Jaehyuk Lim;Donghwan Han;Juho Sung;Seokchan Yoon;Sanghyun Kang;Gwon Kim;Hyoung Won Baac;Changhwan Shin
{"title":"提高基于互补场效应晶体管的逆变器交流性能的器件设计指南","authors":"Jaehyuk Lim;Donghwan Han;Juho Sung;Seokchan Yoon;Sanghyun Kang;Gwon Kim;Hyoung Won Baac;Changhwan Shin","doi":"10.1109/TCAD.2025.3539599","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Complementary field-effect transistors (CFETs) have emerged as promising candidates for next-generation semiconductor devices. CFETs feature a structure with an nMOS (or pMOS) transistor at the bottom and a transistor of the opposite type at the top. CFETs can be classified into Fin-CFETs or GAA-CFETs based on their channel structure. In this study, we compare and analyze these two devices to determine which structure is more favorable for device scaling and which device exhibits better performance per unit area. For a reliable analysis, the threshold voltage was adjusted to be the same for all devices. Initially, to compare the DC performance, the on-state drive currents in both linear mode and saturation mode operations were extracted and compared from the <inline-formula> <tex-math>$I_{\\mathrm { DS}}$ </tex-math></inline-formula>-versus-<inline-formula> <tex-math>$V_{\\mathrm { GS}}$ </tex-math></inline-formula> input-transfer characteristics. Subsequently, complementary metal-oxide-semiconductor inverters were constructed to compare their AC performance. Six parameters were extracted and compared: high-to-low propagation delay (<inline-formula> <tex-math>$t_{pLH}$ </tex-math></inline-formula>), falling time (<inline-formula> <tex-math>$t_{f}$ </tex-math></inline-formula>), low-to-high propagation delay (<inline-formula> <tex-math>$t_{pLH}$ </tex-math></inline-formula>), rising time (<inline-formula> <tex-math>$t_{r}$ </tex-math></inline-formula>), overshoot voltage (<inline-formula> <tex-math>$V_{ov}$ </tex-math></inline-formula>), and undershoot voltage (<inline-formula> <tex-math>$V_{und}$ </tex-math></inline-formula>). Based on the results, we suggest which CFET structure is more suitable for device scaling.","PeriodicalId":13251,"journal":{"name":"IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems","volume":"44 8","pages":"3189-3196"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Device Design Guidelines to Boost Up AC Performance of CFET (Complementary Field-Effect-Transistor)-Based Inverter\",\"authors\":\"Jaehyuk Lim;Donghwan Han;Juho Sung;Seokchan Yoon;Sanghyun Kang;Gwon Kim;Hyoung Won Baac;Changhwan Shin\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/TCAD.2025.3539599\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Complementary field-effect transistors (CFETs) have emerged as promising candidates for next-generation semiconductor devices. CFETs feature a structure with an nMOS (or pMOS) transistor at the bottom and a transistor of the opposite type at the top. CFETs can be classified into Fin-CFETs or GAA-CFETs based on their channel structure. In this study, we compare and analyze these two devices to determine which structure is more favorable for device scaling and which device exhibits better performance per unit area. For a reliable analysis, the threshold voltage was adjusted to be the same for all devices. Initially, to compare the DC performance, the on-state drive currents in both linear mode and saturation mode operations were extracted and compared from the <inline-formula> <tex-math>$I_{\\\\mathrm { DS}}$ </tex-math></inline-formula>-versus-<inline-formula> <tex-math>$V_{\\\\mathrm { GS}}$ </tex-math></inline-formula> input-transfer characteristics. Subsequently, complementary metal-oxide-semiconductor inverters were constructed to compare their AC performance. Six parameters were extracted and compared: high-to-low propagation delay (<inline-formula> <tex-math>$t_{pLH}$ </tex-math></inline-formula>), falling time (<inline-formula> <tex-math>$t_{f}$ </tex-math></inline-formula>), low-to-high propagation delay (<inline-formula> <tex-math>$t_{pLH}$ </tex-math></inline-formula>), rising time (<inline-formula> <tex-math>$t_{r}$ </tex-math></inline-formula>), overshoot voltage (<inline-formula> <tex-math>$V_{ov}$ </tex-math></inline-formula>), and undershoot voltage (<inline-formula> <tex-math>$V_{und}$ </tex-math></inline-formula>). Based on the results, we suggest which CFET structure is more suitable for device scaling.\",\"PeriodicalId\":13251,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems\",\"volume\":\"44 8\",\"pages\":\"3189-3196\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"94\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10876188/\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"计算机科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, HARDWARE & ARCHITECTURE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10876188/","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, HARDWARE & ARCHITECTURE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Device Design Guidelines to Boost Up AC Performance of CFET (Complementary Field-Effect-Transistor)-Based Inverter
Complementary field-effect transistors (CFETs) have emerged as promising candidates for next-generation semiconductor devices. CFETs feature a structure with an nMOS (or pMOS) transistor at the bottom and a transistor of the opposite type at the top. CFETs can be classified into Fin-CFETs or GAA-CFETs based on their channel structure. In this study, we compare and analyze these two devices to determine which structure is more favorable for device scaling and which device exhibits better performance per unit area. For a reliable analysis, the threshold voltage was adjusted to be the same for all devices. Initially, to compare the DC performance, the on-state drive currents in both linear mode and saturation mode operations were extracted and compared from the $I_{\mathrm { DS}}$ -versus-$V_{\mathrm { GS}}$ input-transfer characteristics. Subsequently, complementary metal-oxide-semiconductor inverters were constructed to compare their AC performance. Six parameters were extracted and compared: high-to-low propagation delay ($t_{pLH}$ ), falling time ($t_{f}$ ), low-to-high propagation delay ($t_{pLH}$ ), rising time ($t_{r}$ ), overshoot voltage ($V_{ov}$ ), and undershoot voltage ($V_{und}$ ). Based on the results, we suggest which CFET structure is more suitable for device scaling.
期刊介绍:
The purpose of this Transactions is to publish papers of interest to individuals in the area of computer-aided design of integrated circuits and systems composed of analog, digital, mixed-signal, optical, or microwave components. The aids include methods, models, algorithms, and man-machine interfaces for system-level, physical and logical design including: planning, synthesis, partitioning, modeling, simulation, layout, verification, testing, hardware-software co-design and documentation of integrated circuit and system designs of all complexities. Design tools and techniques for evaluating and designing integrated circuits and systems for metrics such as performance, power, reliability, testability, and security are a focus.