MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099800060 · doi:10.1149/2.0261501jss

Trends in Copper Precursor Development for CVD and ALD Applications

2014· article· en· W2099800060 on OpenAlexaff
Peter G. Gordon, Agnieszka Kurek, Seán T. Barry

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Journal of Solid State Science and Technology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSemiconductor materials and devices
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCopperAtomic layer depositionMaterials scienceMicroelectronicsChemical vapor depositionDeposition (geology)NanotechnologyThin filmChemical engineeringMetallurgyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The continued dominance of copper in microelectronic manufacturing is due in part to the techniques that have kept pace with the relentless trend towards smaller feature sizes. Pure and defect-free copper features can be created at these and smaller scales using gas phase deposition methods such as chemical vapor deposition (CVD) and atomic layer deposition (ALD). Here we review the deposition processes and in particular surface chemistry for depositing copper metal by CVD and ALD. A summary of known processes is given, and new trends in copper film deposition research are discussed. As well, process parameters and properties of copper films deposited from precursors using key ligand systems such as aminoalkoxides, amidinates, guanidinates, betadiketonates and betaketoiminates are presented. Surface chemistry is examined from the point of view of the similarities of CVD and ALD, considering precursors that can be used in both types of processes. This serves to highlight trends in decomposition mechanisms and illuminates some interesting similarities in process temperature and other parameters.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations67
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECS Journal of Solid State Science and TechnologySame topicSemiconductor materials and devicesFrench-language works237,207