4.6 Article

Ta-Doped SnO2 as a reduction-resistant oxide electrode for DRAM capacitors

Journal

JOURNAL OF MATERIALS CHEMISTRY C
Volume 5, Issue 36, Pages 9405-9411

Publisher

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c7tc03467a

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Future Semiconductor Device Technology Development Program - MOTIE (Ministry of Trade, Industry Energy) [10047231]
  2. KSRC (Korea Semiconductor Research Consortium)
  3. Korea Institute of Science and Technology (KIST) [2E27160]
  4. Korea Evaluation Institute of Industrial Technology (KEIT) [10047231] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Noble metal oxides, such as RuO2, have received attention as capacitor electrodes in dynamic random access memories (DRAMs). Noble metal oxides generally have a high work function compared to noble metals and enhance the crystallinity of dielectric materials grown on them, resulting in a lower leakage current and higher dielectric constants. Despite these advantages, noble metal oxides are easily reduced during the dielectric film, such as TiO2, growth on top or by annealing under a forming gas atmosphere, degrading the capacitor performance. In this work, Ta-doped SnO2 is suggested as a potential capacitor electrode for DRAMs. Ta-Doped SnO2 films have a high work function, comparable to that of RuO2, and induce the formation of a high-temperature phase with a high dielectric constant, namely rutile TiO2, at low temperatures. More importantly, the Ta-doped SnO2 films show suitable structural and chemical stabilities, even after annealing at 400 degrees C under a forming gas atmosphere. RuO2 films, on the other hand, turn into a mixture of RuO2 and Ru after annealing under the same conditions. These findings suggest that Ta-doped SnO2 could serve as capacitor electrodes in next-generation DRAMs.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available