MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969837736 · doi:10.1149/1.2355843

Selective Epitaxy of Si/SiGe to Improve pMOS Devices by Recessed Source/Drain and/or Buried SiGe Channels

2006· article· en· W1969837736 on OpenAlexaff
Roger Loo, Peter Verheyen, R. Rooyackers, Christian Walczyk, Frederik Leys, Denis Shamiryan, Philip Absil, Tinne Delande, Alain Moussa, Hans Weijtmans, R. Wise, Vladimir Machkaoutsan, C. Arena, J. McCormack, S. Passefort, Haruyuki Sorada, Akira Inoue, Byeong Chan Lee, Sangjin Hyun, S. Jakschik, Matty Caymax, Geert Eneman, H. Bender, C. Drijbooms, Luc Geenen, P. Tomasini, Stéphane Godny

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Transactions · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSemiconductor materials and devices
Canadian institutionsInfineon Technologies (Canada)
FundersEuropean Commission
KeywordsPMOS logicHeterojunctionEpitaxyMaterials scienceOptoelectronicsEngineering physicsProcess (computing)ThickeningThermalElectrical engineeringNanotechnologyTransistorComputer scienceEngineeringPhysicsVoltage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Selective Epitaxial Growth of SiGe and/or Si-cap/SiGe heterostructures offer an elegant way to improve pMOS device performance. This paper discusses some important challenges and characteristics of the corresponding epi process. Loading effects are strongly reduced by choosing the growth conditions away from the mass transport regime, i.e. by reducing the growth pressure and/or increasing the gas velocity. Anomalous SiGe thickening at convex corners of recessed areas and the impact of the underlying SiGe on the growth behavior during Si- capping are discussed as well. The limits of the chemical and thermal budgets during pre-epi treatments as defined by the device concepts require some process optimization but are not a show stopper.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.740

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECS TransactionsSame topicSemiconductor materials and devicesFrench-language works237,207