MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2177687796 · doi:10.1149/05004.0075ecst

Correlation between Electrical and Optical Properties of Tantalum Anodic Oxide and Electron Cyclotron Resonance Etching Studies of E-beam Deposited Ta<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub> Films

2013· article· en· W2177687796 on OpenAlexaff
A. Kulpa, Nicholas A. F. Jaeger

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Transactions · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSemiconductor materials and devices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTantalumElectron cyclotron resonanceEllipsometryMaterials scienceEtching (microfabrication)Analytical Chemistry (journal)Cathode rayElectronElectrolyteOpticsThin filmChemistryElectrodeNanotechnologyPhysicsLayer (electronics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The anodicTa2O5 films were grown in 5ml/98%H2SO4 electrolyte. Discharge currents were collected immediately after growth. The optical properties were studied with a Spectroscopic Ellipsometer, over a wide range of frequencies from the UV to the IR. It was established that films for which the discharge current followed the known "~ -1" power dependence (characteristic of films that can sustain electric fields of MV/cm) have different optical properties as compared to films for which the discharge current is not represented by that function. Etching studies of the e-beam deposited Ta2O5 films, combined with reflectance measurements after each etch step, resulted in a shift in the reflectance spectrum as a function of film thickness, d. This empirical f versus d dependence (where f is the frequency corresponding to the reflectance minimum for each d) was used to calculate the energies of the 4d doublet of Ta+5 in Ta2O5.

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 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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.745

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECS TransactionsSame topicSemiconductor materials and devicesFrench-language works237,207