Gall 2016
Gall 2016
Gall 2016
Daniel Gall
(Received 23 December 2015; accepted 5 February 2016; published online 23 February 2016)
The electron mean free path k and carrier relaxation time s of the twenty most conductive
elemental metals are determined by numerical integration over the Fermi surface obtained from
first-principles, using constant k or s approximations and wave-vector dependent Fermi velocities
vf (k). The average vf deviates considerably from the free-electron prediction, even for elements
with spherical Fermi surfaces including Cu (29% deviation). The calculated product of the bulk
resistivity times k indicates that, in the limit of narrow wires, Rh, Ir, and Ni are 2.1, 1.8, and 1.6
times more conductive than Cu, while various metals including Mo, Co, and Ru approximately
match the Cu resistivity, suggesting that these metals are promising candidates to replace Cu for
narrow interconnect lines. V C 2016 AIP Publishing LLC. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4942216]
using the Vienna ab initio simulation package (VASP), Transport is simulated within a semiclassical approach,
employing periodic boundary conditions, a plane wave basis such that the bulk conductivity ro is given by
set, the Perdew-Burke-Ernzerhof generalized gradient ðð
approximation (GGA) exchange correlation functional,34 2e2 X sn ðkÞv2t;n ðkÞ
ro ¼ dS: (1)
and the projector-augmented wave method.35 Computational 8p3 h n jvn ðkÞj
SnF
convergence with respect to the energy cut-off for the plane
wave expansion, the k-point grid, and the unit cell size and
Here, the sum is over bands and the integration is over
shape is tested and adjusted such that all values reported in
the Fermi surface SnF of band n. The carrier relaxation time
this letter have a computational uncertainty <1%. In addition
sn(k), the electron velocity along the transport direction
to the outer-most electron shells, the following electrons are
vt,n(k), and the electron velocity vector vn(k) are functions of
explicitly calculated; that is, they are not included in the core
the wave vector k for each band with index n. The factor two
of the pseudo potentials: p for alkali, alkaline earth, and tran-
in Eq. (1) is accounting for both spins for the case on non-
sition metals up to column VI, 4d for In, 2s and 2p for Al, magnetic metals, while this factor is removed for magnetic
and 1s for Be. Calculations are done using primitive unit materials (Co and Ni in this letter) and the contribution from
cells containing one atom for fcc, bcc, and bct and two atoms each spin is summed up separately, starting with a spin-
for hcp structures, and lattice parameters are fixed at the polarized density functional calculation.
established experimental room temperature values. The latter Using a constant relaxation time approximation, the
are typically slightly smaller (1%) than the values obtained relaxation time becomes independent of band, spin, and
when fitting calculated energy vs lattice parameters, as wave vector. That is, sn(k) ¼ s and thus
typical for the generalized gradient approximation.36
ðð
Self-consistent calculations using a C-centered 40 40 1 e2 X v2t;n ðkÞ
40 k-point grid are used to determine the charge distribu- ¼ 3 dS: (2a)
sqo 4p h n jvn ðkÞj
tion, which is subsequently used for non-self-consistent cal- SnF
culations with a finer 200 200 200 k-point mesh. Such a
fine k-point sampling is required for good convergence of Correspondingly, using a constant mean free path approx-
the numerical integration across the Fermi surface, which is imation, the carrier relaxation time becomes sn(k) ¼ k/jvn ðkÞj
very sensitive to band crossings. Careful convergence tests and therefore
are performed for all reported elements to achieve the ðð 2 ð Þ
1 e2 X vt;n k
desired <1% numerical accuracy, requiring, for example, for ¼ 3 dS: (2b)
kqo 4p h n v2n ðkÞ
Be an increase to 400 400 400 k-points. SnF
The Fermi surface is determined from the calculated
bands, i.e., the calculated electron energy vs k curves En(k) I note here that for cubic symmetry, the integral in Eq.
