Skip to main content
ACS AuthorChoice logoLink to ACS AuthorChoice
. 2024 Jun 24;24(26):7948–7952. doi: 10.1021/acs.nanolett.4c01197

Hot Carrier Nanowire Transistors at the Ballistic Limit

Mukesh Kumar , Ali Nowzari , Axel R Persson , Sören Jeppesen , Andreas Wacker , Gerald Bastard §, Reine L Wallenberg , Federico Capasso , Ville F Maisi , Lars Samuelson †,⊥,*
PMCID: PMC11229068  PMID: 38912704

Abstract

graphic file with name nl4c01197_0006.jpg

We demonstrate experimentally nonequilibrium transport in unipolar quasi-1D hot electron devices reaching the ballistic limit at room temperature. The devices are realized with heterostructure engineering in nanowires to obtain dopant- and dislocation-free 1D-epitaxy and flexible bandgap engineering. We show experimentally the control of hot electron injection with a graded conduction band profile and the subsequent filtering of hot and relaxed electrons with rectangular energy barriers. The number of electrons passing the barrier depends exponentially on the transport length with a mean-free path of 200–260 nm, and the electrons reach the ballistic transport regime for the shortest devices with 70% of the electrons flying freely through the base electrode and the barrier reflections limiting the transport to the collector.

Keywords: hot carrier transistors, ballistic electrons, bandgap engineering, quantum mechanical transmission


Hot carriers open up many interesting device concept paradigms based on their ballistic transport in semiconductors.1,2 In the ballistic transport, a significant fraction of the charge carriers move through the structure without losing their energy. Thus, the highest speed operation is potentially feasible since many types of scattering have not yet limited the carrier flow. To obtain hot electron devices, the bandgap energy of a semiconductor needs modulations at energies much larger than the thermal energy kT, to generate and detect highly nonequilibrium electrons. Typically, bandgap engineering for generating hot electrons has been done by either gating,35 doping,6,7 or using Schottky or tunnel barriers in metal–oxide–semiconductor structures.813 More recently, monolayer materials have also been employed to obtain extremely short base electrodes1416 and III-nitrides with large bandgap.1720 Bandgap engineering is also used extensively in modern electronics. For example in any cell phone receiver/transmitter block, 2D epitaxy of graded SiGe thin base layers is controlled at the atomic level by chemical vapor deposition (CVD), yielding the best performance.21,22 While successful in making ballistic devices, the above-mentioned approaches come with major constraints. For doped structures, the dopants act as scattering centers. Additional scattering and energy relaxation therefore limit the free flight of the carriers, which is a serious constraint for the ballisticity. Doping also typically varies smoothly in the structure, preventing sharp boundaries between different operational parts of the devices. On the other hand, the Schottky barrier-based devices generate hot electrons via a tunneling process. This together with the inability to adjust the barrier height and thickness hinders choosing and setting the hot carriers and their detector barrier to specific energies. In this paper, we use 1D epitaxy in semiconductor nanowires for bandgap engineering. The 1D epitaxy allows us to tailor the bandgap of a III–V semiconductor by combining different lattice-mismatched materials into heterostructures free from defects and dopants thanks to the efficient radial relaxation in the nanowire geometry.2328 1D epitaxy is also beneficial for reducing the possible scattering directions compared to the planar 2D/3D geometries. We make devices with 1D epitaxy where up to 70% of the electrons fly ballistically at room temperature and determine the mean-free part and the reflection probability for the electrons at the barrier. The findings are consistent with the theoretical predictions.

The conduction band profile of our hot electron injector–collector system is presented in Figure 1a. A graded potential barrier on the left forms a hot electron injector. Electrons will be injected close to the maximum value of the barrier by raising the chemical potential of the graded side; see Figure 2b, which flattens the graded barrier and allows electrons to flow through this graded segment. As a detector, we use a rectangular barrier that has the same height as the injector so that ideally only ballistic electrons at a high energy pass. Electrons that relax in the middle region will be blocked by the rectangular barrier, which we grow thick enough (thickness 20 nm with a barrier height of approximately 500 meV in the InAs/InP heterointerface) to suppress tunneling at low energies. Thus, the electrical current after the filtering barrier measures the number of ballistic electrons that fly over the barrier. The sharp interfaces also define the length l of the base electrode between the injector and filter unambiguously.

