Phys. Status Solidi A, 1–7 (2016) / DOI 10.1002/pssa.
201600599
Comparative study on noise
characteristics of As and Sb-based
high electron mobility transistors
Takuto Takahashi**, Shota Hatsushiba, Sachie Fujikawa, and Hiroki I. Fujishiro*
Department of Applied Electronics, Tokyo University of Science, 6-3-1 Niijuku, Katsushika-ku, Tokyo 125-8585, Japan
Received 12 August 2016, revised 24 October 2016, accepted 3 November 2016
Published online 22 November 2016
Keywords high electron mobility transistors, InAs, InGaAs, InSb, noise, quantum-corrected Monte Carlo simulations
* Corresponding author: e-mail fujisiro@te.noda.tus.ac.jp, Phone: þ81 3 5876 1439, Fax: þ81 3 5876 1614

e-mail 8115625@ed.tus.ac.jp, Phone: þ81 3 5876 1439, Fax: þ81 3 5876 1614
We study comparatively the RF and the noise characteristics
for the In0.7Ga0.3As, InAs/AlSb and InSb high electron
mobility transistors (HEMTs) by using the quantum corrected
Monte Carlo (QC-MC) simulation. The increase in the current
fluctuation <DI 2ds > with Vds is caused by the increase in the
electron velocity variance s 2v (i.e., the electron heating); this
indicates clearly that the low Vds operation is essential to
lowering <DI 2ds >. The smaller electron effective m results in
the larger s 2v and thus the larger <DI 2ds >, yet it allows the low
1 Introduction These days, rapid growth of infor-
mation and communication systems has resulted in much
attention to millimeter and sub-millimeter wave regions as
new frequency resources, which has led to increasing
demand for ultra-high frequency and ultra-low noise
transistors. So far, the highest cut off frequency fT and
the lowest minimum noise figure NFmin have been recorded
by the InGaAs high electron mobility transistors (HEMTs)
through increasing In content in the InGaAs quantum well
(QW) channel to increase the electron mobility m by
lowering the electron effective mass m , and/or shortening
the gate length Lg [1–5]. The potential candidate for
increasing fT further has been the InAs QW channel with
AlSb buffer/barrier, in which m in the InAs channel has
been lowered by applying the tensile strain from the AlSb
buffer/barrier [6, 7]. In the meanwhile, recently, the InSb
HEMT has been expected to exhibit much higher fT than the
As-based HEMTs, because of the highest m owing to the
smallest m of InSb among III–V semiconductors [8].
Indeed, the maximum fT over 300 GHz has been reported so
far [8, 9]. The quantum-corrected Monte Carlo (QC-MC)
simulation has also showed the potential of the InSb HEMT
a
solidi
physica
status
www.pss-a.com
applications and materials science
Vds operation through the higher m. The InSb HEMT with the
channel of the smallest m overcomes the inherent nature of the
larger <DI 2ds > through the ability of the lower Vds operation
along with the larger gm. Eventually, the InSb HEMT shows
the smallest minimum noise figure NFmin of 0.31 dB with the
associated gain Gass of 12.4 dB at 100 GHz and the highest
cutoff frequency fT of 1.8 THz at Vds of 0.2 V. These results
indicate the potential of the InSb HEMT for the ultra-low
power, ultra-high frequency, and the ultra-low noise transistor.
ß 2016 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
for the ultra-low power and the Terahertz operation [10–12].
On the other hand, in spite of the extensive works to increase
fT further, there has still been a question regarding the noise
characteristics: that is to say, whether the smaller m has
also been preferable to lowering NFmin or not. Therefore, in
this work, we study comparatively the noise characteristics
for the As and Sb-based HEMTs by using the QC-MC
simulation to reveal what is the suitable structure for the
ultra-low noise transistor.
2 Simulation methods
2.1 QC-MC simulation The device DC and RF
characteristics including the noise are calculated by means
of the QC-MC simulation, where the quantum mechanical
and degeneracy effects are considered [13–15]. Three-
valleys (G, L, X) non-parabolic spherical conduction band
model is assumed for each material. Strained or unstrained
band structures are calculated by empirical pseudopoten-
tial method with rigid ion approximation, and then the
band parameters that include m and non-parabolic
parameters are extracted [7, 16]. Scattering mechanisms
that are taken into account are acoustic, polar, non-polar
ß 2016 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
 pss a

solidi
physica

status
2 T. Takahashi et al.: Noise characteristics of As and Sb-based high electron mobility transistors

optical phonons, ionized impurity, alloy, and impact spectral densities and the Y-parameters, according to the
ionization. following formulas [18, 20, 24–26]:


