Effect of the Coulomb interaction on the response time and impedance of the resonanttunneling diodes

Michael N. Feiginov
Citation: Applied Physics Letters 76, 2904 (2000); doi: 10.1063/1.126512
View online: http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.126512
View Table of Contents: http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/apl/76/20?ver=pdfcov
Published by the AIP Publishing
Articles you may be interested in
Shape effects in graphene nanoribbon resonant tunneling diodes: A computational study
J. Appl. Phys. 105, 084317 (2009); 10.1063/1.3115423
Suppression of intrinsic bistability in resonant-tunneling diode by in-plane magnetic field
Appl. Phys. Lett. 86, 032108 (2005); 10.1063/1.1853515
Lateral current density fronts in asymmetric double-barrier resonant-tunneling structures
J. Appl. Phys. 93, 6347 (2003); 10.1063/1.1568529
Disorder effects in reduced dimension: Indiumphosphide-based resonant tunneling diodes
J. Appl. Phys. 88, 6951 (2000); 10.1063/1.1324680
Exciton-induced tunneling effect on the current-voltage characteristics of resonant tunneling diodes
J. Appl. Phys. 81, 6221 (1997); 10.1063/1.364409

This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitation.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to IP:
200.129.163.72 On: Mon, 10 Nov 2014 19:35:10

APPLIED PHYSICS LETTERS

VOLUME 76, NUMBER 20

15 MAY 2000

Effect of the Coulomb interaction on the response time

and impedance of the resonant-tunneling diodes
Michael N. Feiginova)
Institute of Radioengineering and Electronics of Russian Academy of Sciences, 11 Mokhovaya Street,
Moscow 103907, Russia

Received 15 July 1999; accepted for publication 21 March 2000

We demonstrated that the response time of the resonant-tunneling structures ( resp) can be much
smaller as well as much larger than the quasibound-state lifetime. A simple analytical expression for
the impedance of the resonant-tunneling diode has been derived, it takes into account the Coulomb
interaction and the quasibound-state lifetime. A simple equation relating resp to the static
differential conductance has also been obtained; it allows one to get resp in the static measurements
of the currentvoltage curve. 2000 American Institute of Physics. S0003-69510001020-2

Two-dimensional 2D electrons accumulate in the quantum well QW of the resonant-tunneling RT diodes RTD
based on the double-barrier heterostructures.1 The Coulomb
interaction of the 2D electrons with emitter and collector can
lead to the currentvoltage (I V) curve of Z type in the
static case see Ref. 2 and references therein. Thus far no
consideration has been given to the effect of the Coulomb
interaction on the response time ( resp) of the RTD. So far it
has been believed1 that resp cannot be less than the electron
dwell times in the QW due to the tunneling to emitter ( e )
and collector ( c ). In the present work we show that it is not
true and that resp can be much smaller than e and c . The
Coulomb interaction should lead to the same effect in other
RT structures, e.g., the quantum cascade laser,3,4 also it
should be essential for the domain speed in the superlattices.5
The problem of the equivalent circuit of the RTD is
closely related to that of the response time. Many equivalent
circuits have been proposed. Among them the simplest RC
circuit, RLC circuit,6 the circuit from Ref. 7 are in most
common use. Nevertheless, there is not a simple and yet
comprehensive way to describe the impedance of the RTD.
We solve the problem in the present work. The problem was
dealt with in Ref. 7, but the approach used there is not quite
accurate see below, and in Refs. 810, but the results are
so cumbersome that it seems to be possible to use them just
for numerical calculations.
Basic equations. We consider the RTD Fig. 1, see notations there in the sequential tunneling model.11 The current distribution is assumed to be homogeneous in the plane
of the barriers. The set of equations consists of Eq. 1 describing the Coulomb interaction of the electrons in the QW
with emitter and collector, the equations for emitter-well
(J ew ) Eq. 2 and well-collector (J wc ) Eq. 3 currents, continuity Eqs. 4 and 5, electroneutrality Eq. 6 and Eq. 7
for emitter-collector Fermi level difference.

