MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1484737033 · doi:10.1063/1.373486

Rate constants for the reaction of H2 with defects at the SiO2/Si(111) interface

2000· article· en· W1484737033 on OpenAlexaff
Ligia Gheorghita, E. A. Ogryzlo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Physics · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSemiconductor materials and devices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecombinationSiliconPassivationReaction rate constantHydrogenActivation energyElectron paramagnetic resonanceReaction rateChemistryRate equationAtomic physicsOxideAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Materials sciencePhysical chemistryKineticsNuclear magnetic resonanceNanotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A radio frequency probe has been used to monitor changes in charge-carrier recombination centers at a SiO2/Si interface by following the steady-state photogenerated carrier concentration in the silicon. A silicon surface covered with ∼200 Å of thermal oxide was exposed to gaseous molecular hydrogen at temperatures between 135 and 300 °C. The reaction was found to occur with a nonexponential rate law that could be described by a cluster of rate constants governed by a Gaussian distribution of activation energies. At high temperatures, the dominant reaction was found to be that of “Pb” centers with a rate law that is consistent with that previously obtained by electron paramagnetic resonance. At low temperatures the reaction is dominated by the passivation of a carrier recombination center with a much lower activation energy. This new species makes up about 25% of the total recombination center concentration at the Si/SiO2 interface. Almost 20% of the recombination centers could not be passivated by H2.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.208 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied PhysicsSame topicSemiconductor materials and devicesFrench-language works237,207