arxiv: v1 [cond-mat.mes-hall] 1 Mar 2011

Transcription

1 Strong mobility degradation in ideal graphene nanoribbons due to phonon scattering A. Betti, G. Fiori, and G. Iannaccone arxiv: v1 [cond-mat.mes-hall] 1 Mar 2011 Dipartimento di Ingegneria dell Informazione: Elettronica, Informatica, Telecomunicazioni, Università di Pisa, Via Caruso 16, I-56122, Pisa, Italy Abstract We investigate the low-field phonon-limited mobility in armchair graphene nanoribbons (GNRs) using full-band electron and phonon dispersion relations. We show that lateral confinement suppresses the intrinsic mobility of GNRs to values typical of common bulk semiconductors, and very far from the impressive experiments on 2D graphene. Suspended GNRs with a width of 1 nm exhibit a mobility close to 500 cm 2 /Vs at room temperature, whereas if the same GNRs are deposited on HfO 2 mobility is further reduced to about 60 cm 2 /Vs due to surface phonons. We also show the occurrence of polaron formation, leading to band gap renormalization of 118 mev for 1 nm-wide armchair GNRs. alessandro.betti@iet.unipi.it 1

2 Understanding the role of phonon scattering [1 4] is of primary importance, since it provides information regarding the ultimate intrinsic mobility limit (µ in ) of a material, i.e., when all extrinsic scattering sources have been removed. This is especially important for new materials or nanostructured ones, such as graphene nanoribbons, where experiments are not fully comparable, given the presence of defects and other non idealities. Recent experiments have found µ in in suspended graphene close to 10 5 cm 2 /Vs near room temperature [5], but with a sizable degradation after deposition on high-k gate insulators [6], probably due to coupling to the polar modes of the substrate [1 3]. Very few indications are available on mobility degradation in Graphene NanoRibbons (GNRs) deposited on different gate insulators [7]. As of now, µ in in sub-10 nm GNRs cannot be extracted from experiments since line-edge roughness (LER) is presently limiting mobility in state-of-the-art GNRs[8 10]. Theory, on the other hand, allows us to individually evaluate the impact of each scattering source on mobility, which is often a prohibitive task in experiments. Phonon-limited scattering is particularly important, since it represents the unavoidable scattering mechanism at finite temperature, and provides a good indication of the potential for the material in electronics, either for devices or interconnects. Here we investigate the effect of phonons and surface optical (SO) phonons on carrier transport in GNRs by means of a full band (FB) approach based on a tight-binding (TB) description [11] of the electronic structure and of the phonon spectrum. We compute scattering rates with first-order perturbation theory using the deformation potential approximation (DPA), and low-field mobility using the Kubo-Greenwood formula [12]. We obtain the onedimensional (1D) subbands of an armchair GNR from a TB p z -Hamiltonian accounting for energy relaxation at the edges [13]. The electron energy dispersion is quantized in the transverse direction y with wavevectors k yη = (2πη)/[(l +1)a], where a = nm is the graphene lattice constant, l is the number of dimer lines and index η runs from 1 to l. Graphene phonon spectrum is obtained with the force constant dynamic-matrix approach, including contributions up to the fourth nearest neighbors (4NNFC approach) [11] and using force constant parameters extracted from first-principles calculations [14]. Each of the six phonon branches of graphene, labelled by the quantum number j, is splitted into l 1D sub-branches, with transverse wave vector q yβ {q yβ = (2πβ)/[(l+1)a] for β = 0,...,l/2 1 and q yβ = [2π(β +2)]/[(l+1)a] for β = l/2,...,l 1 }. The momentum relaxation rate of an electron in the initial state k = (k x,k yη ) accounting 2

