freesky

 
· 所有网志 (7) · science house (2) · My resume (1) · Research Intrest (0) · My family (0) · My album (1) · 未分类 (3) ·
日历
最新的评论
站内搜索
友情链接
· 我的歪酷 非非共享界
· Institute of Chemistry, CAS
· Organic semiconductor world
· organic electronic blogger
· eczema

订阅 RSS

0002763

歪酷博客

uglydeer @ 2006-07-21 00:58

2005 Chemistry Journals Impact Factors

Below is a selected list of the ISI 2005 and 2004 impact factors for several international journals of chemistry.

The journal Impact Factor is calculated  by the Institute for Scientific Information in its annual Journal Citation Report (which includes Journal Impact Factors 2005) by dividing the number of citations in a year, by the number of citeable articles published in the preceding two years.

Wiley-VCH
In 2005 most Wiley-VCH chemistry and materials journals have increased impact. Angewandte Chemie , with its excellent Factor of 9.596, strengthens its leading position among the general chemistry journals rom 9.161 in 2004. Chemistry—A European Journal keeps advancing and has now reached 4.907 (2004: 4.517).

Advanced Synthesis & Catalysis rises to 4.632 (2004: 4.482) and remains the leader among the primary organic and organometallic chemistry journals. Similarly, ChemBioChem has risen to 3.940 (2004: 3.474) while  sister journal ChemPhysChem enjoy result of 3.607 (2004: 3.596).

Advanced Materials means excellence in its field: Its Impact Factor leaped up to 9.107 (2004: 8.079). The younger sister journal Advanced Functional Materials, showing a rising Impact Factor since its launch, has now crossed another threshold to reach a value of 6.770 (2004: 5.679)

The impact factors of European Journals of Organic is 2.548 (2004: 2.426) and European Journal of Inorganic Chemistry is at 2.514 (2004: 2.336).

Helvetica Chimica Acta impact factor decreases to 1.650 from 1.833 in 2004.

RSC
Chem Soc Rev, the RSC's general chemistry review journal,  sees its impact factor rise by 27% to 13.7 and places it amongst the most highly cited review journals.

Most RSC journals record increased impact factors:

The Analyst, 2.858 (2.78 in 2004)
Chem Soc Rev, 13.7  (10.84 in 2004)
Green Chemistry, 3.50  (+24%)
Dalton Transactions, 3,003
ChemComm, 4.43 (+10%)
Journal of Materials Chemistry, 3.69 (+36%)
Lab on a Chip, 5.3  (5.05 in 2004)
Organic & Biomolecular Chemistry, 2.5  (+32%)  
Organic & Biomolecular Chemistry received its first (partial) Impact Factor of 2.19, based on one year of citation data.


ACS
Below are the 2004 impact factors, soon to be replaced by the 2005 values...

Analytical Chemistry is #1 in total citations (59,525) and #1 in impact factor (5.450) among journals publishing 100 or more articles in 2004.

The Journal of the American Chemical Society is also #5 in impact factor (6.903).Chemical Reviews is #1 in impact factor in chemistry with 20.233. Accounts of Chemical Research is #2 with an impact factor of 13.154.

Nano Letters is ranked #4 in impact factor (8.449), an increase from 6.144 in 2003.

Five ACS journals rank in the top ten in impact factor in organic chemistry:

Organic Letters 4.195
Bioconjugate Chemistry 3.766
The Journal of Organic Chemistry 3.462
Biomacromolecules 3.299
Organometallics 3.196
The Journal of Physical Chemistry A (impact factor of 2.639) and The Journal of Physical Chemistry B (impact factor of 3.834); Chemistry of Materials records an impact factor of 4.103.

