MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045911878 · doi:10.5555/2492708.2493098

AIR (aerial image retargeting): a novel technique for in-fab automatic model-based retargeting-for-yield

2012· article· en· W2045911878 on OpenAlexaff
Ayman Hamouda, Mohab Anis, Karim S. Karim

Bibliographic record

VenueDesign, Automation, and Test in Europe · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in Photolithography Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRetargetingLithographyAerial imageProcess windowComputer scienceWaferOptical proximity correctionProcess (computing)Artificial intelligenceReliability (semiconductor)Matching (statistics)Computer visionElectronic engineeringImage (mathematics)Materials scienceEngineeringNanotechnologyOptoelectronicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we present a novel methodology for identifying lithography hot-spots and automatically transforming them into the lithography-friendly design space. This fast model-based technique is applied at the mask tape-out stage by slightly shifting and resizing the designs. It implicitly does a similar functionality as that of the Process Window OPC (PWOPC) but more efficiently. Being a relatively fast technique it also offers the means of providing the designer with all the design systematic deviations from the actual (on-wafer) parameters by including it in the parameter-extraction flow. We applied this methodology successfully to 28-nm Metal levels and showed that it efficiently (better quality and faster) improves the lithography-related yield and reliability issues.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDesign, Automation, and Test in EuropeSame topicAdvancements in Photolithography TechniquesFrench-language works237,207