MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3011397136 · doi:10.1116/1.5140364

Impacts on access resistance of InP high electron mobility transistors from wafer processing

2020· article· en· W3011397136 on OpenAlexaff
Rubin Ma, J. Lapointe, C. Storey, Philip J. Poole, Frank Jiang, Alireza Seyfollahi, Alexandre W. Walker, J.-P. Noël, A. Kam, A. Densmore

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vacuum Science & Technology B Nanotechnology and Microelectronics Materials Processing Measurement and Phenomena · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSemiconductor materials and devices
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaHerzberg Institute of Astrophysics
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWaferOhmic contactMaterials scienceOptoelectronicsContact resistanceTransistorFabricationElectronic engineeringNanotechnologyElectrical engineeringLayer (electronics)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, the authors evaluated the access resistance of InP high electron mobility transistors (HEMTs) and their degradation during wafer processing. The transfer resistance, which was rarely separated from other components of the total access resistance of InP HEMTs in the literature, was found to be the dominant component of the access resistance. It was also found that the transfer resistance degraded during wafer processing. The selection of the ohmic metal stack and its impact on both the metal-cap contact resistance and the transfer resistance was also investigated. The observations in their experiments and relevant discussions in the report are expected to be useful in the identification of improvement opportunities in both material growth and wafer fabrication of InP HEMTs.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.233
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
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