IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ELECTRON DEVICES, VOL. 63, NO.

2, FEBRUARY 2016 869

Examination of Two-Band E(k) Relations

for Band-to-Band Tunneling
Yuan Taur and Jianzhi Wu

Abstract— Four different two-band E(k) relations for TABLE I

band-to-band tunneling in the literature are examined. Three of E FFECTIVE M ASS OF S EMICONDUCTORS [8], [9]
them are continuous functions, from Franz, Kane, and Flietner,
respectively. One is piecewise, consisting of two linear lines from
the band edges in a k 2 versus E plot. It is shown that while all
three continuous models converge to the same function when the
effective masses of the two bands are equal, they give different
k 2 or mass-barrier products when the masses are unequal.
In particular, Flietner’s model can result in a mass-barrier even
higher than the piecewise linear model when the masses are
highly mismatched. In addition to the four published models,
a fifth, generalized power-n E(k) model is introduced, which
covers both Franz’s model and the piecewise linear model as
two special cases.
Index Terms— Band-to-band tunneling, dispersion relation,
effective mass.

I. I NTRODUCTION

I MAGINARY E(k) relationship in the forbidden bandgap

plays an important role in the current model of tunnel
FETs (TFETs). Several two-band E(k) relations have been
published in the literature since the 1950s. They have com-
monalities as well as distinctions. No detailed comparison has
been made on the different mathematical behavior of these
models in various limits.
This brief examines four different two-band E(k) models
in terms of their k 2 -E plots. A power-n model is intro-
duced, which is a general form of two of the published
models.
II. M ODEL D ESCRIPTION
The tunneling probability is expressed by the WKB integral
   by the fourth, piecewise linear k 2 -E model [6], [7].
T (E) = exp −2 |k(E)|d x
√  hole (LH) bands, the tunneling probability is the sum of the
 
2 2m
= exp − φ B (E)d x (1)
h̄
where k is the imaginary wave vector and φ B ≡ h̄ 2 |k|2 /2m is
the barrier height. The carrier energy E is conserved in the
tunneling process. The x-dependence comes from the bands:
Manuscript received August 2, 2015; accepted December 2, 2015. Date of
publication December 23, 2015; date of current version January 20, 2016.
The review of this brief was arranged by Editor N. Bhat.
The authors are with the Department of Electrical and Computer Engi-
neering, University of California, San Diego, CA 92093 USA (e-mail:
taur@ece.ucsd.edu; wjz2093@gmail.com).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available
online at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TED.2015.2505505
0018-9383 © 2015 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
1) conduction band (CB) (E c ) and 2) valence band (VB) (E v ).
At the two ends of the tunneling path, φ B (E = E c , E v ) = 0.
Each E(k) model provides a relation between k and E, but
cannot be separated into m and φ B in a rigorous way. In the
following description, we express the models in terms of the
mass-barrier product [mφ B ] or h̄ 2 |k|2 /2.
Table I lists the electron and hole effective mass of
several III–V and column IV semiconductors, based on either
experimental data or full-band calculations. There is a wide
variation of the m v /m c ratio among them, from ∼0.2 to 30.
The III–V semiconductors all have direct bandgaps, for which
the first three two-band models discussed below are applicable.
Tunneling in the indirect bandgap column IV semiconductors
involves a phonon to conserve the momentum, and is described
For the semiconductors with both heavy hole (HH) and light
tunneling components from each hole band to the CB. While
the LH band has a lower tunneling mass, its density of states
is smaller than that of the HH band. For thin film TFETs,
the quantization effect is stronger with the LH band, thereby
moving it farther from the CB.
A. Franz’s Model
Franz [1] was the first to publish a continuous two-band
E(k) model for band-to-band tunneling, as early as 1952 [1].
The initial model (19) applies only for the simplest mathe-
matical case of equal mass. Later on, it evolved to the more
general form for unequal masses [2], [3]. The mass×barrier
height in terms of the electron energy E in the bandgap,
870 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ELECTRON DEVICES, VOL. 63, NO. 2, FEBRUARY 2016

or E v ≤ E ≤ E c , is The mass-barrier product or h̄ 2 |k|2 /2 is

 −1
1 1 [mφ B ](piecewise) = m v (E − E v ) for E ≤ E max (10)
[mφ B ](Franz) = + (2)
m c (E c − E) m v (E − E v ) and
where m c and m v are the effective masses of electrons and
[mφ B ](piecewise) = m c (E c − E) for E ≥ E max (11)
holes in the tunneling direction.
It can be shown that the maximum mass-barrier product is where
Eg Eg mv − mc
[mφ B ]max (Franz) =  2 (3) E max (piecewise) = E i − × . (12)
2 mv + mc
√1
mc
+ √1
mv The maximum mass×barrier is
at an electron energy Eg
√ √ [mφ B ]max (piecewise) = . (13)
Eg mv − mc
1
mc + 1
mv
E max (Franz) = E i − ×√ √ (4)
2 mv + mc
E. Generalized Power-n Model
where E g = E c − E v and E i = (E c + E v )/2.
By mimicking a mathematical expression from the
B. Kane’s Model MOSFET velocity saturation model [10], one can consolidate
Kane [4] is well known for his pioneering work on band- Franz’s model and the piecewise linear model into the follow-
to-band tunneling. His result has been incorporated in many ing generalized equation:
textbooks. He derived the following E(k) relation from a [mφ B ](generalized)
perturbation solution to Schrodinger’s equation under the
 n  n −1/n
1 1
assumption of a constant field: = + . (14)

 m c (E c − E) m v (E − E v )
  
