> Is this basically the return of the thermionic valve after fifty years in the wilderness? Yes, but with a twist of quantum. > The experimental data shows th

> Is this basically the return of the thermionic valve after fifty years in the wilderness? Yes, but with a twist of quantum. > The experimental data shows that influential operation mechanism is Fowler–Nordheim tunnelling in tungsten and gold devices, while Schottky emission in platinum device. The bad grammar makes this hard to understand; is FN-tunneling the influential mechanism or an influential mechanism? With the help of Wikipedia I can parse it as an explanation of how the electrons get out of the metal. When you apply an electric field, there can be a potential barrier: the electron must "climb" up out of the metal but can then "fall" down the externally applied field [1]. With Schottky emission, electrons jump the barrier using their thermal energy; increasing the field lowers the barrier, enhancing the emission. All this comes from the days of thermionic diodes. But as the field increases, the barrier also gets narrower. And when it is narrow enough, even low-energy electrons can get out via quantum tunnelling[2]. Apparently, this is called Fowler–Nordheim tunneling. Now these named effects both have equations attached to them, which predict the amount of electrons emitted under different circumstances. But real devices are complicated, and involve both of the above physical effects, plus others. So what researches have to deal with are measured curves that kind-a-sort-a fit the equations if you squint. The mangled sentence in the abstract makes me think that they have measured something (perhaps current vs.temperature curves) look a bit like the Schottky prediction in platinum, and a bit like the Fowler-Nordheim prediction in gold and tungsten. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schottky_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schottky_effect [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_tunnelling https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_tunnelling