Kinetics of TiN Chemical Vapor Deposition Process using TiCl<sub>4</sub>and NH<sub>3</sub>for ULSI Diffusion Barrier Applications: Relationship between Step Coverage and NH<sub>3</sub>Partial Pressure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
TiN films were deposited by chemical vapor deposition (CVD) using NH3 and TiCl4 as the source precursors. The effect of partial pressures of TiCl4 (PTiCl4) and NH3 (PNH3) on the growth rate and step coverage quality of these TiN films was measured, revealing the growth rate of TiN films followed the Langmuir–Hinshelwood (L–H) type isotherm as a function of PTiCl4. The sticking probability of film-forming species was estimated from the step coverage profile simulated by using the Monte Carlo method. The relationship between the sticking probability of Ti-containing species and PNH3 was investigated, revealing that the sticking probability in the 1st-order kinetic regime depended on PNH3. The effect of NH3 on the growth kinetics could be expressed by G.R.×ρTiN=[ksKCTiCl4/(1+KCTiCl4)]·(CNH3)2 in the wide range of PTiCl4. The reason for 2nd-order reaction for PNH3 is not clear yet, but the rate equation suggests the complicated gas-phase and/or surface reaction chemistries to form TiN.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".