Elsevier
The 2005 IFs of the chemistry journals published by Elsevier will soon be made available.  Below are the 2004 values:

Analytical Chemistry

JOURNAL OF CHROMATOGRAPHY A - 3.359
ANALYTICA CHIMICA ACTA -  2.588
Organic Chemistry

Tetrahedron: Asymmetry – 2.386
Tetrahedron Letters – 2.484 (Tetrahedron & Tetrahedron Letters are  2 of the top 3 most cited Organic Chemistry journals are published by Elsevier with Tetrahedron Letters being the most cited chemistry Letters Journal in the World
Inorganic Chemistry

INORGANIC CHEMISTRY COMMUNICATIONS – 1.682
COORDINATION CHEMISTRY REVIEWS – 6.446
Chemical Engineering

JOURNAL OF CATALYSIS – 4.063
JOURNAL OF MEMBRANE SCIENCE – 2.108
IFs: not all that glitters is gold

You may also be interested in checking whether the impact factor is a reliable measurement of scientific quality and this post of Derek Love is best suite to answer your question.


«"Impact factors" are an attempt to quantify what everyone knows empirically: some journals are more prestigious than others.

The whole business comes from the folks at ISI (now owned by Thomson.) They had been publishing the Citation Index for years, which was (and is) a way to find out who had referenced a given paper in the scientific literature after it was published. This can be useful if you want to see if anyone's followed up or commented on an interesting paper (or if you just want to see if anyone's cited your own work.)

About ten years ago, they introduced the Impact Factor to do the same thing for scientific journals...

The publishing community - initially rather worried and skeptical, if my memory serves - has gone completely crazy over the whole idea. Now journals advertise themselves by their impact factors. "Publish here! We're a good journal, really! We have proof!" If you'd like to know what a particular journal's rating is, they'll probably shout it out if it's any good at all. A failure to mention the number, down to three decimal places, is an act that speaks for itself.

Everyone whose livelihood depends on scientific publication, though, already knows them well, since anything that can be measured will be used at performance evaluation time. IFs are a particular obsession in academic research, since publishing papers is one of those things that an aspiring tenure-seeking associate professor is expected to do. (On the priority list, it comes right after hauling down the grant money)...

The less interesting papers are getting a free impact ride, while the better ones could have presumably been playing off in a super-impact league of their own, if such a journal existed. The authors also point out that journals covering new fields with a rapidly expanding literature - much of which is also ephemeral - have necessarily inflated IFs. Does it really indicate their quality? (Well now, say the pro-impact people, isn't this just the sort of carping you'd expect from the BMJ, who live in the shadow of the more-prestigious Lancet?)

On a different level, there's plenty of room to hate the whole idea, regardless of how it's implemented. The number of citations, say such critics, is not necessarily the only (or best) measure of a paper's worth, or the worth of the journal it appears in. (As that link shows, the original papers from both Salk and Sabin on their polio vaccines are on no one's list of high citation rates.)»




 
uglydeer @ 2006-04-02 04:21

自从老婆和女儿回国以后,日子过的清净而又无聊,特别是在周末的日子。在天气晴朗的日子里,透过窗子,看外面湛蓝的天空,后面小山上不时传来各种鸟的啼鸣声。心情没来由的变的平静起来。来到美国将近一年半了,天天为了生存而忙。很上有心情去欣赏,去品评周围的环境,去体味人生的乐趣。我真的很佩服美国人环保的意识和科技的先进。区区一个小镇,麻雀虽小,五脏具全。特别是环境,美仑美幻。绿绿的山,尤其是Oak Ridge 湖,那个简直美,海鸥,大雁,鸳鸯,鸭子在湖中漫游,老人和小孩在湖边散步。这儿到处是草地鲜花和绿树。树林中的动物更是不胜其数,小鹿,松鼠,火鸡,还有很多不知名的动物走来跑去。在橡树岭最美的季节是秋季,那时简直象童话中的世界,象仙境。树变的五颜六色,红似火,黄的象金子。看每个山头都好像涂上各种颜色。在湛蓝的天空的衬托下,简直是美极啦。



 
uglydeer @ 2006-03-26 02:10

Oak Ridge


 
uglydeer @ 2006-03-18 00:51



 
uglydeer @ 2006-03-17 01:59

Process Information
Raith 150 E-Beam Lithography System:
raith


E-beam Lithography Resist Processing

Please note that there are new ebeam resist processes (below) and new ebeam resist handling procedures in place. See Resist List for complete list of resists and developers used in the lab.