E c −E E c −E Here, n = 1 gives Franz’s model, while n = ∞ yields the
2 E g E−Em 2c
v
+ m 2v
− E−E v
mc + mv
[mφ B ](Kane) =  2 . piecewise linear model. n = 10 gives a close approximation
1
− 1 to the piecewise model with a k 2 -E function continuous and
mc mv
differentiable at every E.
(5)
It has a maximum mass-barrier of III. M ODEL C OMPARISON
Eg The first general observation of all two-band models is that
[mφ B ]max (Kane) =   (6) they are all symmetric with respect to CB and VB. In other
2 1
mc + 1
mv words, the model remains invariant under the exchange of
at an energy m c ↔ m v and (E c − E) ↔ (E − E v ).
From (6) and (13), [mφ B ]max (Kane) = 0.5[mφ B ]max
Eg mv − mc
E max (Kane) = E i − × . (7) (piecewise). Furthermore, it can be shown that
4 mv + mc
[mφ B ]max (Kane) ≤ [mφ B ]max (Franz) ≤ [mφ B ]max (Flietner).
C. Flietner’s Model (15)
Flietner [5] published his model in 1972. It has been It can also be shown that
frequently cited in recent TFET publications
[mφ B ]max (Kane) ≤ [mφ B ]max (Franz) ≤ [mφ B ]max (piecewise).
Eg
[mφ B ](Flietner) = E c −E E−E v
. (8) (16)
m v (E−E v ) + m c (E c −E) + √ 2
mc mv
However, the order of [mφ B ]max (Flietner) and
The maximum value is [mφ B ]max (piecewise) depends on m v /m c , as discussed
√
Eg mcmv below.
[mφ B ]max (Flietner) = (9)
4
at the same energy as that of Franz’s model (4). A. Near the Band Edges
All five models share the same asymptotic behavior near
D. Piecewise Linear k 2 -E Model E c and E v , namely
This model simply takes the parabolic E(k) relations, or
[mφ B ] = m v (E − E v ) for E ≈ E v (17)
the linear k 2 -E relations, at the CB edge and the VB edge,
and linearly extrapolates them into the forbidden gap until they and
intersect with each other. While the k 2 -E function is piecewise
continuous, the derivative at the point of intersection is not. [mφ B ] = m c (E c − E) for E ≈ E c . (18)
As mentioned earlier, this model has been associated with the This is expected of the continuity of parabolic E(k) from the
indirect tunneling, where a phonon is involved [6], [7]. CB and VB into the bandgap.
TAUR AND WU: EXAMINATION OF TWO-BAND E(k) RELATIONS FOR BAND-TO-BAND TUNNELING
Fig. 1. [mφ B ]/m c or −h̄ 2 k 2 /2m c versus E in units of E g for m c = m v .
All three continuous models are described by the same curve.
1, both
Fig. 2. [mφ B ]/m c or −h̄ 2 k 2 /2m c versus E in units of E g for m v /m c = 10.
1. The mass-barrier product or |k|2 keeps rising
B. Equal Masses
If m c = m v , the three continuous models, Franz, Kane, and
Flietner, yield identical E(k) or k 2 -E (Fig. 1)
(E c − E)(E − E v )
[mφ B ] = m c . (19)
Eg
The maximum mass×barrier height is [mφ B ]max = m c E g /4
at E = (E c + E v )/2 or the midgap. This is the simple
parabolic function that Franz [1] first came up with in 1952.
Fig. 1 shows that the piecewise linear model has a maximum
mass × barrier twice as high, m c E g /2, at the midgap.
C. Mismatched Masses
In the case of highly mismatched m c and m v , [mφ B ]max is
controlled by the lighter of the two masses in four of the five
models. The only exception is Flietner’s model, in which the
heavier mass plays as important a role in [mφ B ]max as the
lighter mass.
Here, we designate m c to be the lighter of the two, as usually
is the case. Fig. 2 plots all four models for m v /m c = 10.
Consider the slope d[mφ B ]/dE from E v to E c . All slopes start
871
Fig. 3. [mφ B ]/m c or −h̄ 2 k 2 /2m c versus E in units of E g for m v /m c = 100.
with m v at E = E v , and then decrease to zero at the peak
(for the three continuous models) and continue to negative
values until reaching −m c at E c . For Franz’s and Kane’s
models, d[mφ B ]/dE decreases monotonically. However, for
Flietner’s model, the curve goes outside the piecewise curve
between E max and E c . This means that the slope reaches a
value more negative than −m c before coming back to −m c
at E c . This becomes more evident in Fig. 3 for m v /m c = 100.
Fig. 3 also shows that in the limit of m v /m c
Franz’s model and the piecewise linear model converge to a
mass-barrier product of [mφ B ] = m c (E c − E), independent
of m v . This can simply be interpreted as a one-band model
with mass m c and barrier height E c − E. Kane’s model
also becomes independent of m v in the same limit, but with