3 for scattering from GNR phonons is obtained from the Fermi Golden Rule, summing over all final states k = (k x,k yη ), conserving total energy and longitudinal momentum [12]: 1 l 6 τ(k) = +kf n q dq hd2 j x η =1 j=1 β k F 4ρWE jβ (1+cosθ kk )(1 k x/k x ) ph G η,η,β δ [ E(k ) E(k) E jβ ph (q)] 1 f (E k ) 1 f (E k ), (1) where D j = qd AC (D j = D OP ), if j is a longitudinal acoustic (in-plane optical) mode, D AC and D OP = ev/m [4] are the acoustic (AC) and optical (OP) deformation potentials, respectively, k x = k x ± q x, q = q = (q 2 x + q 2 yβ) 1/2, ρ g/cm 2 is graphene mass per unit area [4], n q is the Bose-Einstein occupation factor and n+ q = n q +1. In addition, k F = π/( 3a), W = a/2(l 1) is the GNR width, (1+cos θ kk ) is the spinor overlap [15] and f(e) is the Fermi occupation factor. In Eq. (1) the upper sign is for phonon absorption (ABS) and the lower for phonon emission (EM). G η,η,β is the form factor due to the transverse momentum conservation uncertainty [12, 16]. We have investigated the electrostatic coupling between electrons in the GNR channel and remote phonons of the substrate considering the GNR deposited on an oxide layer of thickness t ox, width W ox and placed at a distance d = 0.4 nm [12]. The oxide is backgated by an ideal metal. Since phonon modes are almost constant as a function of the longitudinal SO phonon wavevector [3], we assume the same energies E β SO as in Ref. [2] for the two considered SO phonon modes. In addition, electrons are confined in the plane, therefore the electron-so phonon scattering rate reads [12]: 1 l τ(k) = +kf dq x η =1 β k F n Qδ ( E k E k E β SO dq y LW ox e 2 F 2 β Ge 2Qd 4π h [ǫ 1D (Q x )] 2 Q (1+cosθ kk ) ) (1 k x /k x ) 1 f(e k ) 1 f(e k ), (2) where Q = (Q x,q y ) represents the 2D SO phonon wavevector, Q = Q, the sum β runs overallsophononmodes, F 2 β 1/(LW ox)istheelectron-phononcouplingparameter[3,12], G(η,η,Q y ) is the form factor [12] which reduces to G η,η,β if Q y =q yβ. In Eq. (2), ǫ 1D (Q x ) is the GNR static dielectric function calculated within the Random Phase Approximation (RPA) in the size quantum limit [4, 12]. For 10 nm-wide GNRs, screening of the electric field due to polar vibrations is instead modeled by means of the 2D RPA graphene static dielectric function ǫ 2D (Q) [17]. From a numerical point of view, in order to reduce numerical noise, we have approximated δ in Eqs. (1) and (2) with a 3

4 Gaussian window of standard deviation E and, for the lowest AC subbranches, a collisional broadening approach has been implemented considering E = h/2 [1/τ (k,q yβ )]. Finally, we have computed the low-field mobility µ in by means of the Kubo-Greenwood formula accounting for 1D transport [12, 16]. DPA formally leads to a zero coupling with the transversal acoustic (TA) and flexural (ZA) phonon modes, so that only scattering with longitudinal acoustic (LA) modes is typically considered [4]. Theory [18] and Raman spectroscopy [19] have shown that ZA modes are negligible down to 130 K. However, classical results based on a TB description of electron-phonon coupling [20] and recent ab-initio calculations [21] have demonstrated that TA modes play a comparable role as that of LA modes in degrading µ in. On the other hand, a physical description of graphene taking into account long-range interaction between carbon atoms highlights an off-diagonal coupling to the TA modes through the modulation of the hopping parameters, which is smaller than the on-diagonal deformation potential contribution [22]. We choose to adopt a physically consistent approach and use DPA considering electron coupling only with LA, LO and TO modes, rather than euristically reintroduce the contribution of TA modes. We use D AC = 10.9 ev, extracted from DFT calculation for the GNR family 3 l+1 [23], rather than fitting experiments which are affected by uncontrolled mechanisms and actually lead to a large spread of the considered values for D AC [4, 5, 21]. Low-fieldmobilityisshowninFig.1aasafunctionoftheelectrondensity n 2D fordifferent widths. µ in close to 500 cm 2 /Vs is found for 1 nm-wide GNR, exceeding by almost one order of magnitude the experimental mobility of GNRs [8, 9] and the intrinsic phononlimited mobility of silicon nanowires [24] of comparable size. We find that µ in is mainly limited by backward scattering involving AC phonons, due to the large mode-dependent OP energy offset ( mev) [16]. Unlike in 2D graphene, where µ in 1/n 2D [2], the lateral confinement in GNRs leads to a non-monotonic n 2D -dependence as also observed in CNTs [25] (Fig. 1a). For small W, µ in increases with n 2D, due to the reduction of final states available for scattering. For wider GNRs biased in the inversion regime, electrons can populate excited subbands opening additional channels for scattering, thus reducing µ in. In Fig. 2a, µ in is plotted as a function of temperature T. Similarly to what has been observed in small-diameter CNTs [26], in narrow GNRs the dependence on W and T can be expressed by means of the empirical relation µ in (W,T) = µ 0 (300K/T)(W/1nm) α AC where µ cm 2 /Vs and α AC = 2.65, which is close to µ in W 3 expected for narrow 4

