4.4 Article

Improved leakage current properties of ZrO2/(Ta/Nb)Ox-Al2O3/ZrO2 nanolaminate insulating stacks for dynamic random access memory capacitors

期刊

THIN SOLID FILMS
卷 655, 期 -, 页码 48-53

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.tsf.2018.02.010

关键词

Atomic layer deposition (ALD); High-k material; Dynamic random access memory (DRAM); Metal-insulator-metal capacitor; ZrO2; (Ta/Nb)O-x; Al2O3

资金

  1. World Premier International Research Center Initiative (WPI)
  2. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT)
  3. CREST Phase Interface Science for Highly Efficient Energy Utilization [JPMJCR13C3]
  4. Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The influence of amorphous high-k interlayers, such as Al2O3, (Ta/Nb)O-x (TN), and (Ta/Nb)O-x-Al2O3 (TNA), on the leakage current (J) and dielectric constant (k) for metal-insulator-metal capacitors with ZrO2/high-k/ZrO2 nanolaminate insulating films and TiN electrodes was investigated. The insulating films were prepared by atomic layer deposition followed by post-deposition annealing at 600 degrees C. The capacitance equivalent thickness (CET) of the capacitors increased in the order ZrO2/(Ta/Nb)O-x/ZrO2 (ZTNZ) < ZrO2/(Ta/Nb)O-x-Al2O3/ZrO2 (ZTNAZ) < ZrO2/Al2O3/ZrO2 (ZAZ), owing to the k values for Al2O3 (similar to 6), TNA (similar to 9), and TN (similar to 11). The J values at 0.6 V for capacitors with a CET of 1.1 nm increased in the order ZTNAZ < ZAZ << ZTNZ. The effect of a high-k interlayer on the J characteristics appeared above a thickness of 0.4 nm in the case of Al2O3 and TNA, while a 0.8-nm-thick TN maintained high J values. Based on these results, there are three important factors as a high-k interlayer to reduce J value, such as a band gap larger than that for TN (4.4 eV), a thickness of >= 0.4 nm, and an amorphous structure. Therefore, to achieve the low J and CET, TNA is a promising candidate material for a high-k interlayer for future dynamic random access memory.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据