MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Practicality of Single Microscope Failure Analysis for Fault Isolation, Analysis, and Advanced TEM Sample Preparation by the Integration EBAC and EDS on FIBSEM

2017· article· en· W2758510945 on OpenAlex
John Lindsay, James Sagar, James Holland, J. D. S. Goulden

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings - International Symposium for Testing and Failure Analysis · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIntegrated Circuits and Semiconductor Failure Analysis
Canadian institutionsOxford Instruments (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFault detection and isolationDetectorComputer scienceLamella (surface anatomy)Materials scienceWorkflowActuatorArtificial intelligenceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Device failure analysis typically requires multiple systems for fault identification, preparation and analysis. In this paper we discuss the practicalities and limits of using a single FIBSEM system for a complete failure analysis workflow. The theoretical requirements of using a nanomanipulator for both lamella lift out and electrical testing are discussed and the current capabilities of windowless X-rays detectors for chemical analysis demonstrated. When the required resolution for failure analysis exceed the limits of a FIBSEM and TEM is required, the combination of the nanomanipulator and X-ray detector for advanced lift out and thickness controlled thinning techniques are demonstrated to prepare exceptional quality lamellae.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.885
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.257 · 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