5 GNRs, since µ in τ/(w DOS) G 1 DOS 2 and G 1/W 2 and the density of states DOS 1/ W. Of course, for large W µ in saturates to that of 2D graphene. Since AC in-plane phonons scattering is dominant and n q kt/ hω for kt hω, µ in is inversely proportional to T (Fig. 2a). The mean free pathin the first subband L k is shown infig. 1b as a function of n 2D and in Fig. 2b as a function of T, where L k v(k)τ (k), v(k) is the group velocity and the expectation value has been computed in the Brillouin zone, considering f(1 f) as the distribution function [16]. At T = 300 K, L k is of the order of few µm for larger GNRs, as expected in graphene flakes, while it is 10 nm for narrower GNRs (Figs. 2b). In addition, L k 1/T, as µ in (Figs. 2b). The SO phonon-limited mobility µ ex as a function of n 2D is shown in Figs. 3a-b for W smaller than 10 nm, considering GNRs deposited both on SiO 2 and on HfO 2. As in graphene [2, 3], the higher the dielectric constant, the larger the mobility suppression due to SO phonon scattering. In particular, we observe µ ex down to 700 cm 2 /Vs for SiO 2 (Fig. 3a) and 60 cm 2 /Vs for HfO 2 (Fig. 3b), due to the smaller energy offset of the emission processes. As in CNTs [27], µ ex W α SO with α SO ( ) dependent on n 2D and smaller than α AC. For W smaller than 5 nm µ ex increases with electron concentration due to the impact of screening, whereas for W = nm for higher concentrations n 2D the increase of available modes for scattering reduces mobility. Comparing Figs. 3a-b with Fig. 1a, it can be observed that SO phonons play a secondary role for very narrow GNRs on SiO 2 but they become predominant with increasing W 2.5 nm roughly for n 2D <10 12 cm 2, whereas they are predominant for all n 2D densities in GNRs on HfO 2. Comparison with experiments shows that µ ex is larger by up to one order of magnitude than mobility measured on GNRs deposited on SiO 2 [8] and by a factor three than mobility measured on 10-nm-wide GNRs integrated with ultrathin HfO 2 dielectric [7]. This gives a rough estimation of the increase in mobility that could be achieved through fabrication technology improvements capable to suppress the present dominant scattering mechanisms (e.g. LER). As can be noted in Fig. 2c and as it also occurs in CNTs deposited on polar dielectrics [27], µ ex 1/T γ. In particular, for HfO 2 γ 3. Since µ in 1/T, SO phonon scattering dominates transport roughly above 100 K for all W (Fig. 2c), as for CNTs on SiO 2 [27]. Finally, we focus on the polaronic energy shift δe k due to the electron-phonon coupling, computed exploiting the second-order perturbation theory [12]. Fig. 4a shows δe k as a 5

