Texture and stress analysis in as-deposited and annealed damascene Cu interconnects using XRD & OIM
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Texture variations were investigated as a function of linewidth in as‐deposited and annealed damascene Cu interconnect lines using x‐ray diffraction (XRD) and orientation imaging microscopy (OIM). Texture was predominantly {111} fiber in narrower lines in as‐deposited condition with some contribution from {111}〈110〉 component in narrower linewidths and {111}〈112〉 component in the higher linewidths. Texture became sharper with decreasing linewidth in case of as‐deposited specimens and became more random upon annealing. The decrease in texture strength was attributed to the increased twinning upon annealing. The role of linewidth to pitch distance ratio on influencing the texture strength was identified. Electron back scatter diffraction (EBSD) investigations revealed variations in texture of the local grain population. Presence of sidewall {111} component was identified in the 0.4 and 0.5 μm lines in as‐deposited condition and persisted upon annealing but was absent in the 0.35 μm lines. Presence of {110} grains parallel to the surface became more dominant upon annealing in the narrowest 0.35 μm lines with a sidewall {100} component. Residual stresses measured in the lines were tensile in all the three principal directions with very low values in the normal direction for higher linewidths.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".