INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PRECISION ENGINEERING AND MANUFACTURING Vol. 14, No. 9, pp.

1513-1518 SEPTEMBER 2013 / 1513

DOI: 10.1007/s12541-013-0204-x

Effect of Contact Angle between Retaining Ring and

Polishing Pad on Material Removal Uniformity in CMP
Process

Yeongbong Park1, Hyunseop Lee1, Youngkyun Lee1, Sunjoon Park1, and Haedo Jeong1,#
1 Graduate School of Mechanical Engineering, Pusan National University, Jangjeon-dong, Gumjung-gu, Busan, South Korea, 609-735
# Corresponding Author / E-mail: hdjeong@pusan.ac.kr, TEL: +82-51-510-2463, FAX: +82-51-518-8442

KEYWORDS: CMP, Edge exclusion, Edge effect, Retaining ring, Contact angle, Finite element analysis

This paper presents the effect of the contact angle between the retaining ring and the polishing pad in chemical mechanical
polishing (CMP) on the profile of the material removal rate (MRR) around the wafer edge and on the within-wafer
nonuniformity (WIWNU). This study demonstrates that the mechanical interaction among the polishing pad, wafer, and
retaining ring influences the ability to achieve planarization from the CMP process. In particular, the purpose of this study is
to understand the effect of the contact conditions between the retaining ring and the pad on the CMP process. In order to verify
the mechanical aspects of the MRR near the wafer edge, retaining rings with different contact angles were prepared. Finite
element analysis (FEA) verified the effect of the contact angle between the retaining ring and the polishing pad on the stress
distribution around the edge of the wafer. The results of the analysis were corroborated by conducting CMP experiments with
200-mm blanket oxide wafers. As expected, the FEA results were in good agreement with the MRR profile around the edge area.
Through simulations and experiments, we concluded that the contact angle is an important factor to achieve a flatter edge
profile and the material removal profile around the edge of the wafer was optimum at a 0o contact angle. In particular the
WIWNU was below 4% when a flat retaining ring was used. The results of this study make it possible to improve the yield of
chip production by ensuring the retaining ring maintains perfect flatness without making any special design changes to the
CMP equipment.

Manuscript received: September 9, 2012 / Accepted: June 10, 2013

1. Introduction Semiconductors (ITRS)3 presented the requirement for the edge

As the semiconductor industry pursues increased circuit density and
multi-level metallization integration, achieving a uniform edge material
removal rate (MRR) during chemical mechanical polishing (CMP) is
essential in order to improve the yield of chip production. A uniform
profile that extends to the edge of the wafer is difficult to achieve. Edge
exclusion is the outer part of a wafer where dies are not fabricated.
Even though dies cannot be fabricated in this region, one must still
strive to have the same film thickness uniformity and defect density as
in the case of the inner parts of the wafers.
Reducing edge exclusions is particularly important for larger wafers
because the number of chips around the peripheral area increases with
wafer diameter, and as the lithography area moves closer to the wafer
edge, the depth of focus (DOF) requires a much flatter surface near the
edge area.1,2 The recent International Technology Roadmap for
exclusion to be 2 mm, which is predicted to be achieved by 2024 if the
technical difficulties in reducing edge exclusions are overcome.
However, device manufacturers are actually trying to reduce the edge
exclusion to less than 1 mm, which is approximately the same as the
edge roll-off area of a wafer. Several factors affect the wafer edge
region, such as polishing pressure, velocity, processing time, chemical
reactions and hydrodynamic conditions of the slurry, and properties of
the pad. The complex relationship among the parameters makes it
difficult to analyze and predict the MRR uniformity during CMP.
Baker4 reported that the edge exclusion of the wafer is generated
mainly by the edge effect, which is not observed in conventional
abrasive machining processes, such as lapping and grinding, the MRR
was strongly affected by the stress distribution along the wafer edge
and that the edge effect was caused by the rebounding of the pad. The
stress variation in the edge region matched the expectation for the

