Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 7 minor 37 references

TCAD Cryogenic Model Parameters Calibration based on 65 nm NMOS Experimental Data

T0 review · 3 major / 7 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A single set of TCAD parameters, plus a temperature-dependent saturation velocity, reproduces measured currents in a 65 nm nMOSFET from 292 K down to 4.5 K.

desk verdict Useful cryogenic TCAD calibration workflow for 65 nm NMOS, with a plausible fit but a portability claim that outruns the evidence. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.12692 v1 pith:6KC6GBOF submitted 2026-08-13 physics.comp-ph

Wesley Xi , Vikram Magendar , Alhaji A Sharka , Hiu Yung Wong This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.comp-ph
keywords band-tailstatescryogenicCMOSTCADcalibration65nmnMOSFETsubthresholdswingsaturationmobilitymodelvelocityquantumcorrection
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper reports a technology computer-aided design (TCAD) calibration for a foundry 65 nm nMOSFET measured at 292 K, 77 K, and 4.5 K, using transmission electron microscopy to fix the real device structure. It claims that one consistent parameter set fits the measured capacitance-voltage, drain current-gate voltage, and drain current-drain voltage curves in both the subthreshold and on-state regimes at all three temperatures. The central result is that existing TCAD models, with adjusted parameters, are sufficient down to 4.5 K; the only explicitly temperature-dependent addition is the saturation velocity. The work matters because cryogenic CMOS is a candidate platform for quantum-computer control electronics and other low-temperature systems, and a transferable calibration workflow means device behavior can be predicted without building new physics into the simulator.

What carries the argument

The machinery has three load-bearing parts. First, the Lucent mobility model, a composite of an extended PhuMob bulk mobility model, the Lombardi surface mobility model, and the Hänsch high-field saturation model, governs the current; the parameters $A$, $C$, and $k$ are tuned against the measured curves. Second, a Gaussian band-tail density of states, Eq. (3), is added to the conduction-band electron density, and its single fitted width $\sigma=0.004$ eV produces the temperature-independent subthreshold swing at 4.5 K. Third, a density-gradient quantum correction and a tanh saturation-velocity law carry the quantum-confinement and high-field effects, with the velocity law being the only explicitly temperature-dependent addition.

What would settle it

Fabricate or select two 65 nm nMOSFETs with the same channel doping and dimensions but different gate-oxide or interface quality, then measure subthreshold swing at 4.5 K and fit each with the same band-tail width $\sigma=0.004$ eV. If the same width fits both, band-tail states are sufficient; if subthreshold swing tracks the interface-trap density, the band-tail assignment is absorbing trap physics.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that the cryogenic behavior of a 65 nm nMOSFET can be captured by adjusting parameters in existing TCAD models rather than by adding new model forms. With a composite mobility picture combining the Lucent model (extended PhuMob, Lombardi surface mobility, and Hänsch high-field saturation), a Gaussian band-tail density of states, and a density-gradient quantum correction, the simulator fits the measured curves at 292 K, 77 K, and 4.5 K using a single parameter set. The only new temperature-dependent element is the saturation velocity, written as $v_{sat}=v_0\tanh(T_c/T)$ with $v_0=1.74\times10^7$ m/s and $T_c=332$ K. The fitted band-tail width $\sigma=0.004$ eV is what produces the saturation of subthreshold swing at low temperature. The paper presents this as evidence that the standard TCAD model library is adequate for cryogenic simulation, provided the calibration follows the documented strategy.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the flattened sub-threshold swing at cryogenic temperature comes from a spread of extra energy states near the band edge, not from defects at the oxide-silicon interface; if the defects are the real cause, the fitted width merely absorbs that physics and the conclusion may not transfer to other devices.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The calibrated setup should transfer to other technologies, because the TCAD models themselves are not technology-specific; only structural and doping parameters need re-fitting.
  • No new temperature-dependent mobility physics is required down to 4.5 K: the existing temperature dependencies, with adjusted constants, suffice.
  • The calibration recipe, start at 292 K, ramp the simulator down to the target temperature, and solve the on-state before the off-state, can be reused for other transistor types.
  • Subthreshold swing saturation at low temperature can be represented by a single band-tail width parameter, giving a practical stand-in for whatever microscopic physics produces it.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Editorial inference: the fitted acoustic-phonon exponent $k=0.01$ is far below the usual value near 1.7, suggesting the low-temperature current in this device is not limited by acoustic phonon scattering; a direct mobility-versus-temperature measurement below 77 K could test that.
  • Editorial inference: if the band-tail mechanism is transferable, the same $\sigma=0.004$ eV can serve as a starting guess for other 65 nm-class devices, with significant deviations flagging interface-trap-dominated parts.
  • Editorial inference: the tanh saturation-velocity law has a crossover temperature $T_c=332$ K, so measuring saturation velocity at intermediate temperatures would show whether the law is a physical model or merely an effective fit.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 7 minor

