Appl. Phys. Lett., Vol. 78, No. 16, 16 April 2001
Perkins et al.
2359
FIG. 5. Ten successive Ϯ2 V sweeps show monotonic flatband shift ͑re-
verse sweeps not shown͒.
FIG. 4. Scaled EOT and leakage values for ZrO2 and ZrHfOx films of
varying nominal dielectric thickness.
preparation were caused by elevated fixed charge and trap-
ping resulting from the relatively large nitrogen content near
the dielectric/substrate interface.10 The stress-related ⌬VG
shift is a measure of the drift in the CV characteristics after
successive bias sweeps. As shown in Fig. 5 for a 20 Å ZrO2
film deposited atop a chemical oxide, a shift of 120 mV is
observed after 10 successive Ϯ2 V sweeps ͑reverse sweeps
not included for clarity purposes͒. This phenomenon may
result from several factors such as chemical contamination,
stress-induced defect formation, or mobile-ion transport. The
last possibility seems unlikely since positive-voltage stress-
ing does not shift the CV curves back in the positive-voltage
direction. It is our belief that the ⌬VG shift is a strong func-
tion of the electrode used, and that it indicates a possible
instability of the TiN/Al interface in contact with ZrO2.
concluding the existence of a moderate K-valued interfacial
layer.8 This analysis of the data shown in Fig. 4 assumes that
the interfacial layer is the same for all samples. Subject to
this assumption, the dielectric constant of the ZrO2 layer was
estimated to be between 25 and 35. In a recent study of
reactively sputtered ZrO2, Busch et al. report that only 6 Å
of the 10 Å interfacial layer in their samples can be attributed
to pure SiO2. These authors then mention that some inter-
mixing ͑silicate͒ is likely present in their amorphous interfa-
cial layer.9 At this time, it is unclear how this layer achieves
a moderate dielectric constant. However, the ability to pro-
duce a higher dielectric constant interfacial layer, while
maintaining excellent electrical characteristics, is a key en-
abler of continued scaling of the gate dielectric.
The authors would like to thank E. Garfunkel, M. Kelly,
and P. Pianetta for helpful discussions. This work was sup-
ported in part by the NSF/SRC Engineering Research Center
for Environmentally Benign Semiconductor Manufacturing
and Intel Corporation. One of the authors ͑C.P.͒ acknowl-
edges the support of the Semiconductor Research Corpora-
tion through a graduate fellowship.
Behavior similar to that of ZrO2 was also shown for an
oxide alloy of Hf and Zr, produced by alternating the metal
precursor steps of ZrCl4 and HfCl4. The similarities of the
two metal atoms and metal oxide crystal structures make
possible crystalline ZrO2–HfO2 alloys. These films had
slightly higher EOT values and lower leakage currents than
non-alloyed ALCVD-grown ZrO2 counterparts. Alloying
may allow further optimization of future dielectric films,
possibly in terms of crystallinity and leakage current mini-
mization.
Hysteresis and stress-related ⌬VG shifts were measured
to determine gate stack stability. Hysteresis in the CV curve
is a primary indicator of flatband and threshold voltage sta-
bility due to trapping and/or detrapping of charge in the di-
electric. The hysteresis is voltage dependent, with higher val-
ues resulting for larger voltage range sweeps. When the gate
bias was swept between Ϯ3 V, the hysteresis was approxi-
mately 70–90 mV for the samples with the chemical oxide
layer. For Ϯ2 V sweeps, the hysteresis decreased to 8–10
mV. Samples with the nitride layer produced similar trends
with much larger values. The Ϯ2 V sweeps resulted in hys-
teresis values of approximately 130 mV. We believe these
high hysteresis values for samples with NH3 RTN Si surface
1 Y. Ma, Y. Ono, L. Stecker, D. R. Evans, and S. T. Hsu, Tech. Dig. Int.
Electron Devices Meet. 149 ͑1999͒.
2 D. J. Hubbard and D. G. Schlom, J. Mater. Res. 11, 2757 ͑1996͒.
3 W.-J. Qi, R. Nieh, B. H. Lee, K. Onishi, L. Kang, Y. Jeon, J. C. Lee, V.
Kaushik, B.-Y. Neuyen, L. Phabhu, K. Eisenbeiser, and J. Finder, VLSI
Tech. Dig. 40 ͑2000͒.
4 B. Kralik, E. K. Chang, and S. G. Louie, Phys. Rev. B 57, 7027 ͑1998͒.
5 M. Balog, M. Schieber, M. Michman, and S. Patai, Thin Solid Films 47,
109 ͑1977͒.
6 M. Copel, M. Gribelyuk, and E. P. Gusev, Appl. Phys. Lett. 76, 436
͑2000͒.
7 D. A. Muller and S. Ramanathan ͑private communication͒.
8 W.-J. Qi, R. Nieh, B. H. Lee, L. Kang, Y. Jeon, K. Onishi, T. Ngai, S.
Banerjee, and J. C. Lee, Tech. Dig. Int. Electron Devices Meet. 145
͑1999͒.
9 B. W. Busch, W. H. Schulte, E. Garfunkel, T. Gustafsson, W. Qu, R.
Nieh, and J. Lee ͑in press͒.
10 G. Lucovsky and J. C. Phillips, J. Non-Cryst. Solids 227–230, 1221
͑1998͒.
On: Sat, 29 Nov 2014 18:24:29