## 4 Results and Discussions
Dotted lines represent V\({}_{\text{D}}\) = 0.7 V, whereas continuous lines represent V\({}_{\text{D}}\) = 0.05 V. Crystallographic orientation of the Si channel is \(<\)110\(>\) and L\({}_{\text{G}}\) = 12 nm. One of the most significant findings to emerge from these simulations is that Phi and 1/Phi ratios can thus be suggested as offering the optimal AR. The V\({}_{\rm T}\) and I\({}_{\rm on}\) variability depends on the parameters of the variability sources, and thus further investigations to assess the effects of individual SVs for Phi and 1/Phi NWTs on V\({}_{\rm T}\) and I\({}_{\rm on}\) are required. For each individual source, and for their combinations, ensembles of 1000 microscopically different transistors are thus simulated as shown in Figure 10 and Table 4. The effects of SV sources on I\({}_{\rm on}\) of Phi NWTs are similar to those of 1/Phi NWTs, with a 0.1 mA/\(\upmu\)m shift in Gaussian distribution. This shift has relevance as the mobile charge Q\({}_{\rm M}\) in the channel of 1/Phi NWTs is higher than Q\({}_{\rm M}\) in the channel of Phi NWTs. Another important implication is that the I\({}_{\rm on}\) standard deviation of the 1/Phi NWTs is less than in the I\({}_{\rm on}\) SD of Phi NWTs for \(<\)110\(>\) channel orientation. Further, MGG is significantly wider in I\({}_{\rm on}\) variability than other SV sources. These findings are also valid for threshold voltage variability as shown in Figure 11 and Table 5.  
Figure 10: I\({}_{\rm on}\) distributions subject to combined individual SV and combined SV (RDD, WER, and MGG) which are representative of gate-first technology of Phi and 1/Phi NWTs. Figure 9: V\({}_{\rm T}\), I\({}_{\rm on}\), DIBL, and I\({}_{\rm off}\) distributions subject to combined SV (RDD, WER, and MGG), all of which are reflective of the gate-first technology of the NWTs listed in Table 2.  
Presented in Figure 12 are the distribution and correlations between extracted figures of merit (FoM), derived from the TCAD simulations conducted with respect to the degraded NWT with a trap sheet density amounting to 1 \(\times\) 10\({}^{12}\) /cm\({}^{2}\) when variability sources (RDD, WER, MGG) are considered. Both figures show a correlation between the V\({}_{\rm T}\), I\({}_{\rm off}\), and I\({}_{\rm on}\). However, nevertheless, the correlation between DIBL and the remaining FoM is weak. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**I\({}_{\rm on}\) mA/\(\mu\)m**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**5 nm \(\times\) 8.1 nm**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**8.1 nm \(\times\) 5 nm**} \\ \cline{2-5}  & **SD** & **Mean** & **SD** & **Mean** \\ \hline WER & 0.0380 & 1.246 & 0.0276 & 1.310 \\ RDD & 0.0379 & 1.203 & 0.0401 & 1.265 \\ MGG & 0.0882 & 1.223 & 0.0893 & 1.286 \\ SV & 0.1031 & 1.171 & 0.0998 & 1.232 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: Mean and standard deviation values of I\({}_{\rm on}\), subject to combined individual SV and combined SV (RDD, WER, and MGG) which are representative of gate-first technology of Phi and 1/Phi NWTs. Figure 11: Threshold voltage (V\({}_{\rm T}\)) distributions subject to combined individual SV and combined SV (RDD, WER, and MGG) which are representative of gate-first technology of Phi and 1/Phi NWTs. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**V\({}_{\rm T}\) mV**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**5 nm \(\times\) 8.1 nm**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**8.1 nm \(\times\) 5 nm**} \\ \cline{2-5}  & **SD** & **Mean** & **SD** & **Mean** \\ \hline WER & 5.807 & 107.85 & 2.247 & 93.29 \\ RDD & 2.001 & 110.66 & 1.91 & 96.18 \\ MGG & 27.82 & 110.41 & 27.59 & 96.24 \\ SV & 28.52 & 111.9 & 27.74 & 97.65 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 5: Mean deviations and standard deviations values of V\({}_{\rm T}\) subject to combined individual SV and combined SV (RDD, WER, and MGG) which are representative of gate-first technology of Phi and 1/Phi NWTs.