VV 0 N 2De 2 /C E f e E f c d/ Ld ,

J ew e E f e E f w 2D V / e ,

J wc eN 2D/ c ,

Electronic mail: misha@mail.cplire.ru

e N 2D / tJ ew J wc ,

Q c / tJ wc J RTD ,

Q c Q e eN 2D0,

E f c E f e Q e dQ c L 4 e/ ,

where J RTD is the density of current through RTD, N 2D

E f w U w 2D is the 2D electron concentration in the
QW, 2D is the 2D density of states in the QW, VU w
U e . Q e and Q c are 2D charge densities in the emitter and
collector, respectively. We suppose for simplicity that U w
E f e when the external bias is zero, VV 0 in the case.
Further, we shall be interested in such external biases only,
when there is the RT current (U w E f e ). e and c are supposed to be independent of V. The effective emitter-well
distance (d) is more than the emitter-barrier thickness by the
ThomasFermi screening length and the half width of the
QW; L is the similar well-collector distance, that includes
also the thickness of the depletion region the transit time of
electrons through the region is supposed to be not essential.
C (Ld)/4 Ld is the capacitance of the QW per unit
area. The form-factor (V) describes the broadening of the
resonant levels for the emitterwell transitions, Fig. 2. It

FIG. 1. The band diagram of the RTD in RT regime. 2D electrons in the

QW are formed by the balance of the resonant emitter-well current (J ew )
and the nonresonant well-collector one (J wc ).

This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitation.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to IP:
0003-6951/2000/76(20)/2904/3/$17.00
2904
2000 American Institute of Physics
200.129.163.72 On: Mon, 10 Nov 2014 19:35:10

Appl. Phys. Lett., Vol. 76, No. 20, 15 May 2000

Michael N. Feiginov

2905

much larger than the second one. The last term in Eq. 10
can increase as well as diminish resp . The factor before
(V 0 )/ e is the emitter-well Fermi-level difference, is
the derivative of the form factor. If the Coulomb effects are
omitted the limit of C, then resp dwell . The Coulomb interaction significantly changes resp .
Equation 11 relating the static differential conductance
0
) to resp follows from Eqs. 14 also:
(G RTD
FIG. 2. The form factor of the emitter-well RT transitions. The solid line is
for the transitions from 3D emitter, and the dashed line describes an additional contribution of the 2D emitter i.e., from the accumulation region in
Fig. 1.

should be pointed out that in the case of three-dimensional

3D emitter (V) is the step-function (V), if the broadening of the resonant levels is negligibly small. Another equation has been used in Ref. 7 instead of 2 and the dependence of the well-emitter current on V was neglected there.
We represent the solution of the set 17 as the sum of the
static solution the superscript 0 and a small fluctuation:
0
N 2D(t), E f i E 0f i E f i (t),
VV 0 V(t), N 2DN 2D
etc.
0
Static I V curve. Equation for N 2D
(V 0 ) follows from
Eqs. 14:
0
2D
N 2D

E 0f e U 0e V 0 V 0

e / c V 0

This equation, combined with Eqs. 1 and 3, gives the

0
0
0
0
(E 0f e E 0f c ), J RTD
J wc
J ew
, as an
static I V curve J RTD
0
implicit function of V . The I V curve can have Z-type
region, if the broadening of the resonant levels is sufficiently
small.
Response time. The Eq. 9 for the linear response of the
RTD on the bias variation E f c (t) follows from Eqs. 1
4 also. We suppose, without loss of generality, that
E f e (t)E 0f e and U e (t)U 0e .

0
1 resp / dwell C wc / c ,
G RTD

11

where C wc /4 L is the well-collector capacitance. C wc is

determined by the structure geometry, the doping profile and
external bias, and its value is known with good accuracy.
0
in QW see,
One can get c from Eq. 3 by measuring N 2D
e.g., Ref. 12. If the collector barrier is thinner or the same as
the emitter one, then dwell c . In the case, Eq. 11 gives
possibility to get easily resp in the static measurements of
0
.
G RTD
RTD impedance. An expression for linear impedance
(Z RTD E f c /e J RTD) follows from the set 17:
1
Z RTD

0
i C ec G RTD

1i c d/ Ld
.
1i resp

12

C ec /4 (Ld) is the emitter-collector capacitance. If the

contact resistance is a significant one, it should be connected
in series with Z RTD Eq. 12.
Discussion. As follows from Eq. 12, the RTD could be
considered as an RC circuit in the low frequency limit, when
c d/(Ld)1 and resp1:
0
G RTD
1/Z RTDi C
,

