text:
A method and system for optimizing a steady-state performance of a process having multiple inputs and multiple output-responses is provided. The method and system provide a unified and systematic way of optimizing nominal, statistical and multi-criteria performance of the process. The process can be inter alia a semiconductor manufacturing process or a business process.
1. A computer performed process for optimizing a steady-state performance of a physical process having multiple inputs and multiple output-responses, the method comprising the steps of:
1) inputting to the computer a mathematical model of the physical process or input data values to build a mathematical model of the physical process;
2) specifying three types of objectives wherein:
(i) objective Type I comprises finding inputs that enable the responses of the physical process to satisfy a set of constraints;
(ii) objective Type II comprises finding inputs such that the yield of the physical process is maximized, with yield being the probability of satisfying the constraints on multiple responses given random variations of inputs;
(iii) objective Type III comprises finding inputs such that multiple mutually conflicting objectives are satisfied; and
3) generating an optimized solution satisfying simultaneously all three types of objectives;
4) modifying the steady state performance of a physical process by applying the optimized solution in step 3 to the physical process.
2. A method according to claim 1, comprising generating a set of control points in an operating space representing a random set of conditions of the process.
3. A method according to claim 2, comprising driving the set of control points to a first region in the operating space satisfying objective Type I.
4. A method according to claim 3, comprising driving the control points in the first region to a subsumed second region in the operating space satisfying simultaneously objective Type I and objective Type II.
5. A method according to claim 4, comprising driving the control points in the second region in the operating space to a subsumed third region in the operating space satisfying simultaneously objective Type I and objective Type II and objective Type III.
6. A method according to claim 5, comprising driving the control points by a constraint satisfaction herding operator.
7. A system for optimization of a physical process, the system comprising:
1) means for specifying a sequence of experiments on the physical process;
2) means for creating a mathematical representation of the physical process;
3) specification means for specifying three objectives, wherein:
(i) objective Type I comprises finding inputs that enable the responses of the physical process to satisfy a set of constraints;
(ii) objective Type II comprises finding inputs such that the yield of the physical process is maximized, with yield being the probability of satisfying the constraints on multiple responses given random variations of inputs;
(iii) objective Type III comprises finding inputs such that multiple mutually conflicting objectives are satisfied; and
4) generation means for generating an optimal solution;
5) control means for modifying a steady state performance of the physical process by utilizing the optimal solution generated in step 4;
6) display means for using the mathematical representation of the physical process for generating a solution satisfying simultaneously all three types of objectives.
This invention relates to a method and system for optimizing a steady-state performance of a process having multiple inputs and multiple output-responses.
A problem addressed by this invention is that of optimizing a process with multiple inputs and multiple responses and objectives. For example, the process can be a semiconductor manufacturing process, such as sputter deposition or thin film electrochemical plating of thin film for disk read/write head, or a business process with resources and cancel/return policy as inputs and cycle time and profit as responses, etc. There are several kinds of objectives that are usually required:
1. Type I objective
Find inputs that enable the responses or outputs of the process to satisfy a set of constraints or specifications.
2. Type II objective
Find inputs such that the yield of the process can be maximized, with yield being the probability of satisfying the constraints or specifications on multiple responses given uncertainties or random variations of inputs. This is the problem of process window optimization or yield maximization or design centering.
3. The combination of Type I and II above. This is the case when both the statistical performance (the yield under input fluctuation) and the nominal performance (the target or center of the process window) are simultaneously considered. In this case, Type I applies to the nominal performance while Type II applies to yield. In addition, other engineering constraints can be imposed, and again Type I objective would be used.
4. Type III objective
Find inputs such that multiple objectives, usually mutually conflicting, are achieved. Each objective could be to maximize or minimize a response, or to drive a response as close to target as possible.
5. The combinations of all the above.
The problem is how to find solutions that satisfy all three types of objectives simultaneously. In the summary section that follows, an overview of the deficiency of the state of the art is reviewed, providing a reason for the need of this invention.
