31 research outputs found
Feasibility of SIO2/Al2O3 tunnel dielectric for future Flash memories generations
No full textIn this paper, we investigate the feasibility of SiO2/Al2O3 stack tunnel dielectric for future Flash memory generations using statistical leakage current simulations. We show that the statistical Monte Carlo (MC) simulator we employed reproduces accurately leakage currents measured on SiO2/Al2O3 dielectric capacitors. Exploiting its statistical capabilities, we calculate leakage current distributions in Flash memory retention conditions. We show that the high defectiveness of AI2O3 stacks strongly reduces the potential improvement of Flash retention due to the introduction of AI2O3 tunnel dielectric
Seditio & στάσις: Tacitus and Cassius Dio on the revolt of the Pannonian legions in AD 14
No full textMeđu grčko-rimskim autorima koji su ostavili pisani trag o pobuni panonskih legija g. 14. najpodrobniji su Tacit i Kasije Dion. Umnogome različita, dva vrela upućuju na slična pitanja što proizlaze iz ove epizode. Relevantni ulomci stavljaju se u kontekst dviju monografija kojima pripadaju. Traže se moguće podudarnosti i razlike. Ispituje se što se iz njih može doznati o vojno-političkim pogledima dvojice pisaca. Pokušava se razaznati utjecaj ranije historiografije i je li mlađi autor preuzimao građu od starijegSeveral ancient writers mentioned the revolt of the Pannonian legions that broke out almost immediately upon Augustus' death in AD 14. The evidence is best attested in Tacitus' Annals and, to some extant, in Dio's Roman History. Placed whithin the broader context of Tiberius' ascension to the imperial throne, the two narratives vividly depict army's mutinous acts. This paper relies on Tacitus' and Dio's data and discusses the similarities or differences between the two sources. More precisely, it examines the way in which their own thoughts influenced the accounts on the Pannoninan revolt. The purpose is to sketch out a coherent picture of what shaped the data attested in Tacitus' and Dio's writings.
Unusually extended and elaborated, Tacitus' account implies that both earlier authors and his previous works left a strong mark on his views on the military disobedience. Despite the pessimistic tone, there is no reason to assume that Tacitus questioned the very foundations of the Principate nor that he accused troops for such deeds. On the other hand, Dio's condensed chapter seemingly fails to offer additional informaton. However, the Greek author provides a number of comparative examples elsewhere in the Roman history. If carefully scritinized, they show that Dio's views were shaped by his personal experience and by contemporary Greek culture. Even in this short paragraph one can discern following features: Dio avoids details, but preferes accuracy; he is ironic, but well-aware of the threat of military unrest; he offers no comment, but infers conclusions. The similarities between the two narratives are insufficient to assess that Dio relied mainly on Tacitus' data. It seems that the two authors drew from a variety of sources, and that at least some of them were known exclusively to Dio
