4.5 Article

Effects of Oxygen Precursor on Resistive Switching Properties of CMOS Compatible HfO2-Based RRAM

Journal

METALS
Volume 11, Issue 9, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/met11091350

Keywords

memristor; resistive switching; metal oxides; atomic layer deposition; HfO2

Funding

  1. National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) - Ministry of Science and ICT [2021R1C1C1004422]
  2. Korea Institute of Energy Technology Evaluation and Planning (KETEP)
  3. Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy (MOTIE) of the Republic of Korea [20194030202320]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The resistive switching behaviors of HfO2-based RRAM in two different oxidants were investigated in this work. The H2O sample exhibited a lower forming voltage and higher endurance in resistive switching, with a smaller capacitor value attributed to higher interface trap sensitivity.
In this work, we investigate the resistive switching behaviors of HfO2-based resistive random-access memory (RRAM) in two different oxidants (H2O and O-3) in an atomic layer deposition system. Firstly, the surface characteristics of the Ni/HfO2/Si stack are conducted by atomic force microscopy (AFM). A similar thickness is confirmed by scanning electron microscope (SEM) imaging. The surface roughness of the HfO2 film by O-3 (O-3 sample) is smoother than in the sample by H2O (H2O sample). Next, we conduct electrical characteristics by current-voltage (I-V) and capacitor-voltage (C-V) curves in an initial process. The forming voltage of the H2O sample is smaller than that of the O-3 sample because the H2O sample incorporates a lot of H+ in the film. Additionally, the smaller capacitor value of the H2O sample is obtained due to the higher interface trap in H2O sample. Finally, we compare the resistive switching behaviors of both samples by DC sweep. The H2O sample has more increased endurance, with a smaller on/off ratio than the O-3 sample. Both have good non-volatile properties, which is verified by the retention test.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available