In the previous section, five types of objectives are listed. There are really three generic types, since the third and fifth types are just combinations of the other three. Methods in the field of DOE (Design of Experiment) and process optimization statistical packages generally only deal with Type I objective. Design centering (Type II objective) is not dealt with, and only a scalar function, usually a particular response or a weighted sum of multiple responses, is optimized subject to some constraints or specifications. Thus, true Type III objective is also not considered. Methods in the field of statistical circuit design and yield optimization deal with Type II objective only. Methods in the field of Multi-Objective optimization deal with Type III objective. In the real world, however, all three objectives are important, but there do not exist methods that consider them simultaneously.
This invention presents a unified approach, called the Constraint Satisfaction Herding (CSH) technique, that deals with the combination of all these three types of objectives. Furthermore, even for any one given type of objective, CSH offers an advantage over the conventional approaches in the respective fields mentioned above.
For example, for Type I objective, the existing DOE statistical methods and software packages cannot find global optimum solutions. Furthermore, if there are multiple solutions, only one can be found. For Type II objective, not only does the above mentioned global solution and multiple solution problems remain, but also Type II objective can have a "region" of solutions, and existing methods produce only one solution and do not take advantage of it, while CSH can optimize Type III objective on top of this "region" of solutions for Type II solutions. For type III objective, existing methods present only one solution among the set of non-dominated solutions, while CSH presents many solutions within the non-dominated set. Most important of all, CSH can simultaneously consider an arbitrary combinations of the three types of objectives, and is modular in the sense that any type of objective can be added in or taken out at will without starting all over from scratch. It offers an object-oriented approach. These advantages, together with several other ones, will be evident when CSH is described in detail in the following sections.
Accordingly, we now disclose a method for optimizing a steady-state performance of a process having multiple inputs and multiple output-responses. The method comprises the steps of:
1) specifying three types of objectives, wherein:
(i) objective type I comprises finding inputs that enable the responses of the process to satisfy a set of constraints;
(ii) objective type II comprises finding inputs such that the process is maximized, with yield being the probability of satisfying the constraints on multiple responses given random variations of inputs;
(iii) objective type III comprises finding inputs such that multiple mutually conflicting objectives are satisfied; and
2) generating a solution satisfying simultaneously all three types of objectives.
In another aspect, the present invention includes a system for optimization of a physical process, the system comprising:
1) means for specifying a sequence of experiments on the physical process;
2) means for creating a mathematical representation of the physical process;
3) means for optimizing a steady state performance of the physical process by specifying three objectives, wherein:
(i) objective type I comprises finding inputs that enable the responses of the process to satisfy a set of constraints;
(ii) objective type II comprises finding inputs such that the yield of the process is maximized, with yield being the probability of satisfying the constraints on multiple responses given random variations of inputs;
(iii) objective type III comprises finding inputs such that multiple mutually conflicting objectives are satisfied; and
4) means for using the mathematical representation of the physical process for generating a solution satisfying simultaneously all three types of objectives.
The invention is illustrated in the accompanying drawing, in which:
FIG. 1 shows a solution space satisfying the Type II objective;
FIG. 2 shows a feasibility region in an objective space for reactive ion etching;
FIG. 3 shows a one-point solution offered by the weighted sum method;
FIG. 4 shows that when a feasibility region in objective space is not convex, the non-inferior surface between the two tangent points cannot be reached by a weighted sum method;
FIG. 5 shows a process of finding a point on the non-inferior surface using a weighted p-norm technique or least path approximation technique, with p approaching infinity;
FIG. 6 shows a shape of the least path approximation for finding one point on the non-inferior surface, with various values of p;
FIG. 7 illustrates a constraint satisfaction herding (CSH) algorithm;
FIG. 8 shows a flowchart characterizing an algorithm of the system for Type I and Type II objectives;
FIG. 9 shows a general system architecture of the present invention;
FIG. 10 comprises an Input Variables Table;
FIG. 11 comprises an Output-Response Table;
FIG. 12 comprises a Constraint Table;
FIG. 13 comprises an Effects Table;
FIG. 14 shows an Outline of Dilute Chemistry Experiments;
FIG. 15 shows a BestDesign Local Response Surface;
FIG. 16 shows a range of variables for screening and main runs; and
FIG. 17 shows a computer system for machine realization of the present invention.