Summary. This paper reports a TCAD calibration study for 65 nm nMOSFETs at cryogenic temperatures. The authors fabricated a large-area nMOSFET for CV and a minimum-size nMOSFET for IV, measured CV at 300 K and IDVG/IDVD at 292 K, 77 K, and 4.5 K, and used TEM to define the device geometry. They then calibrated a Sentaurus TCAD stack, including the Lucent mobility model, density-gradient quantum correction, band-tail states, and a temperature-dependent saturation velocity, to simultaneously fit CV, sub-threshold, and on-state IV curves. The main claims are that a single parameter set fits all measured temperatures and that, apart from saturation velocity, no new temperature-dependent models are required.

Significance. If the fitting results are taken at face value, the paper provides a useful cryogenic TCAD calibration workflow and a concrete parameter set for 65 nm nMOSFETs, with detailed fitting strategies and convergence tricks that are likely transferable to other technology nodes. The use of TEM to constrain device geometry and the comparison of fitted parameters to literature values are strengths. However, the physical attribution of the cryogenic sub-threshold swing to band-tail states is not uniquely identified, and the portability claims extend beyond the single-device evidence. The paper is a solid engineering contribution, but its central conclusions are more conditional than the abstract suggests.

major comments (3)
  1. [VI, Figs. 6–8; Section VIII] The central claim that the simulation curves 'match closely' is supported only by visual comparison; no quantitative error metric (e.g., RMS or relative error in ID, SS error per temperature, or capacitance error) is reported. Because several parameters (C, v_sat, k, σ) are adjusted to fit these same curves, the absence of residuals makes it impossible to assess whether the deviations are within experimental uncertainty, and it weakens the conclusion in Section VIII that a single parameter set fits the data 'well.' Please add numeric error metrics and, if feasible, a validation subset (e.g., one temperature or one bias condition held out of the fit).
  2. [IV, Eq. (3); VI, step 2; VII-A] The attribution of the cryogenic SS saturation to a Gaussian band-tail with σ = 0.004 eV is not uniquely determined. Section IV itself notes that interface traps at the insulator/silicon interface could also model the same SS saturation, and the CV measurements are taken only at 300 K, so no cryogenic capacitance or conductance data constrain the trap contribution. Since only σ is reported as adjusted and N_t in Eq. (3) is not listed as a fitted parameter, the band-tail width effectively absorbs any interface-trap physics; the conclusion that no new temperature-dependent model is needed is therefore conditional on this attribution. A concrete test would be to compare cryogenic CV or multi-frequency conductance measurements against the band-tail model, or to validate the σ value on a device with a known different interface-trap density.
  3. [Abstract; Section VIII; Table IV] The abstract and conclusions claim that the calibrated parameters are 'expected to be applicable to other technologies' because TCAD models are not technology-specific, but this extrapolates far beyond the evidence: only one large-area device for CV and one minimum-length device for IV were measured, and no second device or technology was used for validation. Many fitted quantities (e.g., Lombardi parameters A, C, k, the stress magnitude, and the doping profiles in Tables II and IV) are process- and geometry-dependent by the paper's own discussion. The transferable claim should be restricted to the calibration workflow and the qualitative finding about the temperature dependence of saturation velocity, unless additional validation data are provided.