2.2 RF and noise analysis A noisy two-port device NFmin ¼ 1 þ 2Rn Y cor þ Y opt ; ð4Þ
as the HEMT in common source configuration is
represented by means of the intrinsic noiseless device  
together with two correlated noise current generators, one at P Sidig pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Rn ¼ 2
; Y cor ¼ Re Y 11  Y 21 ; Y opt ¼ A  B;
the input (gate) terminal and the other at the output (drain) jY 21 j Sid
terminal [17, 18]. These noise sources are characterized by
the power spectral densities of the current fluctuations. The  
noiseless device is represented by the Y parameters, which Sig 2 2  Sid Sig
allows us to evaluate the dynamic behavior of the device. A ¼ jY 21 j þ jY 11 j  Re Y 11 Y 21 ;
Sid Sid
To extract the Y parameters of the noiseless device,
small step perturbations in voltage are applied to both gate
 
and drain terminals, individually. Because the transient Sid Sig
currents due to the voltage steps contain signals at all B ¼ Im2 Y 11 þ Y 21 ;
Sid
frequencies, the Y parameters of the device are given by the
Fourier decomposition of them, according to the following where Rn is the noise resistance, Ycor is the correlation
formula as: admittance (associated to the correlation between the gate
jv
and drain noise sources), and Yopt is the parallel optimum
Y ij ðvÞ ¼ ½I i ð1Þ  I i ð0Þ=DV j þ F ½I i ðtÞ  I i ð1Þ; ð1Þ matching admittance for satisfying the minimum noise
DV j
conditions. The associated power gain Gass corresponding to
the minimum noise condition is also calculated as follows:
where DVj is the voltage step of amplitude, Ii (t) is the
transient current, Ii (0) and Ii (1) are the steady currents

Re Y opt Y 21 2
Gass ¼  
before and after the voltage perturbation for the gate and Y þ Y : ð5Þ
drain terminals, respectively [19, 20]. The real parts of Y21 Re Y 22  YYopt21þY
Y 12
11
opt 11

and Y22 represent the transconductance gm and the output

conductance gd, respectively. The equivalent circuit
parameters that include the gate-source capacitance Cgs
and the gate–drain capacitance Cgd are also extracted by
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
using the Y parameters, and then the intrinsic fT is calculated
as [21, 22]


f T ¼ gm =2p Cgs þ Cgd : ð2Þ
The power spectral densities of the auto-correlation of
noise sources at the gate and drain terminals Sig (f), Sid (f),
and the cross-correlation between them Sidig (f) are
determined by the fast Fourier transform of the current
fluctuations DIgs and DIds at the gate and drain terminals in
the steady state, respectively. The intrinsic dimensionless
noise parameters P, R, and C, which represent the drain and
the gate noise sources and their cross-correlation, are also
calculated by using the noise spectral densities and the Y
parameters, as the following formulas [23]:
NFmin is also represented by using the noise parameters
and fT, as the following formula [27]:
f

NFmin ¼ 1 þ 2 PR 1  C2 : ð6Þ
fT
3 Device models Figure 1 shows the schematic
illustration of the device geometry. Three types of the layer
structures are simulated: the combinations of channel/buffer
(barrier) are In0.7Ga0.3As/In0.52Al0.48As in device A, InAs/
AlSb in device B, and InSb/In0.75Al0.25Sb in device C. The
channel thickness is 15 nm. The donor sheet densities are
2.0  1012, 2.5  1012, and 1.5  1012 cm2, respectively,
which are chosen so as to make the densities of the
two-dimensional electron gas (2DEG) in the channel

