Ultrathin Zirconium Silicate Films Deposited on Si(100) Using Zr(O[sup i]-Pr)[sub 2](thd)[sub 2], Si(O[sup t]-Bu)[sub 2](thd)[sub 2], and Nitric Oxide
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ultrathin Zr silicate films were deposited using Zr(O i -Pr) 2 (tetramethylheptanedione,thd) 2 , Si(O t -Bu) 2 (thd) 2 and nitric oxide in a pulse-mode metallorganic chemical-vapor deposition apparatus with a liquid injection source. High resolution transmission electron microscopy, atomic force microscopy, X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy XPS, and medium energy ion scattering were employed to investigate the structure, surface roughness, chemical state, and composition of the films. The nitric oxide used as oxidizing gas, instead of O 2 , not only reduced the thickness of the interfacial layer but also removed the carbon contamination effectively from the bulk of the films. The as-deposited Zr silicate films with a Si:Zr ratio of 1.3:1 were amorphous, with an amorphous interfacial layer 0.3-0.6 nm thick. After a spike anneal in oxygen and a 60 s nitrogen anneal at 850C, these films remained amorphous throughout without phase separation, but the interfacial layer increased in thickness. No evidence of Zr-C and Zr-Si bonds were found in the films by XPS and carbon concentrations 0.1 atom %, the detection limit, were obtained. The hysteresis, fixed charge density, and leakage current determined from capacitance-voltage analysis improved significantly after postdeposition anneals at 850C and the films exhibited promising characteristics for deep submicrometer metal-oxidesemiconductor devices.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".