minor comments (7)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states that CV, IDVG, and IDVD curves are fitted 'well' without specifying that CV is at 300 K only; specify the temperatures in the abstract or at first mention.
  2. [III] The TEM gate length is reported as 39 nm, while the device is described as W/L = 120 nm/60 nm; clarify whether 39 nm is the physical gate length or the effective electrical length after processing.
  3. [VI, Eq. (13) and Table IV] The saturation velocity expression uses Tc in Eq. (13), but Table IV and the text use 'TC'; unify the notation.
  4. [VII-A] The definition of SS as 'the voltage difference between current at 5×10-9 A and 5×10-8 A' is ambiguous about the gate-voltage range over one decade; state explicitly that this is the mV/decade extracted from the IDVG curve in that current window.
  5. [IV, Eq. (3)] In the sentence following Eq. (5), 'The total election density' contains a typo ('election' should be 'electron').
  6. [Table IV] The asterisk footnote in Table IV is not defined in the caption; indicate which values are simulator defaults and which are from the literature.
  7. [V, Fig. 5] Fig. 5 shows doping profiles at various cut locations, but the cut locations are not marked in Fig. 3; adding a reference to the cut lines would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the paper is an explicit calibration exercise and does not present fitted quantities as predictions.

full rationale

The paper's stated goal is calibration: TCAD model parameters are adjusted to reproduce measured CV, IDVG, and IDVD curves from 292 K down to 4.5 K. The conclusion that a single parameter set fits the data is the outcome of the fitting procedure, not a derivation from an input. Table III maps each fitted parameter to its target: sigma to sub-threshold swing, C to ION at 292 K, vsat to saturation current, and k to ION at 77 K and 4.5 K. The text explicitly says sigma is 'changed' and 'found to match' the SS, and the mobility parameters are adjusted to 'get a good fit', so parameters are not renamed as predictions. The claim that no new temperature-dependent model is needed, apart from saturation velocity, is a model-adequacy statement based on successful fitting with existing model forms plus Eq. (13); it is not a circular reduction because the fitted parameters are genuinely free parameters of the chosen models. The band-tail versus interface-trap ambiguity is acknowledged by the authors ('It might also be modeled by including band-edge traps'), making it a physical-attribution risk and a portability concern, but not a self-definitional loop. Self-citations to prior group papers are contextual and not load-bearing: they support fitting strategies and background, not the derivation itself. No uniqueness theorem is imported, and no equation is defined in terms of the result it is used to predict. The paper is therefore a transparent calibration study with no significant circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 18 free parameters · 8 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central fit is enabled by roughly a dozen fitted or hand-set numeric parameters plus several structural assumptions. The paper is honest about most of them, but the portability claim and the band-tail SS mechanism depend on assumptions that are not independently tested.

