MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2083541479 · doi:10.1139/p03-101

Influence de la température de substrat sur la croissance et les propriétés des films minces de silicium amorphe déposés par pulvérisation cathodique

2003· article· en· W2083541479 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
S Abdesselem, A Ouhab, M.S. Aïda

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThin-Film Transistor Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubstrate (aquarium)Thin filmPhysicsAnalytical Chemistry (journal)HydrogenDeposition (geology)Chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We deposit thin films of a-Si:H by RF diode spray on substrate with temperatures varying from 200 to 500 °C. Knowing that this deposition method is violent when compared with the plasma-assisted deposition method, we have used low RF power to limit the energy of the Ar ions bombarding the surface of the growing film. Characterization of the films by UV–visible absorption spectroscopy suggests that the influence of the substrate temperature can be classified into three different regimes: (i) low temperature, T s < 300 °C: the films show a strong disorder, the hydrogen is bound only in the polyhydric configuration; (ii) intermediate temperature, 300 °C < T s < 400 °C: film growth is rapid, the films present a lower defect density; this may be the best regime to make good quality a-Si:H films using the spraying method; (iii) high temperature, T s > 400 °C: the films are more organized, but less hydrogenated. The substrate temperature influences the film properties by modifying the growing mechanism through a control of the reactions taking place at the plasma–substrate interface, where the hydrogen dynamics play a fundamental role.[Journal translation]

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.373
Threshold uncertainty score0.817

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of PhysicsSame topicThin-Film Transistor TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207