MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008923294 · doi:10.1002/sia.1909

Critical review of the current status of thickness measurements for ultrathin SiO <sub>2</sub> on Si Part V: Results of a CCQM pilot study

2004· article· en· W2008923294 on OpenAlexaff
M. P. Seah, Steven J. Spencer, Farid Bensebaa, I. Vickridge, Hans‐Ulrich Danzebrink, Michael Krumrey, Th. Groß, W. Oesterle, E. Wendler, B. Rheinländer, Yasushi Azuma, Isao Kojima, Noboru Suzuki, M. Suzuki, Shigeo Tanuma, Dae Won Moon, H. J. Lee, Hyun Mo Cho, H. Y. Chen, Andrew T. S. Wee, T. Osipowicz, Jisheng Pan, W.A. Jordaan, Roland Hauert, Ulrich Klotz, C. van der Marel, Marcel A. Verheijen, Y. Tamminga, C. Jeynes, Paul Bailey, Srijit Biswas, U. Falke, N. V. Nguyen, D. Chandler‐Horowitz, James R. Ehrstein, D. Müller, Joseph A. Dura

Bibliographic record

VenueSurface and Interface Analysis · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicElectron and X-Ray Spectroscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReflectometryX-ray photoelectron spectroscopyAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Materials scienceNeutron reflectometryEllipsometryWaferScatteringChemistryThin filmOpticsNanotechnologyNeutron scatteringNuclear magnetic resonanceTime domain

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Results are reported from a pilot study under the Consultative Committee for Amount of Substance (CCQM) to compare measurements of and resolve any relevant measurement issues in the amount of thermal oxide on (100) and (111) orientation silicon wafer substrates in the thickness range 1.5–8 nm. As a result of the invitation to participate in this activity, 45 sets of measurements have been made in different laboratories using 10 analytical methods: medium—energy ion scattering spectrometry (MEIS), nuclear reaction analysis (NRA), RBS, elastic backscattering spectrometry (EBS), XPS, SIMS, ellipsometry, grazing—incidence x‐ray reflectometry (GIXRR), neutron reflectometry and transmission electron microscopy (TEM). The measurements are made on separate sets of 10 carefully prepared samples, all of which have been characterized by a combination of ellipsometry and XPS using carefully established reference conditions and reference parameters. The results have been assessed against the National Physical Laboratory (NPL) data and all show excellent linearity. The data sets correlate with the NPL data with average root‐mean‐square scatters of 0.15 nm, half being better than 0.1 nm and a few at or better than 0.05 nm. Each set of data allows a relative scaling constant and a zero thickness offset to be determined. Each method has an inherent zero thickness offset between 0 nm and 1 nm and it is these offsets, measured here for the first time, that have caused many problems in the past. There are three basic classes of offset: water and carbonaceous contamination equivalent to ∼ 1 nm as seen by ellipsometry; adsorbed oxygen mainly from water at an equivalent thickness of 0.5 nm as seen by MEIS, NRA, RBS and possibly GIXRR; and no offset as seen by XPS using the Si 2p peaks. Each technique has a different uncertainty for the scaling constant and consistent results have been achieved. X‐ray photoelectron spectroscopy has large uncertainties for the scaling constant but a high precision and critically, if used correctly, has zero offset. Thus, a combination of XPS and the other methods allows the XPS scaling constant to be determined with low uncertainty, traceable via the other methods. The XPS laboratories returning results early were invited to test a new reference procedure. All showed very significant improvements. The reference attenuation lengths thus need scaling by 0.986 ± 0.009 (at an expansion factor of 2), deduced from the data for the other methods. Several other methods have small offsets and, to the extent that these can be shown to be constant or measurable, these methods will also show low uncertainty. Recommendations are provided for parameters for XPS, MEIS, RBS and NRA to improve their accuracy. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.033
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.175

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0330.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations140
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSurface and Interface AnalysisSame topicElectron and X-Ray Spectroscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207