MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2945049384 · doi:10.1109/jlt.2019.2918762

Light-Blocking Optical Alignment Rulers for Guiding Layer-by-Layer Integration

2019· article· en· W2945049384 on OpenAlexafffund
Mahssa Abdolahi, Ali Al Adawi, Hao Jiang, Bożena Kamińska

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Lightwave Technology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSemiconductor Lasers and Optical Devices
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBlocking (statistics)Layer (electronics)Integrated opticsMaterials scienceOptoelectronicsOpticsComputer scienceComputer networkNanotechnologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vertical integration of device layers is a prevailing strategy to boost the performance of microchips and optical devices while maintaining a small form factor. In this paper, we introduce light blocking optical alignment rulers (LBOARs) for layer-by-layer alignment of thin films, which can be potentially applied in manufacturing three-dimensional integrated circuits. LBOAR measures the blocking of the light transmitted through two vertically stacked subwavelength aperture arrays (gratings), which are fabricated onto the separate device layers to be aligned. Here, detailed numerical studies and proof-of-concept experiments on LBOAR are presented. The simulation results reveal two different mechanisms governing the light transmission through a pair of rulers: light blocking and induced extraordinary optical transmission (EOT). In the light-blocking regime, the intensity change is very sensitive to the horizontal shift between two rulers. In contrast, EOT-based alignment is significantly disturbed by the vertical separation of the nearly contacting rulers. Therefore, LBOAR can be more advantageous than EOT-based alignment for certain applications that require only horizontal alignment between two layers of devices. To validate the light-blocking concepts, in our experiments, two-layer stacked LBOARs were fabricated using laser lithography, physical vapor deposition, and dry etching. Optical transmission measurements show that in the nearly perfect alignment condition the transmitted intensity in the light-blocking regime drops significantly providing an alignment accuracy better than 200 nm.

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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.585

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Lightwave TechnologySame topicSemiconductor Lasers and Optical DevicesFrench-language works237,207