MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3107850185 · doi:10.1109/tsm.2021.3062943

A Graph-Theoretic Approach for Spatial Filtering and Its Impact on Mixed-Type Spatial Pattern Recognition in Wafer Bin Maps

2021· article· en· W3107850185 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Semiconductor Manufacturing · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPattern recognition (psychology)Spatial filterBinMetric (unit)Spatial analysisFilter (signal processing)Common spatial patternWaferPattern matching

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Statistical quality control in semiconductor manufacturing hinges on effective diagnostics of wafer bin maps, wherein a key challenge is to detect how defective chips tend to spatially cluster on a wafer-a problem known as spatial pattern recognition. Recently, there has been a growing interest in mixed-type spatial pattern recognition-when multiple defect patterns, of different shapes, co-exist on the same wafer. Mixed-type spatial pattern recognition entails two central tasks: (1) spatial filtering, to distinguish systematic patterns from random noises; and (2) spatial clustering, to group filtered patterns into distinct defect types. Observing that spatial filtering is instrumental to high-quality mixed-type pattern recognition, we propose to use a graph-theoretic method, called adjacency-clustering, which leverages spatial dependence among adjacent defective chips to effectively filter the raw wafer maps. Tested on real-world data and compared against a state-of-the-art approach, our proposed method achieves at least 46% gain in terms of internal cluster validation quality (i.e., validation without external class labels), and about 5% gain in terms of Normalized Mutual Information-an external cluster validation metric based on external class labels. Interestingly, the margin of improvement appears to be a function of the pattern complexity, with larger gains achieved for more complex-shaped patterns.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations21
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Semiconductor ManufacturingSame topicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect DetectionFrench-language works237,207