where n is the band index. This is done by dividing the (2b) is exactly one third of the area of the Fermi surface Af,
Brillouin zone into irregular tetrahedra that are defined by such that the product k qo is inversely proportional to the
four neighboring k-points. Linear interpolation between the Fermi surface area, i.e., kqo ¼ 12p3h/(e2Af) as used, for exam-
corners yields the intercepts of the Fermi surface with the ple, in Ref. 26. This fact is not explicitly used in the numerical
tetrahedron edges. Three or four intercepts per tetrahedron code, primarily to keep modularity and flexibility of the com-
define one or two triangles of the Fermi surface, respec- putational approach, which first interpolates band energies in
tively,37 with an electron velocity vn(k) ¼ 1h rk En(k) that is the reciprocal coordinate system of the primitive unit cell vec-
perpendicular to the triangle surface and is defined by the tors, second defines the Fermi surface as a list of triangles
slope of the band. More elaborate interpolation schemes with associated velocity vectors in a reciprocal Cartesian coor-
have been tested, including three-dimensional polynomial dinate system, and third determines transport quantities by
interpolation to create k-point submeshes, but do not consis- summation over all triangles according to Eqs. (2a) and (2b).
tently improve k-point convergence, which is attributed to Integration is done for all calculated metals using multiple
these approaches being more sensitive to discontinuities at transport directions corresponding to conventional [100],
band-crossings. [010], [001], [110], [1 1 0], and [111] directions. The results
I reiterate here that all calculations in this paper are are identical within <1% deviation for all directions for the
done for bulk materials; that is, quantum size effects in nar- case of cubic fcc and bcc structures, and for directions within
row wires are not accounted for during the electronic struc- the basal plane for hcp and bct. This is expected based on the
ture calculations. This approximation is justified by the small 3-dimensional isotropic resistivity for cubic materials and 2-
screening length in metals, resulting in a thin film ballistic dimensional isotropy within the basal plane of hexagonal and
conductance that matches the bulk conductance for all but tetragonal symmetries. The values reported, in this letter, are
the narrowest layers. For example, a 2-nm-thick Cu layer has the average from the [100] and [010] directions, while for hcp
a calculated conductance of 0.58 1015 X1 m2 (Ref. 17), and bct the [001] values are separately listed.
in perfect agreement with the bulk value.38 In contrast, sur-
III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
face roughness in narrow conductors can cause a destruction
of isotropic Fermi surface sheets which affects transport Fig. 1 shows typical Fermi surfaces, in this case, for Cu,
properties.17 Mo, Ru, and Rh. The Brillouin zones are outlined by black
085101-3 Daniel Gall J. Appl. Phys. 119, 085101 (2016)
TABLE I. List of the twenty most conductive elemental metals, sorted with increasing bulk room-temperature resistivity qo,rt from Ref. 40. The average Fermi
velocity vf and the products s qo and k qo are obtained from first principles calculations, while values for the room temperature carrier relaxation time srt
and mean free path krt are obtained by dividing the previous columns by qo,rt. For hexagonal and tetragonal crystal structures (hcp and bct), the two listed val-
ues are for transport perpendicular and parallel to the hexagonal/tetragonal axis.
Element Crystal structures qo,rt (lX cm) vf (105 m/s) s qo (1022 X m s) k qo (1016 X m2) srt (fs) krt (nm)
result from the calculated Fermi surface and a spherical free- of the value for Cu, despite their 3–5 times larger bulk
electron surface is attributed to a combination of (i) the cal- resistivity.
culated surface area to be nearly identical to the free-
electron area, as discussed above, and (ii) Eq. (2b) for cubic IV. CONCLUSIONS
symmetry to be only dependent on the surface area, that is,
independent of v(k). In contrast, the calculated s qo of The calculated product k qo provides guidance in the
6.04 1022 X m s is 44% larger than the free-electron search for metals that may be suitable for narrow intercon-
value of 4.19 1022 X m s, reflecting the importance of nect lines, because the resistance of narrow lines is expected
correctly accounting for v(k). to be proportional to k qo. The lowest k qo is found for
The product k qo listed in Table I is interesting for Rh, with a value that is 2.1 times smaller than for Cu, poten-
determining the most promising metals for narrow high- tially yielding narrow lines that are twice as conductive as
conductivity lines, because, based on the FS and MS models, copper. A whole range of other metals, listed in Table I, also
the smallest k qo value is expected to yield the lowest re- become competitive with Cu in regard to effective conduc-
sistance in the limit of thin wires with fixed dimension, grain tivity for the limiting case of narrow wires, suggesting that
size distribution, and interface scattering cross sections, as processing viability and electromigration performance will
discussed above. Various metals have a lower k qo product ultimately determine the best metal to replace Cu for inte-
than Cu, which is the metal currently used for interconnects grated circuits.