Sid Sig jY 21 j Sidig

P¼ ;R ¼ ; C ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ; ð3Þ
4kB T 0 jY 21 j 4kB T 0 jY 11 j 2
Sid Sig

where kB is the Boltzmann constant and T0 the reference

temperature of 300 K. These would provide the information
about the origin of the noise of the device.
From the viewpoint of the circuit design, NFmin (i.e., a
ratio of signal to noise at the gate divided by a corresponding
ratio at the drain) is the most important parameter related to Figure 1 Schematic illustration of HEMTs with three types of
the noise. Therefore, we calculate NFmin by using the noise layer structures.

ß 2016 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim www.pss-a.com

 Original
Paper

Phys. Status Solidi A (2016) 3

(barriers): the strain ratios e|| are 1.1, þ1.3, and 1.3
for the devices A, B, and C, respectively.
Figure 2 shows the calculated dependence of m on e||
for the In0.7Ga0.3As, InAs, and InSb, in which e||
corresponding to the devices A–C are marked by the
dashed lines [10]. We note that the compressive strain
(e|| < 0) makes m larger and the tensile strain (e|| > 0) makes
m smaller. Eventually, m is smallest in the device C, which
is followed by the devices B and A.

Figure 2 Dependence of effective mass m on strain ratio e|| for
In0.7Ga0.3As, InAs, and InSb. e|| corresponding to devices A–C are
marked by dashed lines.
maximum, but not to spill the 2DEG over the barriers. The
resultant 2DEG densities are 1.5  1012, 2.2  1012, and
1.0  1012 cm2, respectively. Lg is 30 nm. The compressive
or tensile strains are applied to the channels owing to the
lattice mismatch between the channels and buffers
4 Simulation results
4.1 RF characteristics Figure 3 shows gm, gd, and fT
as a function of the drain current Ids for the devices A (a), B
(b), and C (c), which are calculated at 100 GHz. The drain
voltage Vds is varied as 0.2, 0.4, and 0.6 V. Figure 4 shows
the DC Ids–Vds characteristics for the devices, where the gate
voltage Vgs is varied from 0.8 to 0.2 V by 0.2 V step. The
red lines show the impact ionization frequencies at Vgs of
0 V.
As shown in Fig. 4, the device C shows the preferable
Ids–Vds characteristics with the lower knee voltage of about

Figure 3 RF transconductance gm, drain conductance gd, and cutoff frequency fT as a function of drain current Ids at 100 GHz for devices
(a) A, (b) B, and (c) C. Drain voltage Vds is varied as 0.2, 0.4, and 0.6 V.

Figure 4 DC Ids–Vds characteristics for devices (a) A, (b) B, and (c) C. Gate voltage Vgs is varied from 0.8 to 0.2 V by 0.2 V step.
Impact ionization frequencies at Vgs of 0 V are also shown by red lines.

www.pss-a.com ß 2016 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

 pss a
solidi
physica
status
4 T. Takahashi et al.: Noise characteristics of As and Sb-based high electron mobility transistors
Table 1 Peaks of electron velocity vd in channel at Vds of 0.2, 0.4,
and 0.6 V for devices A, B, and C.
peak vd (105 m s1)
Vds (V) 0.2 0.4
device A 3.2 4.9
device B 4.6 6.6
device C 6.6 8.1