[mφ B ]max = m c E g /2—only half of Franz’s or the piecewise
model.
Flietner’s model behaves very differently in the limit of
m v /m c
with m v , with [mφ B ]max = m c E g (m v /m c )1/2 /4. It is not clear
how to physically interpret the mass and the barrier separately.
Mathematically, Flietner’s model yields a maximum |k|2
higher than that of the piecewise linear model when the m v /m c
ratio exceeds ∼14.
D. Beyond Band Edges
As far as band-to-band tunneling is concerned, only the
E(k) relation within the bandgap matters. Nevertheless,
a reasonable degree of continuity of the mathematical
functions is expected when extrapolating back into the
VB (E < E v ) and the CB (E > E c ). The piecewise linear
model of course just continues its trends outside E g . For
m c = m v , the common function of the first three models (19)
extends well into the bands, as shown in Fig. 1. For
m v /m c = 10 in Fig. 2, however, there are a few adverse
effects of the models. Kane’s model turns imaginary when
E is only 0.01E g below E v . Franz’s and Flietner’s mod-
els both exhibit a singularity when E is a fraction of E g
below E v . The singularity is avoided in the n = 2 generalized
model.
872
Fig. 4. Tunneling probability under a constant field versus mass ratio.
E. T (E) Under Uniform Field
To illustrate the effect of two-band E(k) models on the
tunneling probability (1), we consider a uniform field case
in Fig. 4. With a uniform field, the tunneling distance and,
therefore, T (E) is independent of E. The tunneling probability
is plotted as a function of m v /m c ratio with m c set to 0.01m 0.
At m v /m c = 1, all three continuous two-band models give the
same T , somewhat higher than that of the piecewise model as
noted before. In the limit of m v /m c
1, the piecewise model [6] L. V. Keldysh, “Behavior of non-metallic crystals in strong
approaches ≈0.09, given by the well-known triangular-barrier
expression
 √ 3/2
 cally relevant P/N junction diodes,” J. Appl. Phys., vol. 95, no. 10,
4 2m c E g
T = exp − (20)
3q h̄E
where the tunneling is electron-like throughout the bandgap.
Franz’s model also approaches the same limit. However,
Flietner’s model continues to go down as m v /m c increases.
Kane’s model, on the other hand, settles to a value higher
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ELECTRON DEVICES, VOL. 63, NO. 2, FEBRUARY 2016
than that of the piecewise model. This suggests that Franz’s
model is the model of choice for the widest range of
m v and m c .
IV. C ONCLUSION
By examining the four published two-band E(k) relations,
including a piecewise case, we found that both Franz’s model
and the piecewise linear model behave reasonably in all
asymptotic limits. They are both reduced to a one-band model
when one mass is much lighter than the other, as one might
expect. Kane’s model under predicts the maximum barrier
height when the masses are highly mismatched. Flietner’s
model, on the other hand, can give mass-barrier height prod-
ucts or k 2 larger than that of the piecewise linear model in the
same limit.
R EFERENCES
[1] W. Franz, (in German), Ann. Phys., vol. 6, no. 11, p. 17, 1952.
[2] Y.-Y. Fan, S. P. Mudanai, W. Chen, L. F. Register, and S. K. Banerjee,
“High-k gate dielectric materials integrated circuit device design issues,”
in High Dielectric Constant Materials. Berlin, Germany: Springer, 2005,
p. 570.
[3] TCAD Sentaurus Device Manual, Synopsys, Inc., Mountain View, CA,
USA, 2013.
[4] E. O. Kane, “Zener tunneling in semiconductors,” J. Phys. Chem. Solids,
vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 181–188, Jan. 1960.
[5] H. Flietner, “The E(k) relation for a two-band scheme of semiconductors
and the application to the metal-semiconductor contact,” Phys. Status
Solidi B, vol. 54, no. 1, pp. 201–208, 1972.
electric fields,” Soviet J. Experim. Theoretical Phys., vol. 6, p. 763,
1958.
[7] P. M. Solomon et al., “Universal tunneling behavior in technologi-
pp. 5800–5812, 2004.
[8] [Online]. Available: http://www.tf.uni-kiel.de/matwis/amat/semi_en/kap
_2/backbone/r2_3_1.html
[9] [Online]. Available: http://www.ioffe.ru/SVA/NSM/Semicond/
[10] Y. Taur and T. H. Ning, Fundamentals of Modern VLSI Devices.
Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2009, pp. 187–191.
Authors’ photographs and biographies not available at the time of publication.