© KSPE and Springer 2013

 1514 / SEPTEMBER 2013
MRR variation. In other words, the irregular MRR at the wafer edge is
explained by the pressure singularity at the edge. Therefore, the contact
angle is also an important factor in the edge effect; the angle is
generated from erroneous assembling of the retaining ring to the carrier
before the start of the CMP process, less accurate machining, and wear
resulting from long-run polishing processes. In this study, we
investigate the effect of the contact angle between the retaining ring
and the polishing pad on the MRR profile around the wafer edge and
the WIWNU in CMP processes using finite element analysis (FEA)
and experiments.
2. CMP Carrier type, retaining ring and definition of
contact angle
2.1 CMP carrier
The design of the wafer carrier is critical to global planarity. The
key design elements of the carrier are wafer leveling and the retaining
ring. Wafer leveling is accomplished by backing the wafer with either
a compressible film or a pneumatic bladder.5 There are two types of
retaining rings: a noncontact retaining ring carrier (NRRC) and a
contact retaining ring carrier (CRRC), as shown in Fig. 1. In the case
of an NRRC, there is a 100-200 μm gap between the retaining ring and
the polishing pad while the carrier is at rest. However, a CRRC
involves the retaining ring contacting the polishing pad at all times. The
NRRC is the conventional design and used with a backing film,
whereas the CRRC is mainly used with a pneumatic bladder (e.g., a
flexible membrane) that applies uniform pressure over the wafer
backside and conforms to the wafer shape.
The causes of nonuniform removal near the wafer edge are various
and complex. In the conventional carrier (NRRC), the concentrated
pressure was applied to the leading edge region owing to the carrier’s
gimbals and pad deformations.6 Therefore, a nonuniform pressure
distribution near the wafer edge was obtained as expected. Results of
CMP performed with a CRRC clarified that the higher pressure of the
retaining ring caused a nonuniform pressure variation near the wafer
edge. The CRRC achieved a superior polishing performance to the
Fig. 1 Schematics of (a) film-backed noncontact retaining ring carrier
and (b) membrane-backed contact retaining ring carrier
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PRECISION ENGINEERING AND MANUFACTURING Vol. 14, No. 9
NRRC; the edge exclusion value of the CRRC was 2-3 mm and the
NRRC’s value was 5-7 mm. This improvement is because the CRRC is
protected from the deformed polishing pad by the retaining ring while
the carrier is moving and rotating. However, the CRRC has an edge
effect caused by the mechanical interaction among the retaining ring,
polishing pad, and wafer.
2.2 Retaining ring
The retaining ring plays a key role in preventing the wafer from
slipping out and spreading slurry over the pad surface. It is made from
a variety of materials and compounds and its features must be
machined to tight tolerances, which are required to satisfy the
increasing demands for wafer planarity. However, the retaining ring is
gradually worn during the CMP process. In particular, some of the
aggressive processes, such as oxide CMP, often require that retaining
rings be replaced as often as every 2 days.7 Therefore, there is always
the possibility of errors in assembling the retaining ring to the carrier
or in the machining accuracy. The retaining ring also wears out
constantly during polishing processes, and the shape of surface is far
from being flat.8 After processing several wafers, the retaining ring
results in uneven changes to its shape.
2.3 Definition of contact angle
The contact angle between the polishing pad and the retaining ring
may be the one of the most important factors for improving MRR
uniformity at the wafer edge. The contact angle is generated when the
polishing pad and the retaining ring contact during the CMP process.
In particular, the shape of the retaining ring in the CRRC is crucial
because it always contacts the pad during the polishing process.
Moreover, the pressure on the retaining ring is normally higher than
that on the wafer. With a proper geometric design, retaining rings can
provide a uniform removal profile around the edge region of the wafer.8
The contact angle of the retaining ring can be classified into three
categories as shown in Fig. 2: (a) concave (θ < 0), (b) flat (θ = 0), and
(c) convex (θ > 0). These contact angles are expected to intensify the
concentration of pressure near the wafer edge; they will have a decisive
effect on the WIWNU and MRR profiles.
3. FEA and experimental
3.1 FEA
The finite element model we used was consisted of a two-layer
polishing pad, wafer, and retaining ring. The pressure acting on the
wafer and retaining ring was assumed to be uniformly distributed.
The initial state was assumed to be when the retaining ring contacts
