MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2182773255 · doi:10.1116/1.4936885

Selective dry etching of TiN nanostructures over SiO2 nanotrenches using a Cl2/Ar/N2 inductively coupled plasma

2015· article· en· W2182773255 on OpenAlexafffund
Bruno Lee Sang, Marie-Josée Gour, Maxime Darnon, Serge Ecoffey, Abdelatif Jaouad, Benattou Sadani, Dominique Drouin, Abdelkader Souifi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vacuum Science & Technology B Nanotechnology and Microelectronics Materials Processing Measurement and Phenomena · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSemiconductor materials and devices
Canadian institutionsInstitut interdisciplinaire d'innovation technologiqueUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTinMaterials scienceInductively coupled plasmaVolumetric flow rateNanostructureEtching (microfabrication)Dry etchingAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Deposition (geology)PlasmaLayer (electronics)FabricationBiasingNanotechnologyOptoelectronicsMetallurgyVoltageChemistryChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An inductively coupled plasma etch process for the fabrication of TiN nanostructures over nanotopography is presented. Using a Cl2/Ar/N2 plasma, a selectivity of 50 is achieved over SiO2. The effect of N2 flow rate on the etch rates and the nonvolatile residues on TiN sidewalls is investigated. As N2 flow rate is increased up to 50 sccm, a change in the deposition of the nonvolatile residues on TiN sidewalls is observed. The current density–voltage characterizations of TiN devices fabricated with TiN nanostructure sidewalls are presented. The measured current densities of two different samples etched with low and high N2 flow rate, respectively, demonstrated the presence after cleaning of an insulating layer deposited on the sidewalls for low N2 flow rate only.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.215 · 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.

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

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Vacuum Science & Technology B Nanotechnology and Microelectronics Materials Processing Measurement and PhenomenaSame topicSemiconductor materials and devicesFrench-language works237,207