6 function of E k for the lowest two subbands for the W = 1.12 nm case. δe k is weakly energy dependent near the cutoff subband, is independent of T and increases sharply in correspondence of intersubband transitions. As in CNTs [26], mostly OP phonons contribute to δe k (inset of Fig. 4a). Instead, unlike in CNTs [26], the contribution to δe k from AC phonons exhibits few peaks due to the transverse momentum conservation uncertainty (inset of Fig. 4a). The polaronic binding energy, i.e. the polaronic energy shift referred to the first conduction subband edge E C1, is δe b =δe k (E k =E C1 ) and is almost 59 mev for 1 nm-wide GNRs, closetothatobtainedforsemiconducting CNTswiththesamenumberl[26](Fig.4b) and corresponds to a band gap renormalization 2δE b 118 mev for 1-nm nanoribbons, and to a relative correction of -35% of the energy gap E g of 10-nm nanoribbons (Fig. 4b). In conclusion, we have proposed a very accurate full-band approach to evaluate low-field phonon-limited mobility µ in in GNRs. We find that µ in is close to 500 cm 2 /Vs in suspended 1 nm-wide GNRs at room temperature, and is suppressed down to 60 cm 2 /Vs in 1-nm wide GNR deposited on HfO 2, due to coupling with SO phonons. The result is important from the point of view of methodology and of fundamental physics, since the corresponding mean free paths range from 1 to 10 nm, undermining the possibility of performing ballistic or coherent transport experiments at non-cryogenic temperatures. It is also important from the application point of view: whereas suspended 2D graphene has an intrinsic mobility at room temperature several orders of magnitude larger than that of bulk semiconductors, narrow GNRs with reasonable semiconducting gap have only slightly larger mobility than comparable silicon nanowires. Finally, we also find polaron formation in armchair GNRs, with a remarkable band gap renormalization of up to 35% in the case of 10 nm-wide ribbons. Thisworkwas supportedinpart bytheec7fpthroughnanosil (n ),GRAND (n ) grants, and by the MIUR-PRIN project GRANFET (Prot. 2008S2CLJ9). Authors thank for the provided computational resources. [1] S. Fratini and F. Guinea, Phys. Rev. B 77, (2008). [2] V. Perebeinos and P. Avouris, Phys. Rev. B 81, (2010). [3] A. Konar, T. Fang, and D. Jena, Phys. Rev. B 82, (2010). [4] T. Fang, A. Konar, H. Xing, and D. Jena, Phys. Rev. B 78, (2008). 6

