^2/Vs}$ (clamped at the Si/SiO₂ interfaces). The physically motivated choice — acoustic phonons clamped at the stiff outer SiO₂/HfO₂ interfaces, optical phonons clamped at the Si/SiO₂ interfaces — gives $260\\ \\mathrm{cm^2/Vs}$ unscreened and $360\\ \\mathrm{cm^2/Vs}$ with dielectric screening, instead of the $700\\ \\mathrm{cm^2/Vs}$ of the bulk-phonon elastic approximation. Scattering with interface hybrid plasmon-phonon modes reduces the low-field mobility to about $200\\ \\mathrm{cm^2/Vs}$ at $1.15\\times10^{13}\\ \\mathrm{cm^{-2}}$ sheet density, yet because these inelastic small-angle collisions keep electrons cool, the saturated drift velocity reaches above $2\\times10^7\\ \\mathrm{cm/s}$. Without those modes, the saturation velocity is $5.5\\times10^6\\ \\mathrm{cm/s}$ ($8.9\\times10^6\\ \\mathrm{cm/s}$ screened), below the bulk value, because electrons transfer at high field into the flat fourfold-degenerate primed subband ladder — an explanation the authors present for previously measured but unexplained low inversion-layer saturation velocities.","pith_inferences":["Relaxing the mode-independent penetration-depth approximation — letting $z_0$ vary per branch or per polarization — could shift the relative weights of dilatational versus flexural scattering and is a testable refinement of the model.","An atomistic phonon calculation for the same SiO₂/HfO₂ stack would test the clamping assumption; if interfacial stiffness is softer than assumed, the mobility could move toward the upper part of the 160–1060 cm²/Vs bracket.","The predicted high-field benefit of IPP scattering suggests short-channel transistors, where transport is more streaming-like, could show a larger relative velocity boost than the long-channel mobility alone indicates.","Since the model predicts weak mobility dependence on electron density, a density sweep in a 1.6 nm double-gate device could separate intrinsic phonon-limited behavior from extrinsic interface-roughness and charge-defect scattering."],"forward_implications":["For the 1.6 nm double-gated stack, the phonon-limited room-temperature mobility is predicted to be about $260\\ \\mathrm{cm^2/Vs}$ unscreened and $360\\ \\mathrm{cm^2/Vs}$ with dielectric screening, not the $\\sim 700\\ \\mathrm{cm^2/Vs}$ bulk-phonon value.","The high-field saturation velocity is below the bulk value ($\\sim 5.5\\times10^6\\ \\mathrm{cm/s}$ unscreened, $\\sim 8.9\\times10^6\\ \\mathrm{cm/s}$ screened) because electrons transfer into the flat primed subbands; this supplies a theoretical explanation for old inversion-layer measurements.","Interface plasmon-phonon scattering lowers the low-field mobility to about $200\\ \\mathrm{cm^2/Vs}$ but raises the saturated velocity above $2\\times10^7\\ \\mathrm{cm/s}$, so high-κ gate stacks need not degrade nanosheet transistors.","The mobility depends only weakly on electron density and gate bias in these ultra-thin sheets, because the external potential barely perturbs the band structure even at $10^{13}\\ \\mathrm{cm^{-2}}$ sheet density."],"supporting_citations":[{"why":"Supplies the elastic-continuum confined-acoustic-phonon framework and the free-standing/clamped boundary-condition comparison that this paper extends.","marker":"[27]"},{"why":"Shows phonon confinement into the SiO₂ layers with clamped boundary conditions at the SiO₂/HfO₂ interfaces, the model adopted for the realistic case.","marker":"[28]"},{"why":"Provides the folded-dispersion elastic-continuum electron-phonon coupling formalism and shape functions reused here.","marker":"[30]"},{"why":"Supplies the Si phonon dispersion parameters (zone-edge energies) used in the confined-phonon model.","marker":"[43]"},{"why":"Provides the dielectric-continuum IPP scattering formalism with screened Green's functions that this paper adapts to the double-gate stack.","marker":"[13]"},{"why":"Supplies the remote-phonon/IPP scattering treatment for Si/high-κ systems that motivates the IPP calculation.","marker":"[19]"},{"why":"Gives