MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979419578 · doi:10.1149/1.1393266

Effect of Heavy Boron Doping on Oxygen Precipitation in Czochralski Silicon Substrates of Epitaxial Wafers

2000· article· en· W1979419578 on OpenAlexaff
Koji Sueoka, Masanori Akatsuka, Mitsuharu Yonemura, Toshiaki Ono, Eiichi Asayama, Hisashi Katahama

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of The Electrochemical Society · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSilicon and Solar Cell Technologies
Canadian institutionsResearch & Development Corporation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWaferMaterials scienceNucleationEpitaxyBoronSiliconPrecipitationDopingAnnealing (glass)GetterAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Chemical engineeringChemistryMetallurgyNanotechnologyOptoelectronicsLayer (electronics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effect of heavy boron doping on oxygen precipitation in Czochralski silicon substrates of epitaxial wafers has been studied with transmission electron microscopy observations and a preferential etching method. Prolonged isothermal annealing between 700 and 1000°C for up to 700 h was performed on p/p+ (5–20 mΩ cm) and p/p− (10 Ω cm) wafers. It was found that, with an increase in boron concentration, the precipitate density increased, and the precipitates could nucleate at a higher temperature. The growth process of platelet precipitates was also investigated and compared with the process in polished p− wafers. It was confirmed that precipitate growth rate in p/p+ wafers was higher than that in p− wafers, and precipitate nucleation in p/p− wafers was delayed compared with p/p+ wafers. The precipitate growth in p/p+ wafers was determined to be reaction‐limited, which differed from the diffusion‐limited growth in p− wafers. © 2000 The Electrochemical Society. All rights reserved.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations32
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of The Electrochemical SocietySame topicSilicon and Solar Cell TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207