the pad. The following assumptions were made:(a) all materials were
isotropic and homogeneous; (b) the surfaces of the wafer, polishing
Fig. 2 Schematics of types of retaining rings
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PRECISION ENGINEERING AND MANUFACTURING Vol. 14, No. 9
pad, and retaining ring were smooth; and (c) the wafer and polishing
pad were in contact at all points of the interface at which a small
amount of sliding occurred, and their relative velocity was constant in
all positions. The following boundary conditions were applied:(1) the
polishing pad had a fixed support at its bottom side; (2) axisymmetric
boundary conditions were applied at r = 0; (3) the normal stress was
considered only in the z-direction of the uniform pressure distribution;
and (4) the displacements of adjacent nodes across each contact were
coupled in all directions. A 2D axisymmetric static model was
simulated using commercial FEA software (ANSYS), and 2D
quadrilateral-shaped elements in ANSYS were used. The numbers of
nodes and elements were 21,483 and 6,537, respectively.
Fig. 3 shows the schematic of the 2D axisymmetric model, and Table
1 lists the material properties and dimensions. The chemical effects of
slurry soften the surface and increase the MRR,9 and the mechanical
effects of an abrasive alter the polishing mechanism. However, this
analysis assumed that chemical interactions occurred during CMP and
the influences of the abrasive were ignored. FEA used in this analysis
considered only stress profile by the mechanical interactions among the
polishing pad, wafer and retaining ring assuming the chemical effect and
abrasive work on all parts of wafer evenly.
3.2 Experimental conditions
All polishing experiments were performed with CRRC CMP
equipment (Poli-500, GnP Technology). A 200-mm blanket oxide
wafer (wafer thickness: 750 μm) was used with a commercial Inter-
Level Dielectric (ILD) slurry (TSO-12, soulbrain). To investigate the
effect of the contact angle on the edge removal profile, the CMP
experiments were conducted using retaining rings of various angles.
Retaining rings of various angles were prepared: (-) 1.2o, (-) 0.6o, 0o
(flat), (+) 0.6o, (+) 1.2o, and (+) 1.8o. The retaining rings were made of
PEEK, which is a commonly employed material in the semiconductor
industry. The width of the retaining ring was 20 mm. Fig. 4 shows a
schematic view of the CMP process with retaining rings at various
angles. Details of the experimental conditions are listed in Table 2. Air
Fig. 3 Schematic of 2D axisymmetric finite element model
Table 1 Material properties and physical dimensions used in the
axisymmetric stress model10,11
Sub-pad Top-pad Wafer Retaining ring
Elastic modulus
3.12 31.22 1.6 × 105 3.6 × 103
(MPa)
Poisson’s ratio (v) 0.35 0.35 0.3 0.4
Density (Kg/mm2) 2.6 × 10-7 2.6 × 10-7 2.33 × 10-6 1.3 × 10-6
Radius (mm) 200 200 100 30
Thickness (mm) 1.27 1.27 0.7 10
SEPTEMBER 2013 / 1515
at a uniform pressure was constantly supplied directly to the backside
of the wafer and the retaining ring. The retaining ring pressure was
independently controlled by supplying air from another pressure port.
The chemical slurry was sprayed continuously onto the center of the
pad during the polishing experiments. An arm-type pad conditioner
was used to regenerate the pad surface and recover the glazed pad. The
carrier, platen, and conditioner rotated in the same direction with nearly
the same rotational speed (93/87 rpm) to achieve an appropriate relative
speed and speed uniformity across the wafer surface.12
4. Result and Discussion
A high pressure is normally applied to retaining rings to prevent
wafers from slipping out. If the retaining ring does not contact properly
with the polishing pad owing to the contact angle, the contact area
between the retaining ring and the polishing pad decreases. This
decreased area requires application of higher pressure on the polishing
pad. There was a singularity of normal stress near the wafer edge
region and the retaining ring edge region owing to the pressure
concentration caused by the retaining ring contacting the polishing pad.
Polishing pads are known to be one of the most critical consumables
in CMP; they have a substantial impact on the polishing rate,
planarization, uniformity, defectivity, and other process results. The pad
Fig. 4 Schematic of the CMP process
Table 2 Experimental parameters
Equipment Poli-500 [G & P Technology, Inc.]
Pad IC1000A6 stacked [commercial pad]
Slurry TSO-12 [commercial slurry]
Contact angle [θ] (-)1.2, (-)0.6, flat, (+)0.6, (+)1.2, (+)1.8 [degree]
Pressure Wafer/Retaining-ring : 4/5 (psi)
Velocity Table/Carrier : 93/87 (rpm)
Slurry flow rate 200 (cc/min)
In-situ conditioning[arm]-commercial disk, Head
Etc.
Oscillation On
Fig. 5 SEM images of IC1000A6-stacked polishing pad: (a) top view
(x150) and (b) cross-sectional area (x100)
 1516 / SEPTEMBER 2013 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PRECISION ENGINEERING AND MANUFACTURING Vol. 14, No. 9
is either a thin polymeric layer (several millimeters in thickness) or a
flat polishing material used for mechanical contact with the wafer for
precise surface polishing. The polishing pads are attached to the platen
of polishing equipment with a low-strength adhesive. After pressure is
applied to their surface, it becomes deformed. Pad deformation can be of
one the following kinds: (1) elastic deformation, (2) viscoelastic
deformation, and (3) permanent deformation.6 The rate of pad
deformation depends on several factors, including the forming structure
of polishing pads and the structure of the materials, e.g., polymeric and
crystalline structures. It is desirable to have minimal pad deformation.
Fig. 5 shows scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images of an IC1000-
stacked pad that was used in this study. The pad consists of cast
polyurethane that is rigid and microporous. Because over 70% of the pad
consists of micropores and the remainder of the pad is a deformable
polymer, the pad is more easily deformed, as shown in the top and
cross-sectional views. Thus, the pad is compressed by the loaded wafer
and recovers during the revolution of the platen, as shown in Fig. 4.
This compression induces the viscoelastic behavior of the polishing
pad13-15 based on the four-element model shown in Fig. 6(a). When the
stress (σ) (i.e., pressure on the pad) is constant, the elastic strain (ε1)
and viscoelastic strain (ε2) are defined as the ratio of the stress to each
modulus (i.e., E1 and E2), respectively. Viscoelastic deformation
depends on the time delay due to the damper (η2). Additionally,
permanent strain (ε3), which is not recovered by the damper (ç1) owing
to the polymer characteristics and the pad structure, occurs when the
pad is unloaded during each revolution of the platen. To measure the
viscoelastic behavior of the polishing pad, a GNP PV system (G&P
technology, Inc.) was used. The IC1000-stacked pad which was used in
polishing experience was measured. Pressures from 200 g/cm2 to
500 g/cm2 were applied to the polishing pad. As shown in Fig. 6(b),
elastic deformation immediately occurs when the wafer presses against
Fig. 6 Viscoelastic behavior of polishing pad: (a) schematics of pad
deformation over time in a four-element model, and (c) compressive
deformation and recovery for 120 s
the pad surface and then relaxes during polishing. Also, the measured
result shows that the higher pressure causes a greater deformation
immediately in polishing pad, owing to viscoelastic behavior of
polishing pad. This also implies that the edge effect of the wafer is
generated by different pad deformation between the wafer and the
retaining ring because a high pressure is normally applied to retaining
rings to prevent wafers from slipping out.
Fig. 7 compares the results of the FEA for the normalized normal
stress distribution, caused by the wafer and retaining ring pressures, on
the wafer and the experimentally obtained MRR profiles with various
contact angles of the retaining ring. Fig. 7 shows that the fluctuation of
normal stress increases with increasing contact angles when the contact
angle is convex around the edge area of the wafer.
However, the normal stress increase dramatically when the contact
angle is concave, especially near the wafer edge. The normal stress
distribution of the flat retaining ring is smoother than that of the
retaining ring with a contact angle. The normal stress near the wafer
edge is much higher than that at the wafer center owing to a contact-
angle-induced stress concentration that results in a pressure
concentration. Maintaining a zero contact angle relieves the stress
concentration in the edge region. As mentioned before, the pressure
distribution of the wafers is related to the normal stress on a wafer,
which directly influences the MRR of the wafer during CMP. Thus, the
distribution of uniform pressure on a wafer is essential for controlling
the WIWNU in planarization technology. On the basis of the normal
stress analysis, it is clear that maintaining a flat contact angle during
CMP improves the material removal profile around the edge area.
The experimental MRR profile shows very similar tendency with
the normal stress distribution. The experimental MRR profile result
also explains the contact angle/MRR profile: a bigger contact angle
results in a larger fluctuation of MRR, especially near the wafer edge.
Fig. 7 Normal stress distribution on wafer and results of polishing test
for contact angles, = -0.6o, 0o (flat), 0.6o, 1.2o, and 1.8o
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PRECISION ENGINEERING AND MANUFACTURING Vol. 14, No. 9
The contact angle also influences the MRR profile near the wafer edge;
the MRR is much higher than the MRR at the wafer center because of
the higher stress concentration at larger angles when the contact angle
is convex. Fig. 7 also shows that the larger contact angle causes a
greater fluctuation in the MRR, especially near the wafer edge,
regardless of whether it is concave or convex. There was an MRR
singularity near the wafer edge due to the pressure concentration. When
the contact angle is flat, the MRR has the best profile among all of the
results. The MRR profiles were not coincident with the normal stress
distributions, but those were seen the very similar each tendency. We
concluded that the results of the CMP experiments were in agreement
with the FEA results, as expected. Fig. 8 shows the average MRR with
respect to the contact angle, which was nearly the same under all
conditions, regardless of being concave or convex.
Figs. 7 and 8 demonstrate that the contact angle of the retaining ring
causes an edge effect, which alters the material removal performance
around the edge region. However, the contact angle does not influence
the MRR at the center of the wafer.
Fig. 9 shows the WIWNU with respect to the contact angle. The
measured pattern was a diameter scan with an edge exclusion of 2 mm.
The WIWNU was calculated according to Equation (2):
σ
WIWNU ( % ) = ---------- × 100 (2)
Xavg
where σ and Xavg are the standard deviation and average MRR,
respectively. The WIWNU was below 4% when a flat retaining ring
was used; the WIWNU was optimum at a 0o contact angle, which
suggests that the edge removal profile can be improved by maintaining
a flat contact angle. The WIWNU value became higher as the shape of
Fig. 8 Average MRRs with various contact angles of retaining ring
Fig. 9 Plot of WIWNU versus contact angle of retaining ring
SEPTEMBER 2013 / 1517
the retaining ring became more concave or convex. Moreover, when
the contact angle of the retaining ring was (-) 1.2o, the wafer began to
slip out because the pressure was concentrated in the outer region of the
retaining ring owing to its concave geometry.
The results of the FEA and the experimental results indicate that the
contact angle intensifies the concentration of pressure near the wafer
edge, strongly affecting the WIWNU and MRR profiles.
Most studies on retaining rings in CMP processes focus on either
extending the service life without decreasing polishing performance or
retaining the ring’s shape, such as the ring width and slot design. No
one has previously studied how maintaining a flat contact angle affects
the material removal profile around the wafer edge. The value of the
contact angle evaluated in this study is small, only between (-) 1.2o and
(+) 1.8o. However, strong influence of the contact angle on the edge
effect revealed that the contact angle is an essential factor for
understanding edge effects, which influence the MRR profile near the
edge region.
To attain a lower WIWNU and a uniform MRR, the retaining ring
should be machined accurately, assembled successfully, and ensured to
be flat, which prevents wear during the polishing process. Above all,
the retaining ring needs to be inspected after being attached to the
carrier and regularly thereafter.
5. Conclusion
With the goal of global wafer planarization, the mechanical
interaction caused by the contact angle between the retaining ring and
the polishing pad was investigated to understand the angle’s effect on
the material removal of the wafer edge during CMP processes. Both the
retaining ring and the polishing pad are important consumables in the
CMP process. Much fewer studies have been conducted on the
retaining ring than on polishing pads. Most studies on retaining rings
are focused mainly on the material of the retaining ring or on fluid
effects due to the slot of the retaining ring. In this paper, retaining rings
with different contact angles were evaluated under the same polishing
process parameters, such as pressure, slurry flow rate, and carrier-table
rotational velocity. A comparison of FEA results with experimental
results was used to verify the effect of the contact angle on the stress
distribution at the wafer edge. As expected, the FEA results were in
good agreement with the polishing results.
The contact angle of the retaining rings affects the normal stress
concentration, which also affects the WIWNU and the MRR profile of the
wafer edge during CMP. Finally, we concluded that the contact angles of
retaining rings should always be flat in order to achieve better
performance at the wafer edge. Our results showed that it is possible to
improve the yield of chip production by maintaining the contact angle,
which does not require any special design changes to the CMP equipment.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This work was supported by National Foundation of Korea
(2012008146) and this research was supported by the second phase of
the Brain Korea 21programs in 2012.
 1518 / SEPTEMBER 2013 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PRECISION ENGINEERING AND MANUFACTURING Vol. 14, No. 9

REFERENCES “Experimental investigation of material removal characteristics in

silicon chemical mechanical polishing,” Japanese Journal of Applied
1. Thy, T., William, R., Jason, T., Igor, J., Nicholas, C., Paul, J., Physics, Vol. 48, No. 11, pp. 116505, 2009.
Reuben, F., Dan, M., Cort, D., Mark, R., Christian, W., Michael, B.,
15. Park, J., Jeong, H., Yoshida, K., and Kinoshita, M., “Pad surface
Aaron, B., and Thomas, T., “Extreme Edge Engineering – 2 mm
treatment to control performance of chemical mechanical
Edge Exclusion Challenges and Cost-Effective Solutions for Yield
planarization,” Japanese Journal of Applied Physics, Vol. 47, No. 2,
Enhancement in High Volume Manufacturing for 200 mm and
pp. 1028-1033, 2008.
300 mm Wafer Fabs,” IEEE/SEMI Advanced Semiconductor
Manufacturing Conference, pp. 453-460, 2004.

2. Yavas, O., Richter, E., Kluthe, C., and Sickmoeller, M., “Wafer-edge
yield engineering in leading-edge DRAM manufacturing,” Semi-
conductor Fabtech., Vol. 39, pp. 1-5, 2009.

3. International Technology Roadmap for Semiconductors, “ITRS

Reports 2011 edition,” http://www.public.itrs.net/reports.html

4. Baker, A. R., “The origin of the edge effect in chemical mechanical

planarization,” Proc. of Electrochem. Soc. Fall Meeting, USA, Vol.
96-22, pp. 228-238, 1996.

5. Nishi, Y. and Doering, R., “Handbook of semiconductor

manufacturing technology,” Taylor & Francis, pp. 17-1, 2007.

6. Park, B., Lee, H., Kim, Y., Kim, H., and Jeong, H., “Effect of
process parameters on friction force and material removal in oxide
chemical mechanical polishing,” Japanese Journal of Applied
Physics, Vol. 47, No. 12, pp. 8771-8778, 2008.

7. Moussa, R. and Quartapella, C., “Next-Generation Materials for

CMP Retaining Rings,” VMIC Conference, pp. 501-505, 2003.

8. Touzov, M. M., Fujita, T., and Doy, T. K., “Novel retaining ring to
reduce CMP edge exclusion,” IEEE international Semiconductor
Manufacturing Symposium, pp. 337-340, 2001.

9. Lee, H., Park, B., Seo, H., Jung, J., Jeong, S., and Jeong, H., “A
Study on Frictional Characteristics and Polishing Results of SiO2
Slurry in CMP,” Transactions of the Korean Society of Mechanical
Engineers - A, Vol. 29, No. 7, pp. 983-989, 2005.

10. Lee, H. and Jeong, H., “A Wafer-scale material removal rate profile
model for copper chemical mechanical planarization,” International
Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture, Vol. 51, No. 5, pp. 395-
403, 2001.

11. Lin, Y. Y. and Lo, S. P., “A Study on the stress and nonuniformity of
the wafer surface for the chemical-mechanical polishing process,”
International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Vol.
22, No. 5-6, pp. 401-409, 2003.

12. Kim, H. J., Kim. H. Y., Jeong, H. D., Lee, E. S., and Shin, Y. J.,
“Friction and thermal phenomena in chemical mechanical
polishing,” Journal of Materials Processing Technology, Vol. 130-
131, No. 0, pp. 334-338, 2002.

13. Kwon, D., Kim, H., and Jeong, H., “Heat and its effects to chemical
mechanical polishing,” Journal of Materials Processing Technology,
Vol. 178, No. 1-3, pp. 82-87, 2006.

14. Park, B., Jeong, S., Lee, H., Kim, H., Jeong, H., and Dornfelt, D. A.,