free parameters (18)
  • t_ins = 2.16 nm
    Gate insulator thickness adjusted to fit maximum capacitance in CV fitting (Table II).
  • epsilon_ins = 5.36
    Insulator dielectric constant adjusted to fit Cmax with oxynitride EOT of 1.57 nm (Table II).
  • n_peak1 = 1.2e18 cm^-3
    Substrate Gaussian doping peak adjusted to fit threshold voltage in CV fitting (Table II).
  • x_depth1 = 50 nm
    Substrate Gaussian doping depth adjusted to fit minimum capacitance (Table II).
  • n_peak2 = 1.6e18 cm^-3
    Second Gaussian (halo) doping peak adjusted to fit short-channel threshold voltage (Table IV).
  • x_peak2 = 50 nm
    Position of the halo Gaussian, set in Section VI to fit VTH and DIBL.
  • x_depth2 = 550 nm
    Depth of the halo Gaussian, set in Section VI to fit VTH and DIBL.
  • X_j_LDD = 15 nm
    LDD junction depth adjusted to fit DIBL (Table IV).
  • sigma = 0.004 eV
    Band-tail width in Eq. (3), adjusted to match sub-threshold swing at all temperatures (Table IV).
  • C = 5.3e3 cm^(5/3) V^(-2/3) s^-1
    Acoustic phonon scattering coefficient in Eq. (9), fitted to low-field on-current (Table IV).
  • k = 0.01
    Temperature exponent in Eq. (9), fitted to 77 K and 4.5 K currents (Table IV).
  • A = 2.0
    Surface roughness base term in Eq. (12), fitted to IDVG curvature in the on-state (Table IV).
  • v0 = 1.74e7 m/s
    Saturation velocity prefactor in Eq. (13), fitted to high-field saturation current (Table IV).
  • Tc = 332 K
    Saturation velocity temperature constant in Eq. (13), fitted to current at all temperatures (Table IV).
  • N_t (band-tail DOS integral) = not reported
    Integrated band-tail DOS in Eq. (3) is needed to set subthreshold current level; no fitted value or default is stated.
  • epsilon0 (band-tail peak position) = not reported
    Band-tail peak position in Eq. (3); not reported, likely a simulator default.
  • stress magnitude = 1 GPa
    Stress is set to 1 GPa by hand for IV simulations; it is not measured or varied (Section IV).
  • gamma (density gradient fit factor) = not reported
    Fit factor in Eq. (7); no final value is given, presumably a simulator default.
assumptions (8)
  • domain assumption Fermi-Dirac statistics and the default Bennett-Wilson bandgap narrowing model with Sentaurus temperature-dependent parameters remain valid at 4.5 K.
    Invoked in Section IV through Eq. (2) and the statement that default temperature-dependent parameters are used.
  • domain assumption A 2D simulation with terminal current and charge scaled by width captures the measured 3D transistor behavior.
    Stated in Section IV for both transistors; standard TCAD practice but unverified against a full 3D simulation.
  • domain assumption TEM-derived dimensions (gate length 39 nm, oxide thickness 2.1 to 2.3 nm, spacer widths) represent the actual measured devices.
    TEM measurements in Section III are used directly to construct the simulation structure.
  • ad hoc to paper A Gaussian band-tail DOS, Eq. (3), is the correct physical origin of sub-threshold swing saturation, rather than interface traps.
    Section IV chooses band-tail states over the competing interface-trap explanation; sigma is then fitted to the same SS data it explains.
  • ad hoc to paper A uniform 1 GPa stress with a deformation potential model approximates the real process-induced stress in the 65 nm device.
    Section IV sets stress to 1 GPa with no measured stress data or sensitivity analysis.
  • domain assumption Dopants are fully ionized in the inversion and depletion regions, so the incomplete ionization model can be disabled.
    Section IV states incomplete ionization is not turned on; this is reasonable due to high doping and full ionization in relevant regions, but not directly verified.
  • ad hoc to paper The substrate doping can be represented by a constant background plus one or two Gaussian profiles.
    Section V and VI define the doping as Gaussian profiles; this is a simplification of the real implanted profile.
  • domain assumption TCAD model parameters are not technology-specific, so the calibrated parameter set can transfer to other technologies.
    Stated in the Abstract and Introduction as the basis for the expected portability claim, but never tested on another technology.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of TCAD Cryogenic Model Parameters Calibration based on 65 nm NMOS Experimental Data." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/6KC6GBOF

@misc{pith2026260812692,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: TCAD Cryogenic Model Parameters Calibration based on 65 nm NMOS Experimental Data},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/6KC6GBOF}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.12692}
}
read the original abstract