7 [5] K. I. Bolotin, K. J. Sikes, J. Hone, H. L. Stormer, and P. Kim, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, (2008). [6] J.-H. Chen, C. Jang, S. Xiao, M. Ishigami, and M. S. Fuhrer, Nature Nanotechnology 3, 206 (2008). [7] L. Liao, J. Bai, R. Cheng, Y.-C. Lin, S. Jiang, Y. Huang, and X. Duan, Nano Lett. 10, 1917 (2010). [8] X. Wang, Y. Ouyang, X. Li, H. Wang, J. Guo, and H. Dai, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, (2008). [9] Y. Yang and R. Murali, IEEE Elec. Dev. Lett. 31, 237 (2010). [10] A. Betti, G. Fiori, and G. Iannaccone, to be published in IEEE Trans. Electron Devices (2011). [11] R. Saito, G. Dresselhaus, and M. Dresselhaus, Imperial College Press, London (2003). [12] See EPAPS supplementary material at [] for the expressions of 1/τ (k), µ and δe k. [13] Y. W. Son, M. L. Cohen, and S. Louie, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, (2006). [14] L. Wirtz and A. Rubio, Solid State Comm. 131, 141 (2004). [15] A. V. Rozhkov, S. Savel ev, and F. Nori, Phys. Rev. B 79, (2009). [16] A. Betti, G. Fiori, and G. Iannaccone, IEDM Tech. Digest pp (2010). [17] E. H. Hwang, S. Adam, and S. D. Sarma, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, (2007). [18] E. Mariani and F. von Oppen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, (2008). [19] A. C. Ferrari, J. C. Meyer, V. Scardaci, C. Casiraghi, M. Lazzeri, F. Mauri, S. Piscanec, D. Jiang, K. S. Novoselov, S. Roth, et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, (2006). [20] L. Pietronero, S. Strässler, and H. R. Zeller, Phys. Rev. B 22, 904 (1980). [21] K. M. Borysenko, J. T. Mullen, E. A. Barry, S. Paul, Y. G. Semenov, J. M. Zavada, M. B. Nardelli, and K. W. Kim, Phys. Rev. B 81, (2010). [22] H. Suzuura and T. Ando, Phys. Rev. B 65, (2002). [23] M.-Q. Long, L. Tang, D. Wang, L. Wang, and Z. Shuai, JACS 131, (2009). [24] S. Jin, M. V. Fischetti, and T. Tang, J. Appl. Phys. 102, (2007). [25] V. Perebeinos, J. Tersoff, and P. Avouris, Nano Lett. 6, 205 (2006). [26] V. Perebeinos, J. Tersoff, and P. Avouris, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, (2005). [27] V. Perebeinos, S. V. Rotkin, A. G. Petrov, and P. Avouris, Nano Lett. 9, 312 (2009). 7

8 Mobility µ in (cm 2 /Vs) w=10.10 nm (a) GRAPHENE [21] w=4.86 nm Density n 2D (cm -2 ) Mean free path <L k > (nm) (b) w=10.10 nm w=4.86 nm Density n 2D (cm -2 ) FIG. 1. (a) µ in and (b) L k for an electron in the lowest subband as a function of n 2D for different W. DFT calculations [21] for graphene are also shown in (a). 8

9 Mobility µ in (cm 2 /Vs) n 2D = 9x10 12 cm -2 µin =µ 0 (a) (300/T) W2.65 w=10.10 nm w=4.86 nm Mean free path <L k > (nm) n 2D = 9x10 12 cm -2 (b) w=10.10 nm w=4.86 nm Mobility µ ex (cm 2 /Vs) w=4.86 nm Temperature (K) n 2D =10 11 cm -2 µ in (T) µin (T) (c) on HfO 2 µ ex αt -3 µ in (T) FIG. 2. (a) mobility µ in, (b) mean free path L k for the lowest subband, and (c) mobility µ ex for GNR on HfO 2 as a function of T for different W. In (a) and (c) dashed lines correspond to the empirical formula for µ in (W,T) and solid lines in (c) to the fit for µ ex. 9

10 Mobility µ ex (cm 2 /Vs) (a) on SiO w=10.10 nm w=4.86 nm nm-wide GNR on HfO 2 [7] (b) on HfO 2 w=10.10 nm w=4.86 nm Density n 2D (cm -2 ) Density n 2D (cm -2 ) FIG. 3. µ ex as a function of n 2D for GNR deposited (a) on SiO 2 and (b) on HfO 2. 10

11 δe k (mev) δe b (mev) T=30 K T=300 K (a) first (b) total first OP 20 AC (x8) second Energy (ev) CNT [26] AC (x8) OP GNR width W (nm) δE b /E g (%) FIG. 4. (a) Polaronic energy shift δe k as a function of the energy E k for the first two subbands (W = 1.12 nm). Solid curves correspond to T= 300 K, dotted curves to T = 30 K. Inset: OP and AC ( 8) contributions to δe k for the first subband. (b): Polaronic binding energy δe b (left) and polaronic correction to the band gap 2δE b /E g (right) as a function of W. Results for CNTs [26] are also reported. 11

12 k k 2 π (l+1) a k