the double-gate thin-Si Monte Carlo mobility calculation with bulk phonons and weak density dependence, the comparison point for the 700 cm²/Vs bulk estimate.","marker":"[63]"},{"why":"Reports the experimental 1.5 nm nanosheet transistor used as the device-motivation and approximate mobility reference.","marker":"[4]"},{"why":"Provides measured mobility in sub-1 nm SOI films used to argue the computed mobility is in the correct range.","marker":"[78]"}],"fun_headline_variants":["Phonon clamping drops Si nanosheet mobility to 260 cm2/Vs","Remote phonons cool electrons, boost Si saturation velocity","Phonon boundary choice swings 1.6 nm Si mobility 160-1060","Clamped phonons, not bulk, set 1.6 nm Si transport","1.6 nm Si mobility pinned by phonon clamping at 260"],"cache_read_input_tokens":3200,"weakest_assumption_plain":"The quantitative headline rests on the assumption that acoustic vibrations are pinned at the outer SiO₂/HfO₂ interfaces and can be described by a single approximate penetration depth for every branch; if the true interface condition is different, the computed mobility shifts between about $160\\ \\mathrm{cm^2/Vs}$ and $1060\\ \\mathrm{cm^2/Vs}$.","fun_headline_variants_meta":{"raw":{"variants":["Phonon clamping drops Si nanosheet mobility to 260 cm2/Vs","Remote phonons cool electrons, boost Si saturation velocity","Phonon boundary choice swings 1.6 nm Si mobility 160-1060","Clamped phonons, not bulk, set 1.6 nm Si transport","1.6 nm Si mobility pinned by phonon clamping at 260"]},"model":"deepseek-v4-flash","effort":"low","cost_usd":0.000735,"raw_usage":{"total_tokens":3423,"prompt_tokens":1221,"completion_tokens":2202,"prompt_tokens_details":{"cached_tokens":384},"prompt_cache_hit_tokens":384,"prompt_cache_miss_tokens":837,"completion_tokens_details":{"reasoning_tokens":2102}},"tokens_in":837,"tokens_out":2202,"duration_ms":15262,"temperature":1.0,"reasoning_tokens":2102,"cache_read_input_tokens":384,"cache_creation_input_tokens":0},"cache_creation_input_tokens":0},"created_at":"2026-08-16T00:12:24.373952+00:00","model_set":{"reader":"deepseek-v4-flash"},"falsifier":"Measure the low-field electron mobility of a 1.6 nm double-gated (100) Si nanosheet with the exact 0.6 nm SiO₂/1.2 nm HfO₂ stack; a value well above $360\\ \\mathrm{cm^2/Vs}$ would show that the clamped outer-interface model over-suppresses phonon scattering. A complementary atomistic calculation of the phonon dispersions and electron-phonon couplings for the same stack would settle whether the elastic-continuum clamping picture is quantitatively correct.","supporting_citations":[{"cited_title":"Donetti, F","cited_arxiv_id":null,"evidence_quote":"Supplies the elastic-continuum confined-acoustic-phonon framework and the free-standing/clamped boundary-condition comparison that this paper extends."},{"cited_title":"Donetti, F","cited_arxiv_id":null,"evidence_quote":"Shows phonon confinement into the SiO₂ layers with clamped boundary conditions at the SiO₂/HfO₂ interfaces, the model adopted for the realistic case."},{"cited_title":null,"cited_arxiv_id":null,"evidence_quote":"Provides the folded-dispersion elastic-continuum electron-phonon coupling formalism and shape functions reused here."},{"cited_title":"Neogi and D","cited_arxiv_id":null,"evidence_quote":"Supplies the Si phonon dispersion parameters (zone-edge energies) used in the confined-phonon model."},{"cited_title":null,"cited_arxiv_id":null,"evidence_quote":"Supplies the remote-phonon/IPP scattering treatment for Si/high-κ systems that motivates the IPP calculation."},{"cited_title":"G` amiz and M","cited_arxiv_id":null,"evidence_quote":"Gives the double-gate thin-Si Monte Carlo mobility calculation with bulk phonons and weak density dependence, the comparison point for the 700 cm²/Vs bulk estimate."},{"cited_title":"Schmidt, M","cited_arxiv_id":null,"evidence_quote":"Provides measured mobility in sub-1 nm SOI films used to argue the computed mobility is in the correct range."}],"review_version":1}