Vgs is 0 V.
0.2 V; this is attributed to the higher m owing to the smallest
m . Then, gm is larger and gd is smaller even at Vds of 0.2 V.
2
Because of the deeper QW channel that comes from the
larger conduction band discontinuity of 1.35 eV at the InAs/
AlSb interface, the device B shows the largest 2DEG
density. Then, the threshold voltage Vth becomes larger
negatively. gm becomes larger when Vds increases more than
0.4 V, whereas gd still remains somewhat larger. Mean-
while, because of the largest m and thus the smallest m, Ids
of the device A is considerably smaller than the devices B
and C. Then, gm is smaller even at Vds of 0.6 V.
Table 1 shows the peaks of the electron velocity vd in the
channel at Vds of 0.2, 0.4, and 0.6 V for the devices A, B, and
C. Vgs is 0 V. The peak vd is largest in the device C, which is
followed by the devices B and C; this is corresponding to the
descending order of the m size [11, 28]. Eventually, the
devices B and C exhibit fT over 1.5 THz, meanwhile the
device A exhibits much lower fT less than 1 THz. It is worth
notifying that fT in the device C tends to have a peak at Vds of
about 0.2 V; this is different from the devices A and B,
where fT tends to increase with Vds. The increase in Vds
increases the drain delay time td through the extention of the
effective gate length, whereas it decreases simultaneously
the gate transit time tg through the increase in vd underneath
the gate by the increasing electric field [11, 28]. In case of
the device C, vd almost saturates at Vds of more than 0.2 V
Figure 5 Current variance <DI 2ds > at drain terminal, velocity variance s 2v , and number of electrons Nch underneath gate as a function of
Ids for devices (a) A, (b) B, and (c) C. Vds is varied as 0.2, 0.4, and 0.6 V.
ß 2016 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
because of the higher m. Accordingly, the increase in td
becomes dominant, and then fT starts to decrease [11, 28].
4.2 Current fluctuations Next, we discuss the
0.6 origin of the current fluctuation. According to the Ramo–
Shockley formula, and assuming the stochastic motion of
5.4 the electrons in the channel, the average and the variance of
7.2 Ids are given by
8.5
q
hI ds i ¼ N ch vd ; ð7Þ
Lg
and
q
hDI 2ds i ¼ N ch s 2v ; ð8Þ
Lg
respectively, where q is an elementary charge, Nch is the
number of the channel electrons underneath the gate, and s 2v
is the velocity variance for a single electron, which is also
approximated by kBTe/m*, where Te is an electron
temperature [29–31]. Sid (f) is white (i.e., independent of
frequency) up to a certain high frequency, and then it is
proportional to <DI 2ds > at an ordinary frequency.
Figure 5 shows <DI 2ds > measured at the drain terminal
as a function of Ids for the devices A (a), B (b), and C (c). Vds
is varied as 0.2, 0.4, and 0.6 V. <DI 2ds > is represented
approximately by the product of s 2v and Nch (see in Eq. (8)),
and then these are also shown in Fig. 5. It is seen that
<DI 2ds > tends to increase with Vds. In the meanwhile, s 2v
increases with Vds, which indicates the heating of the
electrons (i.e., the increase in Te) under the increasing
electric field. On the contrary, Nch decreases with Vds, which
is owing to the increase in vd. Therefore, the increase in
<DI 2ds > turns out to be caused by the increase in s 2v . This
indicates that the operation at the lower Vds is essential to
lowering <DI 2ds > through the prevention of the electron
heating.
www.pss-a.com
 Original
Paper

Phys. Status Solidi A (2016) 5

Figure 6 Intrinsic noise parameters P, R, and C as a function of Ids at 100 GHz for devices (a) A, (b) B, and (c) C. Vds is varied as 0.2, 0.4,
and 0.6 V.

<DI 2ds > is largest in the device C, which is followed by
the devices B and A; this corresponds to the descending
order of the m size. The smaller m results in the smaller
Nch because of the larger vd (see in Eq. (7)). However, it
increases s 2v more as kBTe/m*. Eventually, <DI 2ds > becomes
larger. We note that the smaller m is preferable to the lower
Vds operation because of the higher m, however, it is
disadvantage in <DI 2ds > itself.
4.3 Intrinsic noise parameters Next, we discuss
the noise parameters of the devices. Figure 6 shows P, R, and
C as a function of Ids at 100 GHz for the devices A (a), B (b),
and C (c). Vds is varied as 0.2, 0.4, and 0.6 V. P represents
the drain noise source (see in Eq. (3)). It is surprising that the
device C shows the smaller P in the whole Vds range, in spite
of the larger <DI 2ds >. This is because of the larger gm owing
to the smallest m . Meanwhile, the device A shows the larger

Figure 7 Minimum noise figure NFmin and assosiated power gain Gass as a function of Ids at 100 GHz for devices (a) A, (b) B, and (c) C.
Vds is varied as 0.2, 0.4, and 0.6 V.

