A Universal Core Model for Multiple-Gate Field-Effect Transistors. Part I: Charge Model

A Surface-Field-Based Model for Nanowire MOSFETs With Spatial Variations of Doping Profiles

“…In the subthreshold region, the device operates in the conditions of V g V th and Q inv kT C ox /q · ln(q Q inv /kT C ox ) plays a dominant role and (14) can be simplified to…”

Unified FinFET compact model: Modelling Trapezoidal Triple-Gate FinFETs

“…In [10], a compact model for undoped or lightly doped FinFETs was extended to model FinFETs with different cross-sectional shapes by obtaining an equivalent channel thickness for each structure. Another compact model has been recently proposed for FinFET devices with different cross-sectional shapes [11], [12], where new models for doped FinFETs were developed in a universal model framework. In this work, based on the approach presented in [11], a new normalized unified FinFET core model is proposed.…”

“…Another compact model has been recently proposed for FinFET devices with different cross-sectional shapes [11], [12], where new models for doped FinFETs were developed in a universal model framework. In this work, based on the approach presented in [11], a new normalized unified FinFET core model is proposed. The new normalized charge model is obtained from the solutions of the Poisson equation for DG and Cy-GAA FinFETs, which leads to a single closed form relationship between the mobile charge and the applied terminal voltages given as follows [11]: …”

“…In this work, based on the approach presented in [11], a new normalized unified FinFET core model is proposed. The new normalized charge model is obtained from the solutions of the Poisson equation for DG and Cy-GAA FinFETs, which leads to a single closed form relationship between the mobile charge and the applied terminal voltages given as follows [11]: …”

Accurate analytical approximation of the OTFTs surface potential by means of the Lagrange Reversion Theorem

“…From a general point of view, the surface-potential-based models (SPBMs) represent an attempt to increase the physical content of compact device models, to reduce the complexity and the number of fitting parameters. On the other hand, the main drawback of SPBMs is the need for elaborate computations of the surface potential: it is usually calculated by an iterative solution of the well known Gauss transcendental equation [4,5]. This procedure is computationally expensive, sometimes does not converge to the solution, and represents a significant detriment to implement SPBMs in popular circuit simulators.…”