MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125685179 · doi:10.1149/1.2408858

Current Challenges with Copper Interconnects

2007· article· en· W2125685179 on OpenAlexaff
Paul R. Besser

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Transactions · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCopper Interconnects and Reliability
Canadian institutionsAdvanced Micro Devices (Canada)
FundersAdvanced Micro Devices
KeywordsElectromigrationInterconnectionIntegrated circuitCopper interconnectProcess (computing)Materials scienceFinite element methodCopperComputer scienceElectronic engineeringEngineering physicsElectrical engineeringEngineeringOptoelectronicsTelecommunicationsMetallurgyComposite materialStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the integrated circuit industry, aluminum-based interconnects and oxide interlayer dielectrics have been replaced with copper interconnects in a dual inlaid architecture and with low-K dielectrics. Inlaid Cu lines offer higher conductivity, improved electromigration performance and a reduced cost of manufacturing. In this manuscript, the current challenges with integrating Cu in high-performance integrated circuits are detailed. As technologies scale, the many steps in the integrated process flow cannot be viewed as independent. The interactions between process steps (module interactions) that must be considered will be discussed. The development of a reliable and manufacturable technology requires a fundamental understanding of these interactions. A process-oriented finite element model (FEM) will be presented to capture the effect of individual process steps on the stress evolution during processing. Finally, the future trends for Cu interconnect will be suggested.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.008
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.006

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations6
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECS TransactionsSame topicCopper Interconnects and ReliabilityFrench-language works237,207