Laser direct write patterned indium tin oxide films for photomasks and anisotropic resist applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A laser direct write process has been developed for turning patterned bimetallic Sn/In film into a indium tin oxide layer. Sn over In films (15-120nm thick) with a 1:10 thickness ratio were deposited by DC sputtering. An argon laser beam (0.1 - 0.9 W, spot size: 2 micron, scan speed: 1 cm/s) exposes the film into patterns. These Sn/In films' optical absorption changed from 3 OD at deposition to 0.24 OD after exposure (at 356 nm). XRD, SEM, EDX, and Auger have been used to investigate the film's microstructure and composition suggesting ITO like characteristics. XRD indicated a preferred In<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub> (222) orientation which is similar to ITO films deposited by other methods. Four-point probe tests showed a converted film resistivity of 0.26x10<sup>-3</sup> to 9.7x10<sup>-3</sup> ohm-cm depending on the laser power and Sn concentration. Hall tests indicated that the bulk carrier concentration was in the range of 10<sup>18</sup> to 10<sup>20</sup> cm<sup>-3</sup>. Developed in a wet HCl: H<sub>2</sub>O<sub>2</sub>: H<sub>2</sub>O =1:1:48 solution removes unexposed Sn/In leaving patterned ITO films created at much lower laser power levels than needed for ablative patterning of ITO. Developed films are also resistant to KOH anisotropic etching at a 1:700 ratio producing <111> trenches in Si (100). The large change in optical density means Sn/In films can be used as a material of the direct write photomasks.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".