In this paper, 65 nm n-type Metal-Oxide-Semiconductor Field-Effect-Transistors (nMOSFETs) are taped out and measured at 292 K to 4.5 K. Technology Computer-Aided-Design (TCAD) model parameters are then calibrated to fit the simulation curves to experimental electrical curves. Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) is used to unveil the dimensions of the transistors to ensure accurate modeling. The experimental and simulation capacitance-voltage (CV) curves, drain current - gate voltage (IDVG) curves, and drain current - drain voltage (IDVD) curves are fitted well using the calibrated parameters. The major models calibrated are the Lucent model, which is comprised of an extended PhuMob model, Lombardi model for surface mobility, and the H\"ansch high field mobility model. A band-tail model with adjusted band width is applied to fit the sub-threshold swings at all temperatures. The calibrated parameters are expected to be applicable to other technologies because TCAD models are not technology-specific. It is also found that, except for saturation velocity, no new temperature-dependent model is needed. The calibration process and fitting strategies are detailed and are expected to be applicable to calibrate other transistor types.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.12692 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The measured CV curve (A) at 300 K and IDVG curves (B) at various temperatures at VD = 1 V and VD = 0.05 V [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. shows the structure created in TCAD Sentaurus Structure Editor. IV. PHYSICS MODEL SELECTIONS We first summarize and discuss the TCAD models necessary to model 65 nm devices from 300 K to 4.5 K. This follows from the fitting process, which will be presented in the following sections. Readers may go directly to the following sections if they are only interested in the fitting results. General Models: We first use the … view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. The comparison of IDVD simulation and the experiments at various temperatures. From top to bottom, VG = 1.0, 0.8, 0.6, 0.4, 0.2, 0.0 V [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_8.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

37 extracted references · 25 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Cryo -CMOS Circuits and Systems for Quantum Computing Applications,

    B. Patra et al., “Cryo -CMOS Circuits and Systems for Quantum Computing Applications,” IEEE Journal of Solid -State Circuits, vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 309– 321, Jan. 2018, doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/jssc.2017.2737549

    arXiv 2018

  2. [2]

    Self-blinking Dyes unlock High-order and Multi-plane Super-resolution Optical Fluctuation Imaging

    R. L. Patterson, A. Hammoud, J. E. Dickman, S. Gerber, M. Elbuluk and E. Overton, "Electronics for Deep Space Cryogenic Applications," Proceedings of the 5th European Workshop on Low Temperature Electronics, Grenoble, France, 2002, pp. 207 -210, doi: 10.1109/WOLTE.2002.1022482

    work page Pith review arXiv 2002

  3. [3]

    Cryogenic computer architecture modeling with memory -side case studies,

    G. Lee, D. Min, I. Byu n, and J. Kim, “Cryogenic computer architecture modeling with memory -side case studies,” Proceedings of the 46th International Symposium on Computer Architecture, pp. 774 –787, Jun. 2019, doi: https://doi.org/10.1145/3307650.3322219

    arXiv 2019

  4. [4]

    Cryogenic MOS Transistor Model,

    A. Beckers, F. Jazaeri and C. Enz, "Cryogenic MOS Transistor Model," in IEEE Transactions on Electron Devices, vol. 65, no. 9, pp. 3617-3625, Sept. 2018, doi: 10.1109/TED.2018.2854701

    arXiv 2018

  5. [5]

    Deep -Cryogenic Voltage References in 40 -nm CMOS,

    H. Homulle, F. Sebastiano and E. Charbon, "Deep -Cryogenic Voltage References in 40 -nm CMOS," IEEE Solid -State Circuits Letters, vol. 1, no. 5, pp. 110-113, May 2018, doi: 10.1109/LSSC.2018.2875821

    arXiv 2018

  6. [6]