in integrated circuits. Particularly, noteworthy are Rh, Ir, and
Ni, with values that are 2.1, 1.8, and 1.6 times smaller than ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
that for Cu, respectively. In addition, metals that have k qo This research was funded by the Semiconductor
values comparable to that of Cu but exhibit either processing Research Corporation under Task 1292.094 and through the
and/or electromigration advantages may become competitive STARnet center FAME funded by MARCO, DARPA, and
as the wire cross-sectional area shrinks. Processing advan- SRC. The author also acknowledges the NSF under Grant
tages include metals with an established atomic layer deposi- No. 1309490. Computational resources were provided by the
tion process or metals that can be processed through Center for Computational Innovations at RPI.
annealing steps to form large grains, reducing the resistivity
contribution from grain boundaries. Electromigration advan- 1
J. J. Plombon, E. Andideh, V. M. Dubin, and J. Maiz, Appl. Phys. Lett. 89,
tages primarily refer to metals that exhibit low electromigra- 113124 (2006).
2
tion such that adhesion/liner/barrier layers may become R. L. Graham, G. B. Alers, T. Mountsier, N. Shamma, S. Dhuey, S.
unnecessary, freeing up space which effectively increases Cabrini, R. H. Geiss, D. T. Read, and S. Peddeti, Appl. Phys. Lett. 96,
042116 (2010).
the interconnect cross-sectional area and, in turn, lowers 3
K. Barmak, A. Darbal, K. J. Ganesh, P. J. Ferreira, J. M. Rickman, T. Sun,
their effective resistivity. Promising metals in that regard are B. Yao, A. P. Warren, and K. R. Coffey, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A 32,
W, Mo, Co, and Ru, all exhibiting k qo values within 30% 061503 (2014).
085101-5 Daniel Gall J. Appl. Phys. 119, 085101 (2016)
4 25
J. S. Chawla, F. Gstrein, K. P. O’Brien, J. S. Clarke, and D. Gall, Phys. D. Choi, X. Liu, P. K. Schelling, K. R. Coffey, and K. Barmak, J. Appl.
Rev. B 84, 235423 (2011). Phys. 115, 104308 (2014).
5 26
M. M. Maqableh, X. Huang, S.-Y. Sung, K. S. M. Reddy, G. Norby, R. H. D. Choi, C. S. Kim, D. Naveh, S. Chung, A. P. Warren, N. T. Nuhfer, M.
Victora, and B. J. H. Stadler, Nano Lett. 12, 4102 (2012). F. Toney, K. R. Coffey, and K. Barmak, Phys. Rev. B 86, 045432 (2012).
6 27
D. Josell, S. H. Brongersma, and Z. T}okei, Annu. Rev. Mater. Res. 39, 231 J. S. Chawla, X. Y. Zhang, and D. Gall, J. Appl. Phys. 113, 063704
(2009). (2013).
7 28
See http://www.itrs.net for International Roadmap Committee, P. Cotti, E. M. Fryer, and J. L. Olsen, Helv. Phys. Acta 37, 585 (1964).
29
International Technology Roadmap for Semiconductors, 2013. G. Brandli and J. L. Olsen, Mater. Sci. Eng. 4, 61 (1969).