13

0
C ec G RTD
C
c d/ Ld resp .

14

0, although
The analysis of Eqs. 14 and 11 shows that C
it can be essentially less than C ec . It is worth noting that the
RTD impedance Eq. 12 has formally the form coinciding
with RLC circuit6 when resp1 and c d/(Ld)1, but
9
/ t1/ resp N 2D t E f c t ,
the value of inductance is essentially different. Its value is
0
) rather than dwell (l
substantiated by resp (l resp /G RTD
1
1 V 0 e 2 2D
0

/G
,
as
in
Ref.
6,
and
the
Coulomb
interaction is

dwell
RTD
resp c
e
C
very important for its value. In the general case one should
V 0
use Eq. 12.
E 0f e U 0e V 0 V 0

.
10

The I V curve of the RTD could be broken down into

0
e

e
1 V c / e
two regions. First, the region where the resonant-tunneling
0
0 here and,
current grows up as a function of V 0 . G RTD
resp has the sense of the tunnel relaxation time of the charge
as it follows from Eq. 11, 0 resp dwell . In the case of
fluctuations in the QW. The first and the second terms in Eq.
the RTD with 3D emitter just the first three terms are left in
10 describe relaxation due to the electron tunneling to colEq. 10 (V 0 )1 in the region and dwell / resp5 10
lector and emitter, respectively, and they give the electron
0

due to the third one, if e c . It is in accordance with the

dwell time in the QW: 1/ dwell1/ c (V )/ e . As E f w
unexplained result of Ref. 13, where dwell / resp7 was
changes, the energy of the bottom of the 2D subband in the
measured. resp drastically drops down owing to the last term
QW also shifts due to the Coulomb interaction of the elecin Eq. 10 in the case of 2D emitter, since (V 0 )0. Let us
trons in the QW with emitter and collector. As a result, first,
consider the asymptotic behavior of resp in the limit of
an additional contribution in J ew appears due to the change
ideal structure, when the broadening of the resonant levof the number of free states in the QW available for tunnelels () is conditioned by the tunnel transparency of the baring third term. Second, the current changes owing to the
riers only / dwell , (V 0 )1/ and V 0 0. In the
form-factor (V), that is described by the fourth term in Eq.
case the last term in Eq. 10 is the dominant one as a rule,
10. The factor before the square brackets in Eq. 10 equals
min
U w / E f w and its typical value is 510. It should be noted
and resp
does not depend on the absolute values of e and c
This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the
terms at: http://scitation.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded
to IP:
that due to the factor the third term in Eq. 10 is always
and is determined by their ratio only:

200.129.163.72 On: Mon, 10 Nov 2014 19:35:10

2906

Appl. Phys. Lett., Vol. 76, No. 20, 15 May 2000

min

resp

E 0f e U 0e
e 2 2D
.
C e / c 2 V 0 2 V 0 c / e

Michael N. Feiginov

15

min
min
For example, if e c , then resp
/(E0feU0e ), i.e., resp
depends just on the emitter Fermi level and resp dwell .
The low-frequency capacitance of RTD Eq. 14 can
have a peak in that region of the I V curve, if c d/(Ld)
resp i.e., L or e are sufficiently small and this is in
can drop down, if the
accordance with experiment.12 Also, C
reverse inequality is fulfilled and it was observed in Ref. 10.
on L correlates with the numerical
The dependence of C
14
calculations.
0
Second, the region of exit from resonance, J RTD
drops
0
down as function of V here, this is the region of the
negative differential conductance NDC and the central arm
of Z-type I V curve. resp dwell in the region of NDC, as it
follows from Eq. 11, with resp increasing as NDC grows,
0
. In other words, good RTDs
and resp as G RTD
with large NDC are principally slow. One has to choose
bad RTDs for high-speed applications. As it follows from
the analysis of the static I V curve Eqs. 1, 3, and 8,
and Eq. 10, resp0 in the region of the central arm of
Z-type I V curve, i.e., the region is unstable.
Our model easily explains the capacitance peak in the
NDC region,8,12,1416 to name a few references. It follows
0
when G RTD
, but,
from Eqs. 11 and 14 that C
generally speaking, the peak does not coincide with that nei0
has maximum.
ther in NDC nor in current when N 2D
Although all the results of the present work are obtained
in the sequential tunneling approximation,11 the Coulomb interaction should lead to the similar effect in the coherent
tunneling model. The assumption of the homogeneous current distribution ceases to be true at high frequencies in the
RTD with large diameter. In the case the junction polaritons
are excited by the skin effect.17 Also, the assumption can fail
in the region of the central arm of Z-type I V curve.18
Conclusions. We have demonstrated that in the region
where the RT current grows up, the response time of RTD is
smaller and much smaller than the electron dwell time in the