This machine is capable of routinely producing 3:1 aspect ratios in a high resolution, high contrast resist, with a minimum feature size of roughly 50 nm. For example, if you want 50 nm features, plan on using resist no thicker than 150 nm; alternatively, if your process requires 0.30 µm resist, do not expect feature sizes below 100 nm. For greater process latitude, try to use lower aspect ratios. For sparse patterns with PMMA resist, it may be possible to make aspect ratios as high as 5:1.

In order to get features to print at their design size, a sizing may be specified in ELSA. Most positive resists require a sizing in the range of -0.04 to -0.08 depending on resist type, contrast, thickness, and development. Note that features equal to or smaller than the sizing get shrunk to nothing and will be deleted from your pattern. Although specifying a sizing will help linewidths in most cases, it will also result in an (apparent) increase in the proximity effect on some patterns. Negative resists generally require little or no sizing. Sizing may also be used to compensate for other effects such as etch bias. The resist thickness varies as the square root of the spin speed. However, the resist thickness is highly sensitive to the solvent concentration; ie diluting the resist by a factor of two will reduce the thickness by an amount much greater than a factor of two.

 

PMMA

PMMA is an ultra-high resolution, high current positive resist used for nanolithography. It has poor sensitivity and poor dry etch resistance. It sticks well to almost any surface, lasts forever, is not white light sensitive, and gives very reproducible results. There are several flavors of PMMA recipes that have been characterized at SNF:

Single Layer 2% 950K MW PMMA - Anisole <PDF>
Single Layer 5% 495K MW PMMA - Anisole <PDF>
Bilayer PMMA Resist Process for Liftoff
Single Layer 2% 950K MW PMMA - Chlorobenzene <PDF>
Single Layer 5% 495K MW PMMA - Chlorobenzene <PDF>


 

ZEP 520-12

ZEP is a very high resolution positive resist that like PMMA is simple to use and gives reproducible results. Compared to PMMA, it has an advantage of being 3 times faster and has good dry etch resistance. It has the disadvantages of poor adhesion (requires HMDS) and undercut profiles. This may be good for lift-off, however.

Although we post process notes for chlorobenzene-based ZEP520, please understand that we now discourage use of chlorobenzene-based resists in the lab. Instead, we now recommend the much safer, anisole-based ZEP520. Here are the spin-speed curves for anisole-based ZEP520.

APEX-E

Apex-E is a high performance, chemically amplified DUV positive resist that works well as an E-beam resist as well. It is extremely fast, has excellent dry etch resistance, and moderate resolution (0.15 µm). It's drawbacks are its high speed, which requires a large pixel spacing of .04 µm to keep the writing speed under 100Mhz, and sensitivity to airborne contamination. In order to get reproducible results, the resist should be spun, written, and developed all within a few hours. APEX-E is also very sensitive to contamination from underlying films on the wafer which may make it unusable in certain situations.

HMDS prime

Spin

PAB: 90°C 1 minute

Expose at 3 - 6 µC pattern dose

large area clearing dose is 2.5µC

PEB: 85°C 1 minute

Develop in MF319 1 minute (standard SVG track develop program)

Rinse: DI water

 

 

SAL-601

SAL-601 is a high sensitivity chemically amplified negative resist. It has very good resolution (sub 0.1 µm), high contrast, and moderate dry etch selectivity. The main drawbacks are scumming and bridging between features, particularly in dense patterns; poor adhesion (requires HMDS); a very short shelf life (hours on the wafer, days in a bottle at room temperature, months when refrigerated). Reproducibility is not great due to aging effects and sensitivity to bake time and temperature as well as minute levels of airborne contaminants. Because of the scum problem, this resist is best suited for isolated features. Since this is a negative resist, the wedge pattern does not work well. Try looking for color changes using wedge5, which requires a 0.04 µm pixel spacing to keep under 100 Mhz. SAL-601, like APEX-E, is also sensitive to the chemistry of the underlying film. In particular, nitride may reduce its sensitivity by 30%.

HMDS prime

spin

PAB: 90°C for 10 min.

expose at 5-15 µC/cm2 (doses below 12µC may require 0.04 µm pixel spacing)

PEB: 115°C for 1 min on hotplate

Develop for 2 - 5 min in MF322 (try a develop time 2X the dose to clear)

May require a light RIE descum.

 

 

SNR-200

This resist has found to not have the scumming problems that SAL has and people are resolving smaller features. The following is a SNR recipe:

Singe 150°C for 30 minutes

HMDS prime (not critical)

Spin at 7.5KRPM for .5µm layer

Pre-bake at hotplate 120°C for 2 minutes

Expose. Do an exposure matrix here or start with 6.5µC.

Post exposure bake at 110°C for 2 minutes. (this is a critical step - do not vary time or temperature)

Develop for 20 sec in MF CD-14.


 

UVN2

UVN2 is high sensitivity chemically amplified negative photoresist with a wide process window overlap and PED stability > 2hours.

Singe 150°C for 30 minutes

HMDS prime

Spin at 7.5KRPM for 30 seconds = 4200A thickness

Pre-bake at hotplate 110°C for 1 minutes

Expose. 4.5 to 15 uC

Post exposure bake at 95°C for 1 minutes. (this is a critical step - do not vary time or temperature)

Develop for 30 sec in MF CD-26 developer.

 

 

UVN30

UVN30 is high sensitivity chemically amplified negative photoresist with a wide process window overlap and PED stability > 2hours. This resist is better at fine line-space resolution without scumming.

Singe 150°C for 30 minutes

HMDS prime

Spin at 7.5KRPM for 30 seconds =3800A thickness (or 4K =5300A)

Pre-bake at hotplate 140°C for 90 seconds

Expose. 4.5 to 15 uC (simular to UVN2)

Post exposure bake at 130°C for 40 secnds. (this is a critical step - do not vary time or temperature)

Develop for 30 sec in MF 702 developer, Normality 0.21(recommended by Shipley).

or Develop for 45 sec in MF 322 developer, Normality close to 0.21.

or Develop for (?30 sec) in MF CD-26 developer, Normality 0.26 (used by Cornell).

UV5

This resist has good plasma etch resistance (better than APEX-E). Resolution performance: For .5um thick resist: 0.2 um lines and spaces, 0.1um contact holes and 0.1um isolated lines.

Singe 150°C for 30 minutes

HMDS prime

Spin at 5KRPM for 30 seconds = 5000A thickness

Pre-bake at hotplate 130°C for 1 minutes

Expose. 10 to 20 uC

Post exposure bake at 115°C for 90 seconds. (The PEB delay stability has been shown to be greater than 90 minutes up to 2 hours.)

Develop for 45 sec in LDD26W developer

Hard Bake at 145C for 3 minutes 

E-beam Resist Handling Procedure:
Revision 2.3 October 28, 2003

James W. Conway

Electron Beam Lithography Resist often are more moisture sensitive and reactive than the Novalak based resist systems employed in optical lithography.  They will require more care and diligence in their handling to achieve a quality process result, minimize contamination, and to achieve uniform film thickness across your wafers.

Our standard E-beam resist we use here at SNF is 5% 495K Molecular Weight PMMA, Poly Methyl Methacrylate, but these guidelines are applicable to all E-beam resist handled here in the Lab. The 2% 950 K MW PMMA is our high resolution resist.


Please review the Optical Lithography manual coating processes for additional info.

1.      Cleanliness of process benches, application equipment, wafer chucks and wafers:

-Always wipe down the process bench surfaces with IPA or water using lint-free cloth.  This aids in removing contamination sources and particulate debris from the deck surfaces.  Be sure to maintain the proper chemical handling methods, as some benches do not allow solvents to be used in them. Ask a staff member to help you.

-Deck and Spinner interior surfaces must be covered with Aluminum Foil to minimize particles and traces of materials from previous processing operations.

-Solvent clean your syringes and wafer chuck in Acetone and IPA at the Solvent Bench, blow off these items with the N2 Blow off gun, and allow to dry an addition minute or two on lint-free before moving back to the spinner area.

- All wafers you cover with resist should have been cleaned using standard wafer cleaning methods, depending on your contamination level dependency.  Clean and semi-clean wafers should undergo the Std. Pre-diffusion Wafer Cleaning process.


