MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019779412 · doi:10.1063/1.1388882

Experimental identification of nitrogen-vacancy complexes in nitrogen implanted silicon

2001· article· en· W2019779412 on OpenAlexaff
Lahir Shaik Adam, Mark E. Law, Stanislaw Szpala, P. J. Simpson, D. W. Lawther, O. Dokumaci, Suri Hegde

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physics Letters · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuon and positron interactions and applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward IslandWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVacancy defectSiliconPositron annihilation spectroscopyNitrogenAnnealing (glass)Materials scienceAb initioAb initio quantum chemistry methodsIon implantationChemical physicsChemistryCrystallographyPositron annihilationOptoelectronicsPositronMetallurgyIonNuclear physicsPhysicsOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nitrogen implantation is commonly used in multigate oxide thickness processing for mixed signal complementary metal-oxide-semiconductor and System on a Chip technologies. Current experiments and diffusion models indicate that upon annealing, implanted nitrogen diffuses towards the surface. The mechanism proposed for nitrogen diffusion is the formation of nitrogen-vacancy complexes in silicon, as indicated by ab initio studies by J. S. Nelson, P. A. Schultz, and A. F. Wright [Appl. Phys. Lett. 73, 247 (1998)]. However, to date, there does not exist any experimental evidence of nitrogen-vacancy formation in silicon. This letter provides experimental evidence through positron annihilation spectroscopy that nitrogen-vacancy complexes indeed form in nitrogen implanted silicon, and compares the experimental results to the ab initio studies, providing qualitative support for the same.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

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 studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations22
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Physics LettersSame topicMuon and positron interactions and applicationsFrench-language works237,207