    TCAD as an Integral Part of the Semiconductor Manufacturing Environment,

    R. Minixhofer, "TCAD as an Integral Part of the Semiconductor Manufacturing Environment," 2006 International Conference on Simulation of Semiconductor Processes and Devices, Monterey, CA, 2006, pp. 9-16, doi: 10.1109/SISPAD.2006.282827

    work page arXiv 2006

  7. [7]

    MOS device modeling at 77 K,

    S. Selberherr, "MOS device modeling at 77 K," in IEEE Transactions on Electron Devices, vol. 36, no. 8, pp. 1464- 1474, Aug. 1989, doi: 10.1109/16.30960

    work page doi:10.1109/16.30960 1989

  8. [8]

    Simulation of Silicon Nanodevices at Cryogenic Temperatures for Quantum Computing,

    F. A. Mohiyaddin, F. G. Curtis, M. N. Ericson and T. S. Humble, "Simulation of Silicon Nanodevices at Cryogenic Temperatures for Quantum Computing," Proceedings of the 2017 COMSOL Conference in Boston

    work page 2017

Show all 37 references
  1. [9]

    Calibrated Si Mobility and Incomplete Ionizatio n Models with Field Dependent Ionization Energy for Cryogenic Simulations,

    H. Y. Wong, "Calibrated Si Mobility and Incomplete Ionizatio n Models with Field Dependent Ionization Energy for Cryogenic Simulations," 2020 International Conference on Simulation of Semiconductor Processes and Devices (SISPAD), Kobe, Japan, 2020, pp. 193 -196, doi: 10.23919/...

    2020

  2. [10]

    Cryogenic Electron Mobility and Sub-threshold Slope of Oxygen- Inserted (OI) Si Channel nMOSFETs,

    H. Y. Wong, H. Takeuchi and R. J. Mears, "Cryogenic Electron Mobility and Sub-threshold Slope of Oxygen- Inserted (OI) Si Channel nMOSFETs," 2023 International Conference on Simulation of Semiconductor Processes and Devices (SISPAD), Kobe, Japan, 2023, pp. 229-232, doi: 10.239...

    2023

  3. [11]

    Electron and Hole Surface Roughness Scattering - Limited Mobilities in Oxygen-Inserted (OI) Si Channel,

    V. Magendar et al., “Electron and Hole Surface Roughness Scattering - Limited Mobilities in Oxygen-Inserted (OI) Si Channel," J. Appl. Phys. 139, 125705 (2026). https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0316691

    2026 doi

  4. [12]

    A Wide Temperature Range Unified Undoped Bulk Silicon Electron and Hole Mobility Model,

    Prabjot Dhillon and Hiu Yung Wong, "A Wide Temperature Range Unified Undoped Bulk Silicon Electron and Hole Mobility Model," in IEEE Transactions on Electron Devices, doi: 10.1109/TED.2022.3152471. (2022)

    2022

  5. [13]

    Physics, Compact Modeling and TCAD of SiGe HBT for Wide Temperature Range Operation,

    L. Luo, "Physics, Compact Modeling and TCAD of SiGe HBT for Wide Temperature Range Operation," Ph.D. dissertation, ECE, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, 2011

    2011

  6. [14]

    Revised Theoretical Limit of Sub - threshold Swing in Field-effect Transistors,

    A. Beckers, F. Jazaeri and C. Enz, "Revised Theoretical Limit of Sub - threshold Swing in Field-effect Transistors," arXiv:1811.09146, 2019

    2019 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Theoretical Limit of Low Temperature Sub-threshold Swing in Field -Effect Transistors,

    A. Beckers, F. Jazaeri and C. Enz, "Theoretical Limit of Low Temperature Sub-threshold Swing in Field -Effect Transistors," in IEEE Electron Device Letters, vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 276- 279, Feb. 2020, doi: 10.1109/LED.2019.2963379. TABLE IV IV FITTING PARAMETER VALUES Equation It...

