MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048204133 · doi:10.1116/1.582247

Study of the effect of layer thickness, beam energy, and metal density on the resistless silicide direct-write electron-beam lithography process for the fabrication of nanostructures

2000· article· en· W2048204133 on OpenAlexaff
Éric Lavallée, Jacques Beauvais, Dominique Drouin, Jacques Corbin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vacuum Science & Technology A Vacuum Surfaces and Films · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in Photolithography Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectron-beam lithographyMaterials scienceSilicideResistX-ray lithographyLithographySiliconStencil lithographyCathode rayOptoelectronicsLayer (electronics)Thin filmElectronOpticsNanotechnologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To overcome the limitation of resists in electron beam lithography, a resistless electron beam lithography technique was recently developed. In the silicide direct-write electron-beam lithography process (SiDWEL), a thin metallic film is deposited on a silicon surface. A low-energy (<3 keV) electron beam is then used to enable the intermixing of the metal and the silicon layers through thermal effects. A chemical etch is then used to remove the unexposed metal regions. Thermal calculations are performed using a Monte Carlo simulation of electron trajectories and are correlated with experiments using Ni as the thin metallic film. A comparison of the doses required for the formation of several metals is also done. Results show that the SiDWEL process is possible when the electrons lose all their energy in a layer thickness comparable to the phonon mean free path. Finally, experiments are performed using multilayer samples to form silicide structures.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations4
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Vacuum Science & Technology A Vacuum Surfaces and FilmsSame topicAdvancements in Photolithography TechniquesFrench-language works237,207