MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416917387 · doi:10.4071/001c.151754

Inkjet Photoresist Printing for Semiconductor Devices

2025· article· en· W4416917387 on OpenAlex

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

VenueIMAPSource Proceedings · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNanomaterials and Printing Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooMiQro Innovation Collaborative Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotoresistPhotolithographyCleanroomResistWaferMicroelectronicsSubstrate (aquarium)Shadow mask

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current industry-dominant method for photoresist deposition is spin-coating. However, as technology continues to advance, specifically in the field of microelectronic mechanical systems (MEMS), the limitations of spin-coating are becoming more apparent. A promising alternative is inkjet printing; a well-developed technology that has been very successful in a multitude of other applications, notably in 3D printing. Aside from offering good results on patterned wafers – filling cavities and eliminating edge beading – this additive technique also holds the advantage of dispensing minute volumes of photoresist, unlike spin-coating, which ejects larger volumes of resist while only 5% to 10% is retained on the substrate. Additionally, it can selectively deposit resist onto required locations on the wafer or directly print patterns, reducing the number of photolithography steps required. This article focuses on developing a process for printing photoresist for photolithography applications using a commercially available SUSS inkjet printer in a manufacturing, cleanroom environment (200 mm Fab, FED STD 209E class 10). A commercially available positive photoresist used for production within C2MI’s facility – whose intended method of deposition is spin-coating – was adapted through dilutions for inkjet printing. The findings included an optimal viscosity within a range of 5.5 cPs to 7.5 cPs (with a ± 1 cPs tolerance) and a surface tension between 28 mN/m and 34 mN/m. A 4.35% coating uniformity on a 1.48 μm thick layer was achieved, on average. Furthermore, sharp printed edges without bleeding were obtained, with a print time of 62 seconds for a blanket print. A simple three-layer proof-of-concept test structure was then designed and fabricated to compare inkjet printing with traditional spin-coating photolithography. Uniformity, thickness, print time, resist volume, and the critical dimension (CD) of the photoresist coatings after photolithography were measured and compared, demonstrating promising results for inkjet printing. Although more work is still needed to bring inkjet printing from a proof-of-concept method to an industry ready technology, the control and precision offered by inkjet printing can lead to advancements in material deposition for a variety of applications in the microfabrication process of MEMS. It has the potential to overcome current limitations of spin-coating and can do so while being a more eco- responsible and cost-effective option by reducing material waste.

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)0.000
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 score0.169
Threshold uncertainty score0.685

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.217 · 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