www.pss-a.com ß 2016 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

 pss a
solidi
physica
status
6 T. Takahashi et al.: Noise characteristics of As and Sb-based high electron mobility transistors
P in spite of the smaller <DI 2ds >. This is because of the
smaller gm owing to the largest m . Therefore, P decreases
drastically with Vds according to the increase in gm. These
suggest that the device with the channel of the smaller m as
the device C is likely to overcome the inherent nature of the
larger <DI 2ds > through the ability of the lower Vds operation
along with the larger gm.
R represents the gate noise source (see in Eq. (3)). In the
devices B and C, R increases drastically when Vds increases
more than 0.4 V, which is attributed to the occurrence of the
impact ionization (see Fig. 4). The narrower bandgap
materials such as InAs and InSb have the larger impact
ionization coefficients, which results in the pronounced
impact ionization even at the lower electric field. Therefore,
Vds is restricted within a narrower range, substantially [7, 10,
11].
C represents the cross-correlation between the drain and
the gate noise sources (see in Eq. (3)). Although C
dependents strongly on the device geometry itself, the
device B tends to show the somewhat smaller C than the
others [23].
Here, we note that in this simulation, the device
geometry, for example, the distance between the gate and
the channel dgate is constant. In the meanwhile, the larger
2DEG density allows to shorten dgate while keeping Vth
constant, which would lead to the increase in gm [3].
Therefore, in addition to the decrease in m , the increase in
the 2DEG density is also essential to lowering P. The
devices A and especially B have the room for the
improvement in P through shortening dgate, because of
the larger 2DEG densities.
4.4 Minimum noise figures Finally, we discuss
NFmin of the devices. Figure 7 shows NFmin and Gass as a
function of Ids at 100 GHz for the devices A (a), B (b), and C
(c). Vds is varied as 0.2, 0.4, and 0.6 V. NFmin shows the typical
U-shape, which originates basically from the balance between
the dependence of gm and <DI 2ds > (i.e., fT and P) on Ids [26].
The device C shows the smaller NFmin at the low Vds of 0.2 V;
this indicates that the lower Vds operation and the larger gm (i.
e., the higher fT) beat the larger <DI 2ds >, eventually.
Meanwhile, the device B shows the larger NFmin and the
smaller Gass, comparatively, which are attributed to the
smaller C and the larger gd, respectively. We noted that in the
devices B and C, NFmin tends to increase with Vds, which is
attributed mainly to the occurrence of the impact ionization.
Meanwhile, in the device A, NFmin tends to decrease with Vds,
which is attributed to the increase in gm (i.e., the increase in fT).
Table 2 shows the summary of NFmin, Gass at 100 GHz
and the maximum fT for the devices A–C. Eventually, the
smallest NFmin of 0.31 dB with Gass of 12.4 dB at Vds of
0.2 V is obtained in the device C, which is followed by
0.81 dB with Gass of 13.1 dB at Vds of 0.6 V in the device A