8 30
C. Y. Pan and A. Naeemi, IEEE Electron Device Lett. 35, 250 (2014). R. Englman and E. H. Sondheimer, Proc. Phys. Soc. London, Sect. B 69,
9
K. Fuchs, Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 34, 100 (1938). 449 (1956).
10 31
E. H. Sondheimer, Adv. Phys. 1, 1 (1952). D. Choi, M. Moneck, X. Liu, S. J. Oh, C. R. Kagan, K. R. Coffey, and K.
11
A. F. Mayadas and M. Shatzkes, Phys. Rev. B 1, 1382 (1970). Barmak, Sci. Rep. 3, 2591 (2013).
12 32
A. F. Mayadas, M. Shatzkes, and J. F. Janak, Appl. Phys. Lett. 14, 345 P. J. Price, IBM J. Res. Dev. 4, 152 (1960).
33
(1969). E. Hashimoto and Y. Ueda, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 10, 6727 (1998).
13 34
J. S. Chawla, F. Zahid, H. Guo, and D. Gall, Appl. Phys. Lett. 97, 132106 J. P. Perdew, K. Burke, and M. Ernzerhof, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 3865
(2010). (1996).
14 35
J. S. Chawla and D. Gall, Appl. Phys. Lett. 94, 252101 (2009). J. P. Perdew, J. A. Chevary, S. H. Vosko, K. A. Jackson, M. R. Pederson,
15
P. Y. Zheng, R. P. Deng, and D. Gall, Appl. Phys. Lett. 105, 131603 D. J. Singh, and C. Fiolhais, Phys. Rev. B 46, 6671 (1992).
36
(2014). J. Paier, M. Marsman, K. Hummer, G. Kresse, I. C. Gerber, and J. G.
16
F. Zahid, Y. Q. Ke, D. Gall, and H. Guo, Phys. Rev. B 81, 045406 (2010).
Angy an, J. Chem. Phys. 124, 154709 (2006).
17 37
V. Timoshevskii, Y. Q. Ke, H. Guo, and D. Gall, J. Appl. Phys. 103, E. Asier and G. G. Idoia, New J. Phys. 16, 063014 (2014).
38
113705 (2008). K. M. Schep, P. J. Kelly, and G. E. W. Bauer, Phys. Rev. B 57, 8907
18
Y. Q. Ke, F. Zahid, V. Timoshevskii, K. Xia, D. Gall, and H. Guo, Phys. (1998).
39
Rev. B 79, 155406 (2009). N. Ashcroft and D. Mermin, Solid State Physics (Thomson Learning,
19
J. M. Rickman and K. Barmak, J. Appl. Phys. 114, 133703 (2013). 1976).
20 40
T.-H. Kim, X. G. Zhang, D. M. Nicholson, B. M. Evans, N. S. Kulkarni, W. M. Haynes, CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 95th ed. (CRC
B. Radhakrishnan, E. A. Kenik, and A.-P. Li, Nano Lett. 10, 3096 Press, Boca Raton, Fla., 2014).
41
(2010). J. E. A. Alderson and C. M. Hurd, Phys. Rev. B 12, 501 (1975).
21 42
M. Cesar, D. P. Liu, D. Gall, and H. Guo, Phys. Rev. Appl. 2, 044007 P. Pecheur and G. Toussaint, J. Phys. Chem. Solids 33, 2281 (1972).
43
(2014). P. G. Tomlinson, Phys. Rev. B 19, 1893 (1979).
22 44
L. Lu, Y. Shen, X. Chen, L. Qian, and K. Lu, Science 304, 422 (2004). N. V. Volkenshtejn, V. E. Startsev, V. I. Cherepanov, V. M. Azhazha, G.
23
J. S. Chawla and D. Gall, J. Appl. Phys. 111, 043708 (2012). P. Kovtun, and V. A. Elenskij, Fiz. Met. Metalloved. 45, 1187 (1978).
24 45
J. S. Chawla, X. Y. Zhang, and D. Gall, J. Appl. Phys. 110, 043714 W. Zhang, S. H. Brongersma, Z. Li, D. Li, O. Richard, and K. Maex,
(2011). J. Appl. Phys. 101, 063703 (2007).