MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998060610 · doi:10.1021/la101521k

Understanding Pattern Collapse in Photolithography Process Due to Capillary Forces

2010· article· en· W1998060610 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueLangmuir · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectronic Packaging and Soldering Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurvatureCapillary actionSurface tensionPhotolithographyDeformation (meteorology)MechanicsMaterials scienceScalingGeometryOpticsPhysicsMathematicsComposite materialNanotechnologyThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Photolithography is the most widely used mass nanoproduction process. Technology requirements demand smaller nanodevices. However, smaller features risk collapse during the drying of rinse liquid because of capillary forces. In the present study, progress is made on two fronts: (i) The importance of surface tension force (STF) on three-phase line on the pattern collapse is investigated. The STF was ignored in previous pattern collapse studies. It is found that inclusion of STF increases the pattern deformation. The calculated deformation error from neglecting STF increases by increasing contact angle, pattern height to width ratio, and trough to width ratio. The deformation error decreases with an increase in elasticity module of pattern. (ii) A more accurate representation for the interface curvature (and related Laplace pressure), that is, using Surface Evolver (SE) simulation rather than cylindrical interface model (CIM), is presented. Curvature values of two-line parallel and box-shaped patterns are derived from SE and compared with the curvature values from CIM. It was found that CIM for the case of two-line parallel overestimates the curvature value and for the case of box-shaped underestimates it. SE simulations also showed that the error of calculating curvature values using CIM for both shapes is only a function of LAR (ratio of pattern length to trough width). For LAR values less than 20, the curvature values from CIM are not accurate for calculating pattern deformation.

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.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.342
Threshold uncertainty score0.446

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.212 · 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