Figure 1.

Figure 1

(a) The conduction band diagram of the ballistic hot electron system consisting of a graded potential barrier as a hot electron injector and a rectangular barrier for filtering the electrons. (b) Scanning transmission electron microscope image of a nanowire heterostructure obtained through growth engineering showing an InAs1–xPx-based quasi-1D hot electron injector and InP-based energy filter. (c) Compositional map of In, As, and P along the nanowire.

Figure 2.

Figure 2

(a) A scanning electron micrograph showing one of the measured unipolar 3-terminal hot electron nanowire devices. The middle base electrode needs to be positioned and defined sharply between the injector and the energy filter, spaced by a distance l. Voltage Veb biases the injector and Vbc the filter. (b) Band diagram under typical operation. The voltage Veb lifts the energy of the emitter electrons and flattens the graded barrier, giving rise to electron injection. Ballistic electrons fly over the filter to an unbiased (Vbc = 0) collector.

For realizing the band diagram of Figure 1a, we grow InAs/InAsP nanowire heterostructures with chemical beam epitaxy (CBE), allowing for the demanding abrupt heterointerfaces29 and smooth graded barriers28 within the same growth run. The InAs and InP have additionally a large conduction band offset, low effective mass, and high electron mobility, which are preferred properties for the hot electron devices.30 The graded injectors in InAs-based nanowires were formed with graded InAs1–xPx through in situ modulation of chemical composition x along the length of nanowires, while the rectangular filter barrier was made with fixed x; see Supporting Information for further details. Figures 1b and 1c show a scanning transmission electron micrograph and compositional maps of the structure that highlight clearly the key features and dimensions. To estimate the barrier height for both the injector and filter, we estimate the uppermost phosphorus content to be around x ≈ 0.8 in both segments, corresponding to a conduction band offset of about 0.5 eV.28,30

After growth, we transferred the structures to a Si/SiO2 chip and made ohmic contacts. We made three contacts: an emitter contact before the injector, a collector contact after the rectangular barrier, and a common base contact in between. These form a transistor configuration, as presented in Figure 2. We used electron beam lithography to define and position the contacts, allowing the fabrication of devices with base lengths down to l = 80 nm. Before the deposition of the 25/125 nm Ni/Au contacts with thermal evaporation, sulfur passivation31 was used for obtaining low contact resistance on the order of 100 Ω measured from similar contacts made to the plain InAs segment.

The generation of ballistic electrons in the structure takes place by applying a bias voltage, Veb, to the graded barrier. This voltage lifts the electrons on the left of the injector to higher energies and flattens the graded barrier as shown in Figure 2b. When the energy from the bias voltage eVeb exceeds the barrier height Φb, the injector barrier no longer limits the current flow, leading to high injection current with electrons at energy Φb in the base region. We measure the injection current Ie from the emitter side. The energetic electrons have two possible scenarios at the base. Either they continue at high energy over the filtering barrier contributing to collector current Ic, or they relax at the base regime, get trapped there, and flow away to ground from the base contact.

