MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2069826124 · doi:10.1063/1.2189189

Spectroscopic strain measurement methodology: Degree-of-polarization photoluminescence versus photocurrent spectroscopy

2006· article· en· W2069826124 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physics Letters · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIntegrated Circuits and Semiconductor Failure Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotocurrentPhotoluminescenceMaterials sciencePolarization (electrochemistry)OptoelectronicsSpectroscopyDegree of polarizationDiodeSemiconductor laser theorySemiconductorLaserOpticsChemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A methodological approach to strain analysis in semiconductor devices is presented. Two methods, degree-of-polarization of photoluminescence and photocurrent spectroscopy, are compared by analyzing a spatially inhomogeneous strained test sample, namely, a high-power diode laser array that is affected by packaging-induced stress. Both methods concordantly reveal a −0.1% uniaxial compression in the vicinity of the midpoint of the active region of the device, demonstrating the compatibility of and justifying the assumptions involved in the two different approaches. Furthermore, we discuss some distinctive details of the processing-induced strains observed in the vicinities of metallized contacts and grooves involved in the device design.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.266
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.196 · 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