and 0.92 dB with Gass of 10.2 dB at Vds of 0.4 V in the device
B. In the meanwhile, the highest fT of 1.8 THz at Vds of 0.2 V
is obtained in the device C, which is followed by 1.6 THz at
Vds of 0.6 V in the device B and 0.8 THz at Vds of 0.6 V in the
ß 2016 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
Table 2 Summary of NFmin, Gass at 100 GHz and maximum fT.
NFmin Ga Ids Vds fT
(dB) (dB) (mA mm1) (V) (THz)
device A 0.81 13.1 163 0.6 0.8
device B 0.92 10.2 197 0.4 1.6
device C 0.31 12.4 280 0.2 1.8
device A. These results indicate the potential of the InSb
HEMT for the ultra-low power, the ultra-high frequency and
the ultra-low noise transistor. The further improvement
would be accomplished through the increase in the 2DEG
density. To do that, some efforts that have included the InSb/
InGaSb and InSb/AlInSb multi-QW channels [32, 33] and
the InGaSb channel [34] have been reported.
5 Conclusions We have studied comparatively the RF
and the noise characteristics for the In0.7Ga0.3As, InAs/AlSb,
and InSb HEMTs by using the QC-MC simulation. The
increase in <DI 2ds > with Vds has been caused by the increase in
s 2v (i.e., the heating of the electrons); this has indicated clearly
that the low Vds operation has been essential to lowering
<DI 2ds >. The smaller m has resulted in the larger s 2v and thus
the larger <DI 2ds >, yet it has allowed the low Vds operation
through the higher m. The InSb HEMT of the smallest m has
overcome the inherent nature of the larger <DI 2ds > through
the ability of the lower Vds operation along with the larger gm.
Eventually, the InSb HEMT has showed the smallest NFmin of
0.31 dB with Gass of 12.4 dB at 100 GHz and the highest fT of
1.8 THz at Vds of 0.2 V. These results have indicated the
potential of the InSb HEMT for the ultra-low power, ultra-
high frequency, and the ultra-low noise transistor.
Acknowledgement This work was supported partly by
Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C) in Japan.
References
[1] T. Takegishi, H. Watanabe, R. Yamada, T. Matsumoto, S.
Hara, and H. I. Fujishiro, in: Proc. IEEE International
Conference on Indium Phosphide and Related Materials
(IPRM), Newport Beach, CA, 2009, pp. 124–127.
[2] T. Takegishi, H. Watanabe, and H. I. Fujishiro, IEICE Trans.
Electron. 93, 1258 (2010).
[3] F. A. Fatah, Y. C. Lin, T. Y. Lee, K. C. Yang, R. X. Liu, J. R.
Chan, H. T. Hsu, Y. Miyamoto, and E. Y. Chang, ECS J.
Solid State Sci. Technol. 4, N157 (2015).
[4] X. Mei, W. Yoshida, M. Lange, J. Lee, J. Zhou, P. H. Liu, K.
Leong, A. Zamora, J. Padilla, S. Sarkozy, R. Lai, and W. R.
Deal, IEEE Electron Device Lett. 36, 327 (2015).
[5] T. Takahashi, M. Sato, K. Makiyama, Y. Nakasha, N. Hara,
and T. Iwai, in: Proc. IEEE International Symposium on
Radio-Frequency Integration Technology (RFIT), Sendai,
Japan, 2015, pp. 238–240.
[6] C. Gardes, S. M. Bagumako, L. Desplanque, N. Wichmann,
S. Bollaert, F. Danneville, X. Wallart, and Y. Roelens, in:
Proc. International Conference on Indium Phosphide and
Related Materials (IPRM), Kobe, Japan, 2013.
www.pss-a.com

