Predictive modeling and analysis of HfO <sub>2</sub> thin film process based on Bayesian information criterion using PCA‐based neural networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Principal component analysis (PCA)‐based neural network (NNet) models of HfO 2 thin films are used to study the process of efficient model selection and develop an improved model by using multivariate functional data such as X‐ray diffraction data (XRD). The accumulation capacitance and the hysteresis index input parameters, both characteristic of HfO 2 dielectric films, were selected for the inclusion in the model by analyzing the process conditions. Standardized XRD were used to analyze the characteristic variations for different process conditions; the responses and the electrical properties were predicted by NNet modeling using crystallinity‐based measurement data. A Bayesian information criterion (BIC) was used to compare the model efficiency and to select an improved model for response prediction. Two conclusions summarize the results of the research documented in this paper: (i) physical or material properties can be predicted by the PCA‐based NNet model using large‐dimension data, and (ii) BIC can be used for the selection and evaluation of predictive models in semiconductor manufacturing processes. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".