Figure 3 presents transport data for the device of Figure 2 with l = 150 nm. We indeed see vanishing injector current Ie at low bias voltage, and at Veb > 0.5 V, the current increases steeply, consistent with the estimated barrier height of Φb ≈ 500 meV. These findings and numbers are consistent with our earlier study of the graded barrier as electrical diodes.28 On the collector side, the current Ic stays also vanishingly small at low Veb and increases proportionally to the emitter current Ie. The inset presents the proportionality as the transfer ratio Ic/Ie. We observe that the proportionality stays within Ic/Ie = 14 ± 2% over the whole injection range. Interestingly, if we apply a large reverse bias Veb < −0.6 V to the emitter, a small leakage current Ie appears at the emitter, but no current is induced at the collector side. This reverse biasing removes equilibrium electrons at low energies from the base and does not create high-energy ones. As the collector current remains at Ic = 0, the collector side does not respond to these low-energy excitations. As a further proof of the energy selectivity, Figure 4 shows the collector current Ic as a function of the base collector voltage Vbc for different injection voltages Veb. For Veb < 0.2 V, all the curves stack on top of each other with a diminishing collector current Ic below the 0.02 nA level up to Vbc = ±50 mV. Hence, we have no injection from the emitter here. At larger Vbc, an exponentially increasing leakage current Ic through the energy filter arises, as seen in the yellow data with Veb = −0.8 V in the top panel. The exponential dependence arises because the bias voltage Vbc slants toward the rectangular filter barrier profile, leading to a lower average barrier height. This increases the tunneling probability and hence the current exponentially for the low-energy electrons.32,33 By using Vbc = 0 for the injection experiments, we minimized these leakage contributions. With emission, the collector current Ic depends only weakly on the collector bias voltage Vbc: a bias voltage variation of Vbc = ±50 mV changes the collector current by 20% or less in the high emission current regime.

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Measured current–voltage curves for a device with a base length l = 150 nm. The emitter current Ie and collector current Ic were measured simultaneously as a function of the injector voltage Veb. The energy filter was kept unbiased at Vbc = 0. The inset shows the transfer ratio Ic/Ie at the injection regime. All measurements took place at room temperature.

Figure 4.

Figure 4

Collector current Ic as a function of the base-collector voltage Vbc for emitter-base voltages Veb = −0.8, ..., 0.8 V. The top panel shows the current on a logarithmic scale, and the bottom panel repeats the data with a linear scale. The device has a base length of l = 160 nm.

We now turn to investigating the base length l dependence in order to study the ballistic transport characteristics through the base and over the rectangular barrier. For that, we repeated the device fabrication and measurements for varying base lengths. Figure 5 summarizes the findings. We observed consistently a collector current that was proportional to the injection current and depended only weakly on the other parameter values, as above. However, the transfer ratio Ic/Ie depends strongly on the base length l. We see from Figure 5 that the measured l = 80–2000 nm range results in more than 4 orders of magnitude change to Ic/Ie and scales exponentially as Ic/Ie = T exp(−l/lr), as shown by the solid lines fitted to the data. From the fit, we determine energy relaxation length lr = 220 nm and transmission probability T = 0.28 through the filter for ballistic electrons. For the shortest devices with l = 80 nm, we obtain exp(−l/lr) = exp(−80 nm/220 nm) = 70% of the electrons ballistically flying to the filter. Here the base length with near-unity ballistic transport is more than an order of magnitude larger than the typical values for room-temperature ballistic devices, such as monolayer-based structures1416 and GaN transistors with a typical base length of 10 nm.19,20 Furthermore, the transmission probability T = 0.28 sets predominantly the transfer ratio Ic/Ie = 0.19 in our devices. In other words, R = 1 – T = 72% of the ballistic electrons are reflected at the base–filter barrier interface. The observed transmission probability T and reflection probability R are consistent with theoretical values based on quantum mechanical reflection calculation: with a rectangular barrier (Φb = 500 meV, thickness a = 20 nm) a thermal electron distribution above the barrier provides an average transmission of T = 0.3, in good agreement with the measured value;32,33 see methods. Therefore, quantum mechanics explain the transmission probability T of our system and why the transfer ratio is limited to Ic/Ie = 0.19, equaling the product of 70% ballistic propagation probability and T = 0.28 transmission probability through the filter barrier. The transmission probability T through the filter can be increased by increasing the energy of the ballistic electrons, using resonant tunneling energies with unity transmission or by using a nonrectangular filter profile.33 In particular, engineering a sophisticated multilayer structure34 in analogy to the antireflection coatings in the optical domain is an appealing approach to obtain near-unity transmission over a wider energy window.

