MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2089804515 · doi:10.1116/1.1451275

Sputter-etching characteristics of barium–strontium–titanate and bismuth–strontium–tantalate using a surface-wave high-density plasma reactor

2002· article· en· W2089804515 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

VenueJournal of Vacuum Science & Technology A Vacuum Surfaces and Films · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicElectronic and Structural Properties of Oxides
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche ScientifiqueUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTantalateBismuthEtching (microfabrication)Materials sciencePlasma etchingSputteringAnalytical Chemistry (journal)PhotoresistStrontiumArgonPlasmaThin filmFerroelectricityOptoelectronicsChemistryNanotechnologyDielectricMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The etching of barium–strontium–titanate (BST) and bismuth–strontium–tantalate (SBT) deposited using a pulsed laser deposition technique has been investigated using a nonreactive (argon) surface-wave high-density plasma source. The etch rate of the rf-biased thin films was determined as a function of the self-bias voltage, of the magnetic field intensity and of the gas pressure. It was found that high etch rates with a good selectivity over resist can be achieved without any plasma chemistry, provided the plasma is operated in the very low pressure regime (i.e., below 1 mTorr). For SBT, etch rates as high as 3000 Å/min with a selectivity of 0.2 over HPR-504 photoresist were obtained with self-bias voltages lower than 150 V. It is also found that even though BST and SBT present similar sputter-etching characteristics, SBT is etched about two times faster than BST as a result of the difference in the atomic density of each material.

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)0.001
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 score0.121
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.198 · 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