MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2090005546 · doi:10.1002/pssa.200622520

Hydrogen blistering of silicon: Progress in fundamental understanding

2007· article· en· W2090005546 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

Venuephysica status solidi (a) · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSilicon and Solar Cell Technologies
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlistersSiliconMaterials scienceHydrogenHeterojunctionNanotechnologyChemical physicsOptoelectronicsComposite materialChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract When silicon is implanted with a sufficient concentration of H ions, at low to moderate temperature, and subsequently annealed at high temperature, dome‐shaped gas‐filled blisters and/or craters of exploded blisters appear on the surface. Under particular conditions, blistering can be produced by plasma hydrogenation as well. The phenomenon is another facet of hydrogen behaviour in silicon, a question with both fundamental and applied implications. Blistering is at the origin of the “ion‐cutting” process for the fabrication of silicon‐on‐insulator and other heterostructures; this process is particularly useful whenever atomically sharp interfaces between layers are required. The novelty and vast potential of this process has spurred since the mid‐1990's a burst of experimental activity on blistering. The purposes of those works were either to improve or extend the ion‐cut process, or to clarify its underlying mechanisms. In “mechanisms”, the plural is used to convey the fact that it is a multi‐step phenomenon. Because of this complexity, the theoretical work, in comparison, is far less abundant. Hydrogen blistering of silicon is qualitatively understood in broad terms: H being insoluble in Si, it tends to segregate into cavities which grow and coalesce at high temperature, and the H 2 pressure in the cavities finally deforms the surface. In fact, our understanding of the microscopic mechanisms has progressed much beyond that level thanks to the sophisticated work that has been carried out using techniques such as transmission electron microscopy, Rutherford backscattering in the channelling mode, infrared spectroscopy of local vibrational modes, stress and strain measurements, and others. The effects of n‐ or p‐doping, He ion coimplantation, and isotope substitution have also greatly helped in discriminating between different hypotheses. After a review of the most relevant experimental facts, the blistering mechanisms that have been proposed in the literature will be discussed and their conformity with the data assessed. Finally an attempt will be made to identify the key questions and suggest a few avenues for future work. (© 2007 WILEY‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim)

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 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 score0.371
Threshold uncertainty score0.642

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.233 · 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