Monte Carlo or Montecarlo?

I've had some nomenclature problems with this. To solve them, I've recurred to the easiest solution: I've 'googled' for it...

I've found a very interesting page at riskglossary. It seems that the first time it was cited explicitely was in this paper:
Metropolis, Nicholas and Stanislaw Ulam (1949). The Monte Carlo method, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 44 (247), 335-341

So, following the criteria that the first one to use it has the right to name it, I'll use "Monte Carlo" from now on.

And more papers

It seems that this is my week to read papers. Well, it's a good exercise... I strongly recommend it!

Another quite interesting paper: Analytical Charge and Capacitance Models of Undoped Cylindrical Surrounding-Gate MOSFETs. This time, it is from Oana Moldovan et al. This is a quite good paper, that continues their work on DG MOSFETs.

Another one from the same journal: Modeling of Surrounding Gate MOSFETs With Bulk Trap States. It is also interesting to read. Anyway, the approach is different to the previous one, and it is good to keep an open mind.

And the last one from this journal: Surface-Potential Solution for Generic Undoped MOSFETs With Two Gates. The topic has been discussed before, and I still think that the approach by Francisco and Adelmo is easier to understand. However, this is only an opinion.

Miscellanea

More of my personal obsession: plastic electronics. This week, in the 3GSM Conference, in Barcelona, Polymer Vision has presented (some people would say 'again') the Readius, which is a mobile phone with an integrated roll-up display. It seems that this time they are serious, thanks to Plastic Logic....

Another curious thing: for all those of you that love playing sudoku, you now may have a hard competitor: a quantum computer. I don't know how actually serious this is. However, I think that it may be indicative that people is starting to crave for quantum computers. The first step to be able to produce them should be letting people (engineers) how they work. So we need compact models for that. Anyway, I think that we're still a long way from the point where computers designers can actually use this.

More papers

Another paper: Arbitrary Density of States in an Organic Thin-Film Field-Effect Transistor Model and Application to Pentacene Devices. After reading it, I've been left with the feeling that they have done a lot of very good work, but that the results are somehow quite similar to those that one can obtain with the old good RPI model. Probably it is my fault, but it seems too much work to end up with a gds that is not accurate, and with a fitting comparable to RPI. However, I repeat, the work is quite good and the problems I mention are mainly due to problems with the parameter extraction.

More Organic Circuits

I'm sorry, but this is quite out of topic. One of my personal obsessions are organic circuits, and this month the IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits publishes two very promising papers:
A 13.56-MHz RFID System Based on Organic Transponders
and the other one:
An Organic FET SRAM With Back Gate to Increase Static Noise Margin and Its Application to Braille Sheet Display
This means that it is more and more important having good models for plastic electronics. And this does not mean that we should be able to predict (more or less) the static curves, but also the gm and gds and, more and more important, the capacitances. This must be done if we are to implement full systems-on-display, as it seems to be the trend.