SBOK052 May 2024 OPA4H014-SEP
For conventional products where hundreds of failures are seen during a single exposure, one can determine the average failure rate of parts being tested in a heavy-ion beam as a function of fluence with high degree of certainty and reasonably tight standard deviation, and as a result, have confidence that the calculated cross-section is accurate.
With radiation-hardened parts however, it is difficult to determine the cross-section because often few or no failures are observed during an entire exposure. Determining the cross-section using an average failure rate with standard deviation is no longer a viable option, and the common practice of assuming a single error occurred at the conclusion of a null-result can result in a greatly underestimated cross-section.
In cases where observed failures are rare or non-existent, the use of confidence intervals and the chi-squared distribution is indicated. The chi-squared distribution is particularly designed for the determination of a reliability level when the failures occur at a constant rate. In the case of SEE testing where the ion events are random in time and position within the irradiation area, a failure rate is expected that is independent of time (presuming that parametric shifts induced by the total ionizing dose do not affect the failure rate), and as a result, the use of chi-squared statistical techniques is valid (because events are rare, an exponential or Poisson distribution is used).
In a typical SEE experiment, the device-under-test (DUT) is exposed to a known, fixed fluence (ions / cm2) while the DUT is monitored for failures. This is analogous to fixed-time reliability testing and, more specifically, time-terminated testing where the reliability test is terminated after a fixed amount of time whether or not a failure has occurred (in the case of SEE tests fluence is substituted for time and hence it is a fixed fluence test (6)). Calculating a confidence interval specifically provides a range of values which is likely to contain the parameter of interest (the actual number of failures per fluence). Confidence intervals are constructed at a specific confidence level. For example, a 95% confidence level implies that if a given number of units were sampled numerous times and a confidence interval estimated for each test, the resulting set of confidence intervals can bracket the true population parameter in about 95% of the cases.
To estimate the cross-section from a null-result (no fails observed for a given fluence) with a confidence interval, start with the standard reliability determination of lower-bound (minimum) mean-time-to-failure for fixed-time testing (an exponential distribution is assumed) in Equation 3:
Where:
Where:
Assume that all tests are terminated at a total fluence of 106 ions/cm2. Assume there are a number of devices with different performances that are tested under identical conditions. Assume a 95% confidence level (σ = 0.05). Note that as d increases from 0 events to 100 events, the actual confidence interval becomes smaller, which indicates that the range of values of the true value of the population parameter (in this case, the cross-section) is approaching the mean value + 1 standard deviation. As more events are observed, the statistics are improved such that uncertainty in the actual device performance is reduced.
Degrees-of-Freedom (d) | 2(d + 1) | χ2 at 95% | Calculated Cross-Section (cm2) | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Upper-Bound at 95% Confidence | Mean | Average + Standard Deviation | |||
0 | 2 | 7.38 | 3.69E–06 | 0.00E+00 | 0.00E+00 |
1 | 4 | 11.14 | 5.57E–06 | 1.00E–06 | 2.00E–06 |
2 | 6 | 14.45 | 7.22E–06 | 2.00E–06 | 3.41E–06 |
3 | 8 | 17.53 | 8.77E–06 | 3.00E–06 | 4.73E–06 |
4 | 10 | 20.48 | 1.02E–05 | 4.00E–06 | 6.00E–06 |
5 | 12 | 23.34 | 1.17E–05 | 5.00E–06 | 7.24E–06 |
10 | 22 | 36.78 | 1.84E–05 | 1.00E–05 | 1.32E–05 |
50 | 102 | 131.84 | 6.59E–05 | 5.00E–05 | 5.71E–05 |
100 | 202 | 243.25 | 1.22E–04 | 1.00E–04 | 1.10E–04 |