Phys. Status Solidi A (2016)
[7] F. Machida, H. Nishino, J. Sato, H. Watanabe, S. Hara, and H.
I. Fujishiro, in: Proc. IPRM 2011 – 23rd International
Conference on Indium Phosphide and Related Materials
(IPRM), Berlin, 2011.
[8] T. Ashley, L. Buckle, M. T. Emeny, M. Fearn, D. G. Hayes,
K. P. Hilton, R. Jefferies, T. Martin, K. J. Nash, T. J. Phillips,
J. Powell, W. H. A. Tang, M. J. Uren, D. J. Wallis, and P. J.
Wilding, in: Proc. 64th Device Research Conference (DRC),
State College, PA, 2006.
[9] K. Isono, D. Tsuji, T. Taketsuru, S. Fujikawa, I. Watanabe, Y.
Yamashita, A. Endoh, S. Hara, A. Kasamatsu, and H. I.
Fujishiro, in: Proc. Compound Semiconductor Week (CSW)
[Includes 28th International Conference on Indium Phos-
phide and Related Materials (IPRM) & 43rd International
Symposium on Compound Semiconductors (ISCS)],
Toyama, Japan, 2016.
[10] J. Sato, Y. Nagai, S. Hara, H. I. Fujishiro, A. Endoh, and I.
Watanabe, in: Proceedings 2012 International Conference on
Indium Phosphide and Related Materials (IPRM), Santa
Barbara, CA, 2012, pp. 237–240.
[11] Y. Nagai, S. Nagai, J. Sato, S. Hara, H. I. Fujishiro, A. Endoh,
I. Watanabe, and A. Kasamatsu, in: Proc. International
Conference on Indium Phosphide and Related Materials
(IPRM), Kobe, Japan, 2013.
[12] S. Hatsushiba, S. Fujikawa, and H. I. Fujishiro, in: Proc.
Compound Semiconductor Week 2015 (CSW), Santa
Barbara, CA, 2015.
[13] D. K. Ferry, Superlattice. Microst. 28, 419 (2000).
[14] H. Rodilla, T. Gonzalez, D. Pardo, and J. Mateos, J. Appl.
Phys. 105, 113705 (2009).
[15] H. I. Fujishiro, T. Kawabata, and J. A. Del Alamo, Phys.
Status Solidi C 5, 2795 (2008).
[16] H. Nishino, I. Kawahira, F. Machida, S. Hara, and H. I.
Fujishiro, in: Proc. International Conference on Indium Phos-
phide and Related Materials (IPRM), Kagawa, Japan, 2010.
[17] T. Gonzalez, D. Pardo, L. Varani, and L. Reggiani, IEEE
Trans. Electron Devices 42, 991 (1995).
www.pss-a.com
Original
Paper
7
[18] M. Nakayama, S. Narita, and H. I. Fujishiro, IEICE Trans.
Electron. 88, 1509 (2005).
[19] T. Gonzalez and D. Pardo, IEEE Trans. Electron Devices 42,
605 (1995).
[20] T. Ishii, M. Nakayama, T. Takei, and H. I. Fujishiro, IEICE
Trans. Electron. 86, 1472 (2003).
[21] J. Mateos, T. Gonzalez, D. Pardo, V. Hoel, and A. Cappy,
IEEE Trans. Electron Devices 47, 1950 (2000).
[22] S. Babiker, A. Asenov, N. Cameron, S. P. Beaumont, and R.
B. John, IEEE Trans. Electron Devices 45, 1644 (1998).
[23] J. Mateos, T. Gonzalez, D. Pardo, P. Tadyszak, F. Danneville,
and A. Cappy, Solid State Electron. 42, 79 (1998).
[24] F. Danneville, IEEE Microwave Mag. 11, 53 (2010).
[25] M. Shi, J. S. Martin, A. Bournel, D. Querlioz, N. Wichmann,
S. Bollaert, F. Danneville, and P. Dollfus, Solid-State
Electron. 87, 51 (2013).
[26] J. Mateos, H. Rodilla, B. G. Vasallo, and T. Gonzalez, J.
Comp. Electron. 14, 72 (2015).
[27] R. Rengel, J. Mateos, D. Pardo, T. Gonzalez, and M. J.
Martın, Semicond. Sci. Technol. 16, 939 (2001).
[28] S. Nagai, Y. Nagai, S. Fujikawa, H. I. Fujishiro, S. Hara, A.
Endoh, I. Watanabe, and A. Kasamatsu, in: Proc. 10th
Topical Workshop on Heterostructure Microelectronics
(TWHM), Nagoya, Japan, 2013.
[29] N. Sano, K. Matsuzawa, M. Mukai, and N. Nakayama, Jpn. J.
Appl. Phys. 39, 1974 (2000).
[30] V. Gruzinskis, S. Kersulis, and A. Reklaitis, Semicond. Sci.
Technol. 6, 602 (1991).
[31] N. Sano, IEICE Trans. Electron. 83, 1203 (2000).
[32] S. Fujikawa, J. Takeuchi, Y. Harada, and H. I. Fujishiro, in:
Proc. 19th International Conference on Molecular Beam
Epitaxy (MBE), Montpelier, France, 2016.
[33] Y. Nishio, T. Sato, N. Hirayama, T. Iida, and Y. Takanashi,
Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 55, 084301 (2016).
[34] R. Loesch, R. Aidam, L. Kirste, and A. Leuther, in: Proc.
IPRM 23rd International Conference on Indium Phosphide
and Related Materials, Berlin, Germany, 2011.
ß 2016 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim