Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Accurate prediction of plasma-etching profile evolution can support process exploration, but recursive surrogate predictions may accumulate shape errors. We present a condition-gated graph neural network (GNN) trained with dataset aggregation on a benchmark of 200 simulated Si etching processes in Cl2 plasma. Using the benchmark’s existing polar-coordinate representation, we treat each angular sample as a graph node and connect neighboring samples. Process conditions gate the features at each node, while a gated recurrent unit predicts profile evolution over time. On 29 common validation records, GNN-full achieves a mean intersection over union of 0.9904 for the final single step and 0.9561 for a 39-step rollout, compared with 0.9880 and 0.9487 for a retrained cascade recurrent neural network (CRNN). Corresponding mean radial-profile errors are 0.43 and 2.10 nm for GNN-full vs 0.59 and 2.78 nm for CRNN. Three-seed ablations identify nodewise conditioning and autoregressive training as the main contributors to long-horizon stability. A parameter-matched transformer retains similar performance, indicating that the angular-mixing mechanism is less decisive. Training on 50 selected records reduces training time approximately threefold while retaining most autoregressive accuracy. Both methods reproduce major process-condition trend signs, but CRNN has a lower vertical-depth error in the one-factor-at-a-time sweeps. GNN inference takes approximately 1.4 ms per step, with greater training and repeated-inference cost than CRNN. The results demonstrate a benchmark-specific accuracy–cost trade-off; manufacturing significance and prospective generalization require further validation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Song et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: