Analysis of the Channel and Contact Regions in Staggered and Drain-Offset ZnO Thin-Film Transistors With Compact Modeling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Zinc oxide thin-film transistors (TFTs) with different device geometries and source/drain (S/D) contact metallizations are investigated. To facilitate the analysis, the channel and contact regions in top-gated staggered and drain-offset TFTs employing various permutations of ruthenium (Ru) and gold (Au) bottom electrodes are quantified with a TFT device model. The staggered TFT structure employs identical geometric overlaps between the gate-and-S/D electrodes; whereas the drain-offset TFT structure replaces the gate-to-drain overlap with a geometric gap in the channel. First, the experimental TFT current-voltage (I-V) characteristics are disentangled into the intrinsic channel and contact components by the transmission line method. The contact and channel behaviors are then individually modeled using a universal transistor compact model. From evaluating the model parameters, the diverse device characteristics observed in this paper are attributed to the Au electrode's electron doping effect altering the properties of both the TFT's contact and channel regions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".