Grafted Polystyrene Monolayer Brush as Both Negative and Positive Tone Electron Beam Resist
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although spin coating is the most widely used electron-beam resist coating technique in nanolithography, it cannot typically be applied for nonflat or irregular surfaces. Here, we demonstrate that monolayer polystyrene brush can be grafted on substrates and used as both positive and negative electron-beam resist, which can be applied for such unconventional surfaces. Polystyrene is a popular negative resist when using solvent developer but solvent cannot be used for grafted polystyrene brush that is firmly bonded to the substrate. Instead, we employed two unconventional development methods to lead polystyrene brush to positive or negative tone behavior. Negative tone was achieved by thermal development at 300 °C because exposed thus cross-linked polystyrene brush is more thermally stable against vaporization than unexposed linear one. Surprisingly, positive tone behavior occurred when the brush was grafted onto an aluminum (Al) layer and the film stack was developed using diluted hydrofluoric acid (HF) that etched the underlying Al layer. By transferring the patterns into the silicon (Si) substrates using the thin Al layer as a sacrificial hard mask for dry etch, well-defined structures in Si were obtained in two different electron-beam resist tones as well as in nonflat surfaces.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".