Figure 5.

Figure 5

Base length l dependence of transfer ratio Ic/Ie. Dots are experimental data from several devices, and the solid lines are fits to exponential dependence Ic/Ie = T exp(−l/lr). The red and blue data show the results with nanowires sorted to two diameters: d = 60–65 nm and 76–82 nm, respectively.

With the red and blue points in Figure 5, we sorted the devices into two categories with different diameters d. We observe that the majority of the scattering of the data is explained by diameter dependence, with smaller diameter d = 60 nm leading to shorter mean-free path of lr = 190 nm compared to larger diameter d = 80 nm with lr = 260 nm. This finding suggests that surface scattering contributes at least partially to the relaxation. At small l, both curves meet, indicating a diameter-independent transmission probability T. Comparing the observed mean-free path to theoretical predictions, we used the conventional Fröhlich coupling within the two-band Kane model.35,36 This calculation results in a phonon relaxation rate of lr = 230 nm, in excellent agreement with the experiments; see methods for details. The nonparabolicity of the conduction band is important for the relaxation length: neglecting it results in five times larger lr, which is not consistent with the experiments.

In conclusion, we demonstrated transport in the ballistic limit with three-terminal hot carrier nanowire devices. The structures were made with 1D epitaxy, enabling flexible bandgap engineering with smooth and sharp interfaces without doping. We determined the mean-free path and barrier transmission probability directly from the experiments at room temperature. For the shortest devices, most of the electrons (70%) are ballistic. We also found the mean-free path to depend on the nanowire diameter. These findings are consistent with theoretical estimates.

Acknowledgments

We thank the Knut and Alice Wallenberg (KAW) foundation via Project No. 2016.0089, Swedish Research Council (Dnr 2019-04111), the Swedish infrastructure ARTEMI, and NanoLund for financial support.

Supporting Information Available

The Supporting Information is available free of charge at https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.nanolett.4c01197.

  • Additional information about the nanowire heterostructure growth, device processing, energy relaxation calculations with the Kane model, and transmission probability estimation (PDF)

The authors declare no competing financial interest.

Supplementary Material

nl4c01197_si_001.pdf (277.7KB, pdf)