    2020

  8. [16]

    Study of Cryogenic MOSFET Sub -Threshold Swing Using Ab Initio Calculation,

    Tom Jiao et al., "Study of Cryogenic MOSFET Sub -Threshold Swing Using Ab Initio Calculation," in IEEE Electron Device Letters, vol. 44, no. 10, pp. 1604-1607, Oct. 2023, doi: 10.1109/LED.2023.3310511

    2023

  9. [17]

    Characterization and modeling of 28- nm bulk cmos technology down to 4.2 k,

    A. Beckers, F. Jazaeri, and C. Enz, “Characterization and modeling of 28- nm bulk cmos technology down to 4.2 k,” IEEE Journal of the Electron Devices Society 6, 1007–1018 (2018)

    2018

  10. [18]

    TCAD Modeling of Cryogenic nMOSFET ON- State Current and Sub-threshold Slope,

    P. Dhillon, N. C. Dao, P. H. W. Leong and H. Y. Wong, "TCAD Modeling of Cryogenic nMOSFET ON- State Current and Sub-threshold Slope," 2021 International Conference on Simulation of Semiconductor Processes and Devices (SISPAD), Dallas, TX, USA, 2021, pp. 255 -258, doi: 10.1109/...

    2021

  11. [19]

    Ro bust Cryogenic Ab- initio Quantum Transport Simulation for LG=10nm Nanowire,

    Tom Jiao et al., "Ro bust Cryogenic Ab- initio Quantum Transport Simulation for LG=10nm Nanowire," Solid -State Electronics, Volume 197, 2022, 108440, doi.org/10.1016/j.sse.2022.108440

    2022

  12. [20]

    Cryogenic Behaviors of 65nm Transistor: On- State IV and Parameters,

    P. S. Huang, S. Shah, A. A. Sharka, G. Kengni, Y. Masuoka and H. Y. Wong, "Cryogenic Behaviors of 65nm Transistor: On- State IV and Parameters," 2024 IEEE Workshop on Microelectronics and Electron Devices (WMED), Boise, ID, USA, 2024, pp. 1 -4, doi: 10.1109/WMED61554.2024.10534143

    2024

  13. [21]

    Sentaurus™ Device User Guide Version W-2024.09-SP1, Sept. 2024

    2024

  14. [22]

    Statistical comparisons of data on bandgap narrowing in heavily doped silicon: Electrical and optical measurements,

    H. S. Bennett and C. L. Wilson, “Statistical comparisons of data on bandgap narrowing in heavily doped silicon: Electrical and optical measurements,” Journal of Applied Physics, vol. 55, no. 10, pp. 3582– 3587, 1984

    1984

  15. [23]

    Statistical Cryogenic Characterization of Commercial 14nm FinFETs for Analog Applications,

    W. Xi, H. Wong, L. Minh, L. Nguyen, and V. Magendar, “Statistical Cryogenic Characterization of Commercial 14nm FinFETs for Analog Applications,” 2026 10th IEEE Electron Devices Technology & Manufacturing Conference (EDTM), Mar. 2026

    2026

  16. [24]

    Thomas -Fermi Approach to Impure Semiconductor Band Structure,

    E. O. Kane, “Thomas -Fermi Approach to Impure Semiconductor Band Structure,” Physical Review, vol. 131, no. 1, pp. 79–88, 1963

    1963

  17. [25]

    Macroscopic physics of the silicon inversion layer,

    M. G. Ancona and H. F. Tiersten, “Macroscopic physics of the silicon inversion layer,” Physical Review B, vol. 35, no. 15, pp. 7959 –7965, 1987

    1987

  18. [26]

    Quantum correction to the equation of state of an electron gas in a semiconductor,

    M. G. Ancona and G. J. Iafrate, “Quantum correction to the equation of state of an electron gas in a semiconductor,” Physical Review B, vol. 39, no. 13, pp. 9536–9540, 1989

    1989

  19. [27]