QW. The time becomes especially small in the high-quality

structures with 2D2D tunneling. RTD is principally a slow
device in the NDC region, i.e., resp dwell and resp
0
. A simple analytical expression has been
when G RTD
derived that relates resp to the static differential conductance
Eq. 11. Also, a simple and comprehensive analytical expression has been derived for the RTD impedance Eq. 12.
In the low-frequency limit it describes the special features in
the RTD capacitance.
The work was supported by INTAS 97-11475, RFBR
99-02-17592, Programs FTNS 99-1124, and PAS
3.1.99. The author is grateful to V. G. Popov and V. A.
Volkov for useful discussion.
1

See, e.g., Physics of Quantum Electron Devices, Springer Series in Electronics and Photonics, edited by F. Capasso Springer, New York, 1989,
Vol. 28.
2
A. D. Martin, M. L. F. Lerch, P. E. Simmonds, and L. Eaves, Appl. Phys.
Lett. 64, 1248 1994.
3
R. F. Kazarinov and R. A. Suris, Sov. Phys. Semicond. 5, 707 1971.
4
J. Faist, F. Capasso, C. Sirtori, D. L. Sivco, A. L. Hutchinson, and A. Y.
Cho, Appl. Phys. Lett. 66, 538 1995.
5
M. Buttiker and H. Thomas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 38, 78 1977.
6
E. R. Brown, C. D. Parker, and T. C. L. G. Sollner, Appl. Phys. Lett. 54,
934 1989.
7
F. W. Sheard and G. A. Toombs, Solid-State Electron. 32, 1443 1989.
8
J. Genoe, C. Van Hoof, W. Van Roy, J. H. Smet, K. Fobelets, R. P.
Mertens, and G. Borghs, IEEE Trans. Electron Devices 38, 2006 1991.
9
H. P. Joosten, H. L. M. F. Noteborn, K. Kaski, and D. Lenstra, J. Appl.
Phys. 70, 3141 1991.
10
J. P. Mattia, A. L. McWhorter, R. J. Aggrawal, F. Rana, E. R. Brown, and
P. Maki, J. Appl. Phys. 84, 1140 1998.
11
S. Luryi, Appl. Phys. Lett. 47, 490 1985.
12
L. Eaves, M. L. Leadbeater, D. G. Hayes, E. S. Alves, F. W. Sheard, G. A.
Toombs, P. E. Simmonds, M. S. Skolnick, M. Henini, and O. H. Hughes,
Solid-State Electron. 32, 1101 1989.
13
J. S. Scott, J. P. Kaminski, M. Wanke, S. J. Allen, D. H. Chow, M. Lui,
and T. Y. Liu, Appl. Phys. Lett. 64, 1995 1994.
14
T. Wei and S. Stapleton, J. Appl. Phys. 76, 1287 1994.
15
T. Wei, S. Stapleton, and E. Berolo, J. Appl. Phys. 73, 829 1993.
16
J. Jo, H. S. Li, Y. W. Chen, and K. L. Wang, Appl. Phys. Lett. 64, 2276
1994.
17
M. N. Feiginov and V. A. Volkov, JETP Lett. 69, 336 1999.
18
M. N. Feiginov and V. A. Volkov, JETP Lett. 68, 662 1998.

This article is copyrighted as indicated in the article. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://scitation.aip.org/termsconditions. Downloaded to IP:
200.129.163.72 On: Mon, 10 Nov 2014 19:35:10