References

  1. Barati F.; Grossnickle M.; Su S.; Lake R. K.; Aji V.; Gabor N. M. Hot carrier-enhanced interlayer electron–hole pair multiplication in 2D semiconductor heterostructure photocells. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2017, 12, 1134–1139. 10.1038/nnano.2017.203. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Brongersma M. L.; Halas N. J.; Nordlander P. Plasmon-induced hot carrier science and technology. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2015, 10, 25–34. 10.1038/nnano.2014.311. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Hohls F.; Pepper M.; Griffiths J. P.; Jones G. A. C.; Ritchie D. A. Ballistic electron spectroscopy. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2006, 89, 212103. 10.1063/1.2393168. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  4. Rössler C.; Burkhard S.; Krähenmann T.; Röösli M.; Märki P.; Basset J.; Ihn T.; Ensslin K.; Reichl C.; Wegscheider W. Spectroscopy of equilibrium and nonequilibrium charge transfer in semiconductor quantum structures. Phys. Rev. B 2014, 90, 081302 10.1103/PhysRevB.90.081302. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  5. Shur M.; Eastman L. Ballistic transport in semiconductor at low temperatures for low-power high-speed logic. IEEE Trans. Electron Devices 1979, 26, 1677–1683. 10.1109/T-ED.1979.19671. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  6. Hayes J. R.; Levi A. F. J.; Wiegmann W. Hot-Electron Spectroscopy of GaAs. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1985, 54, 1570–1572. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.54.1570. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Levi A. F. J.; Hayes J. R.; Platzman P. M.; Wiegmann W. Injected-Hot-Electron Transport in GaAs. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1985, 55, 2071–2073. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.55.2071. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Heiblum M. Tunneling hot electron transfer amplifiers (theta): Amplifiers operating up to the infrared. Solid-State Electron. 1981, 24, 343–366. 10.1016/0038-1101(81)90029-0. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  9. Heiblum M.; Thomas D. C.; Knoedler C. M.; Nathan M. I. Tunneling hot-electron transfer amplifier: A hot-electron GaAs device with current gain. Appl. Phys. Lett. 1985, 47, 1105–1107. 10.1063/1.96344. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  10. Heiblum M.; Anderson I. M.; Knoedler C. M. dc performance of ballistic tunneling hot-electron transfer amplifiers. Appl. Phys. Lett. 1986, 49, 207–209. 10.1063/1.97172. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  11. Heiblum M.; Calleja E.; Anderson I. M.; Dumke W. P.; Knoedler C. M.; Osterling L. Evidence of hot-electron transfer into an upper valley in GaAs. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1986, 56, 2854–2857. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.56.2854. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Capasso F., Ed. Physics of Quantum Electron Devices; Springer-Verlag: Berlin, Heidelberg, 1990. [Google Scholar]
  13. Brill B.; Heiblum M. Long-mean-free-path ballistic hot electrons in high-purity GaAs. Phys. Rev. B 1996, 54, R17280–R17283. 10.1103/PhysRevB.54.R17280. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Vaziri S.; Lupina G.; Henkel C.; Smith A. D.; Östling M.; Dabrowski J.; Lippert G.; Mehr W.; Lemme M. C. A Graphene-Based Hot Electron Transistor. Nano Lett. 2013, 13, 1435–1439. 10.1021/nl304305x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Zeng C.; Song E. B.; Wang M.; Lee S.; Torres C. M. Jr.; Tang J.; Weiller B. H.; Wang K. L. Vertical Graphene-Base Hot-Electron Transistor. Nano Lett. 2013, 13, 2370–2375. 10.1021/nl304541s. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Torres C. M. Jr.; Lan Y.-W.; Zeng C.; Chen J.-H.; Kou X.; Navabi A.; Tang J.; Montazeri M.; Adleman J. R.; Lerner M. B.; Zhong Y.-L.; Li L.-J.; Chen C.-D.; Wang K. L. High-Current Gain Two-Dimensional MoS2-Base Hot-Electron Transistors. Nano Lett. 2015, 15, 7905–7912. 10.1021/acs.nanolett.5b03768. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Gupta G.Design of III-Nitride Hot Electron Transistors. Ph.D. thesis, University of California, Santa Barbara. Electrical & Computer Engineering, 2015; available at https://alexandria.ucsb.edu/lib/ark:/48907/f3mp52tr. [Google Scholar]
  18. Suntrup D. J.Transport Properties of III-N Hot Electron Transistors. Ph.D. thesis, University of California, Santa Barbara. Electrical & Computer Engineering, 2015; available at https://alexandria.ucsb.edu/lib/ark:/48907/f3v987k6. [Google Scholar]