    An Improved Electron and Hole Mobility Model for General Purpose Device Simulation,

    M. N. Darwish et al., “An Improved Electron and Hole Mobility Model for General Purpose Device Simulation,” IEEE Transactions on Electron Devices, vol. 44, no. 9, pp. 1529–1538, 1997

    1997

  20. [28]

    A Unified Mobility Model for Device Simulation — I. Model Equations and Concentration Dependence,

    D. B. M. Klaassen, “A Unified Mobility Model for Device Simulation — I. Model Equations and Concentration Dependence,” Solid -State Electronics, vol. 35, no. 7, pp. 953–959, 1992

    1992

  21. [29]

    A Physically Based Mobility Model for Numerical Simulation of Nonplanar Devices,

    C. Lombardi et al., “A Physically Based Mobility Model for Numerical Simulation of Nonplanar Devices,” IEEE Transactions on Computer - Aided Design, vol. 7, no. 11, pp. 1164–1171, 1988

    1988

  22. [30]

    The hot-electron problem in small semiconductor devices,

    W. Hänsch and M. Miura-Mattausch, “The hot-electron problem in small semiconductor devices,” Journal of Applied Physics, vol. 60, no. 2, pp. 650–656, 1986

    1986

  23. [31]

    TCAD Simulation Models, Parameters, and Methodologies for beta -Ga2O3 Power Devices,

    Hiu Yung Wong, "TCAD Simulation Models, Parameters, and Methodologies for beta -Ga2O3 Power Devices," ECS Journal of Solid State Science and Technology, 12 055002, 2023. DOI 10.1149/2162- 8777/accfbe

    2023 doi

  24. [32]

    Modeling of carrier mobility against carrier concentration in arsenic-, phosphorus-, and boron-doped silicon,

    G. Masetti, M. Severi and S. Solmi, "Modeling of carrier mobility against carrier concentration in arsenic-, phosphorus-, and boron-doped silicon," in IEEE Transactions on Electron Devices, vol. 30, no. 7, pp. 764- 769, July 1983, doi: 10.1109/T-ED.1983.21207

    1983

  25. [33]

    Electron and Hole Drift Velocity Measurements in Silicon and Their Empirical Relation to Electric Field and Temperature,

    C. Canali et al., “Electron and Hole Drift Velocity Measurements in Silicon and Their Empirical Relation to Electric Field and Temperature,” IEEE Transactions on Electron Devices, vol. ED -22, no. 11, pp. 1045– 1047, 1975

    1975

  26. [34]

    Scattering mechanism and low temperature mobility of MOS inversion layers,

    Y. Matsumoto and Y. Uemura, “Scattering mechanism and low temperature mobility of MOS inversion layers,” Jpn. J. Appl. Phys., supp

  27. [35]

    On the university of inversion-layer mobility in Si MOSFET’s —Part I: Effects of substrate impurity concentration,

    S. Takagi, A. Toriumi, M. Iwase, and H. Tango, “On the university of inversion-layer mobility in Si MOSFET’s —Part I: Effects of substrate impurity concentration,” IEEE Trans. Electron Devices, vol. 41, pp. 2357–2362, Dec. 1994

    1994

  28. [36]

    A review of some charge transport properties of silicon,

    C. Jacoboni, C. Canali, G. Ottaviani, and A. Alberigi Quaranta, “A review of some charge transport properties of silicon,” Solid -State Electronics, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 77– 89, Feb. 1977, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/0038- 1101(77)90054-5

    1977 doi

  29. [37]

    Lattice scattering mobility of n - inversion layers in si(100) at low temperatures,

    Y. Kawaguchi and Shinji Kawaji, “Lattice scattering mobility of n - inversion layers in si(100) at low temperatures,” Surface Science, vol. 98, no. 1– 3, pp. 211 –217, Aug. 1980, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/0039- 6028(80)90497-5

    1980 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.