2.      Deposition of Resist Material:
The Headway Spinner in the Photolithography area is our normal PMMA spinning tool. It has very reproducible spin speed control and will achieve as good as 1% thickness uniformity across a 100 mm Si wafer.

- Completely cover the interior of the bowl with aluminum Foil.  NO solvents or resist material should ever be introduced to the drain of this bench whatsoever.

- You should run several dummy wafers before starting in order to set and confirm the spin speed and set time accurately to the process specifications.

- It is important to maintain cleanliness and minimize exposure to air of both the resist in the storage bottles and the material to be dispensed onto your wafers.

To reduce cost and minimize waste of resist material you should use either clean BD Type II Glass, or Plastic PE/PP syringes, and PTFE filters to transfer and dispense your resist material on to your wafers. I recommend the 10 ml size syringes.  Plastic syringes and filters are available in the SNF stock room.  BD Type II syringes are available at Bio-stores.  Small chips coating can employ the 2.5 ml syringes.

- Direct from a wide mouth bottle using the syringe without the Luhr lock filter, fill the syringe to the fill line.  Invert the syringe end up, push to plunger bleed off any extra air bubbles and place the filter onto the tip securely.  Prime the filter to remove bubbles, and allow a very small volume of resist (~1ml) to flow out of the syringe. This can go directly into the foil in the base of the spinner. (But never allow any material to go down the drain, as it should all be covered with Al foil.)

3.      Spin Deposition of Resist Material:
- Carefully place and center your wafer onto the Wafer Chuck, and confirm the vacuum chuck securely holds your wafer. Close the cover of the Spinner if open.

-Blow off your wafer with N2 Gun to displace particles.

-Dispense 2 – 4 ml of resist material covering approximately 1/3 of the wafer surface and without delay immediately activate the spinner by pressing gently on the pedal on the floor.  Allow the spinning operation to complete. Stand back! If a wafer flies off the spinner simply press the rear section of the pedal to stop the spinning operation.

- Carefully remove the wafer with tweezers, grasping the wafer perpendicular to the cleavage planes adjacent the flat, and place on either the hotplate or into a quartz wafer boat for the oven soft bake.

-Repeat with your next wafer(s) until you are finished.



4.      PLEASE: Clean up the Headway Spinner area after each use:
Remove all resist and Al Foil from the spinner bowl and wipe down the edges and deck surfaces removing all traces of resist material. This waste is placed into a polyethylene bag and label with a hazardous waste label. Place into the waste receptacle. Replace the foil covering all surfaces of the spinner bowl. 
Wipe down the deck leaving a clean area ready for the next Lab member’s use.

5.      Soft Baking of Resist Materials:
Soft Bake to remove most of the solvents from the resist and to form a continuous polymer layer of resist across your wafers. You must fully cure your films before exposure in order to not contaminate the UHV vacuum system of the EBL systems. This is very important!

Some of our PMMA processes can be performed on a Hotplate, other processes are better soft baked in a N2 purged Oven.  The Blue M Oven using Process No. 1 at 170 degrees Celsius for 2 hours is the standard bake process for Std. 5% 495K MW PMMA. Hot plate bakes can also be employed to soft bake your wafers.

Carefully remove the wafers from the Quartz oven boat and place them immediately into a clean Polypropylene wafer carrier box.  Be sure the new box is labeled with your Name, CORL login, Process Lot Number, and Process Name and Date. 

6.      Optical Microscope Inspection:
Many defects and artifacts of the spin process can be observed by eye such as Comets and Spin irregularities.  But you should also examine the films using an optical microscope at both 5 – 10 X and at 200 – 500 X magnification.  Seek out and count the number of particles and defects you find in 20 fields of view and note the counts in your lab notebook.  This takes only a minute or two but yields good information.
This will help you later to identify the best wafers for your work and to monitor the cleanliness of the wafers you are processing.
 You did inspect your wafers after the cleaning process – right!!

7.      Store your wafers before exposure in a clean dry location preferably w/ N2 purge.

If you run into problems any SNF staff member is happy to assist you! -- JWC