  19. Yang Z.; Zhang Y.; Krishnamoorthy S.; Nath D. N.; Khurgin J. B.; Rajan S. Current gain above 10 in sub-10nm base III-Nitride tunneling hot electron transistors with GaN/AlN emitter. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2016, 108, 192101. 10.1063/1.4949489. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  20. Daulton J. W.; Molnar R. J.; Brinkerhoff J. A.; Hollis M. A.; Zaslavsky A. III-nitride vertical hot electron transistor with polarization doping and collimated injection. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2022, 121, 223503. 10.1063/5.0129920. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  21. Cressler J. D.; Guofu N.. Silicon-Germanium Heterojunction Bipolar Transistors; Artech House, 2003. [Google Scholar]
  22. Karakuzulu A.; Ahmad W. A.; Kissinger D.; Malignaggi A. A Four-Channel Bidirectional D-Band Phased-Array Transceiver for 200 Gb/s 6G Wireless Communications in a 130-nm BiCMOS Technology. IEEE J. Solid-State Circuits 2023, 58, 1310–1322. 10.1109/JSSC.2022.3232948. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  23. Björk M. T.; Ohlsson B. J.; Sass T.; Persson A. I.; Thelander C.; Magnusson M. H.; Deppert K.; Wallenberg L. R.; Samuelson L. One-dimensional Steeplechase for Electrons Realized. Nano Lett. 2002, 2, 87–89. 10.1021/nl010099n. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  24. Wu Y.; Fan R.; Yang P. Block-by-Block Growth of Single-Crystalline Si/SiGe Superlattice Nanowires. Nano Lett. 2002, 2, 83–86. 10.1021/nl0156888. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  25. Gudiksen M. S.; Lauhon L. J.; Wang J.; Smith D. C.; Lieber C. M. Growth of nanowire superlattice structures for nanoscale photonics and electronics. Nature 2002, 415, 617–620. 10.1038/415617a. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Björk M. T.; Ohlsson B. J.; Thelander C.; Persson A. I.; Deppert K.; Wallenberg L. R.; Samuelson L. Nanowire resonant tunneling diodes. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2002, 81, 4458–4460. 10.1063/1.1527995. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  27. Thelander C.; Mårtensson T.; Björk M. T.; Ohlsson B. J.; Larsson M. W.; Wallenberg L. R.; Samuelson L. Single-electron transistors in heterostructure nanowires. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2003, 83, 2052–2054. 10.1063/1.1606889. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  28. Nylund G.; Storm K.; Lehmann S.; Capasso F.; Samuelson L. Designed Quasi-1D Potential Structures Realized in Compositionally Graded InAs1–xPx Nanowires. Nano Lett. 2016, 16, 1017–1021. 10.1021/acs.nanolett.5b04067. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Fuhrer A.; Fröberg L. E.; Pedersen J. N.; Larsson M. W.; Wacker A.; Pistol M.-E.; Samuelson L. Few Electron Double Quantum Dots in InAs/InP Nanowire Heterostructures. Nano Lett. 2007, 7, 243–246. 10.1021/nl061913f. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Persson A. I.; Björk M. T.; Jeppesen S.; Wagner J. B.; Wallenberg L. R.; Samuelson L. InAs1–xPx Nanowires for Device Engineering. Nano Lett. 2006, 6, 403–407. 10.1021/nl052181e. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Suyatin D. B.; Thelander C.; Björk M. T.; Maximov I.; Samuelson L. Sulfur passivation for ohmic contact formation to InAs nanowires. Nanotechnology 2007, 18, 105307. 10.1088/0957-4484/18/10/105307. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  32. Ando Y.; Itoh T. Calculation of transmission tunneling current across arbitrary potential barriers. J. Appl. Phys. 1987, 61, 1497–1502. 10.1063/1.338082. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  33. Davies J. H.The Physics of Low-Dimensional Semiconductors; Cambridge University Press, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  34. Pacher C.; Rauch C.; Strasser G.; Gornik E.; Elsholz F.; Wacker A.; Kießlich G.; Schöll E. Antireflection coating for miniband transport and Fabry–Pérot resonances in GaAs/AlGaAs superlattices. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2001, 79, 1486–1488. 10.1063/1.1399315. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  35. White S. R.; Sham L. J. Electronic Properties of Flat-Band Semiconductor Heterostructures. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1981, 47, 879–882. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.47.879. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  36. Bastard G. Superlattice band structure in the envelope-function approximation. Phys. Rev. B 1981, 24, 5693–5697. 10.1103/PhysRevB.24.5693. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

nl4c01197_si_001.pdf (277.7KB, pdf)

Articles from Nano Letters are provided here courtesy of American Chemical Society

RESOURCES