Before we describe the CSH approach, we first overview the scenario of process optimization with the combinations of the three types of objectives. First, each of the Type I, II and III objectives is reviewed, and discussions follow to set the stage for proposing the CSH approach.
Type I objective
This objective is for the purpose of optimizing the performance at the nominal set point of the process rather than the statistical performance such as yield. Let X be the input for the process or system to be optimized, and X is a k-dimensional vector, with its ith component being xi. Let ΩX be the region of input for optimizing the objective. ΩX is usually a rectangular region defined as:
ΩX ={X|xli ≦xi ≦xui }(1)
where xli and xui are the lower and upper bound for xi. Let Y be the r-dimensional vector, representing the multiple outputs or responses of the process, i.e., Y:Rk →Rr, with the ith component being yi, i=1, . . . , r. Let gi be a nonlinear function of X representing a set of m constraints on the inputs. Then Type I problem is
Find X
such that y-- Li ≦yi ≦y-- Ui, i=1, . . . , r
gi ≦0, i=1, . . . , Ng
X.di-elect cons.ΩX (2)
where y-- Li and y-- Ui are the lower and upper specs for the ith response yi, and Ng is the number of constraints for gi (X).
Although yi is the output or response of the system while gi is the additional constraint functions, mathematically, they both are constraint functions, and from now on, we assume that gi is just another yi. As an example, consider a Reactive Ion Etching process optimization problem. The inputs are power, gas flow rates, pressure, and the responses are etch rate and uniformity. The goal is to find input combinations that achieve a minimum of etch rate (say, 4000 ansgrom per minute) and a minimum of uniformity. Note that in (2), generally, the solution is not unique. The region defined by all the possible solutions to (1) is called the Input Acceptability Region or Input Feasibility Region. Generally, those who consider only Type I objective also minimize or maximize one scalar function among the choices in the Input Feasibility Region, namely,
Minimize: f(x)
such that: y-- Li ≦yi ≦y-- Ui, i=1, . . . , r (3)
where f(x) could be one among the following cases:
1. f(x)=yi (x) for a particular i.
The reason why only one response is used is that when more than one response is used, multiple-objective problem has to be solved, which is much more difficult.
2. f(x) is a linear combination or some scalar function of all of the responses such as the sum of squares of errors between the responses and the targets. This again is a means of avoiding the more difficult multi-objective optimization problem.
In either case, the optimization is solved by the standard constrained optimization methods such as the Sequential Quadratic Programming (SQP), Feasible Direction method or Linear Programming method.
Type II objective
This objective is essentially a Design Centering problem or Process Window Optimization problem. This problem has been treated extensively in the circuit design area, but completely overlooked in the DOE and statistical process control and optimization area. The goal is to place the input recipe X such that all of the responses satisfy the specification under the normal manufacturing fluctuations or other types of uncertainties of X. Let the A be the Input Acceptability Region such that
A={X|y-- Li ≦yi (X)≦y-- Ui, i=1, . . . , r} (4)
Let RT (X0) be the tolerance region enclosing the variations of X centered at X0. A few examples of RT are:
1. A rectangular box when the variation of X is uniformly distributed:
RT (X0)={X.di-elect cons.Rk |xi =xi 0 +ati } (5)
2. An ellipsoid enclosing the n σ variation when the variation of X is normally distributed: ##EQU1##
This is illustrated in FIG. 1, numeral 10. This is the situation for plating TnN thin film on Oxide for back-end-of-line stud in CMOS 6X. The rectangular box is the tolerance region, the red-dotted region is the feasibility region in the input space satisfying the specs, and the green region is the solution region satisfying the Type II objective described below.
The Type II objective is:
Find X
such that RT (X).di-elect cons.A (7)
Again, just like Type I objective, there is usually a "region" of solutions for (7). It is even possible to have multiple regions of solutions. FIG. 1 shows such an example in a real semiconductor manufacturing problem. Existing methods in Design Centering do not end up with a region of solutions. Instead of solving the problem defined in (7), Type II objective is defined as choosing the X that maximizes RT (X) that fits into Input Acceptability Region A(even if the resultant RT (X) is bigger than what is necessary) and therefore, there is no longer a "region" of solutions, but rather distinctive solutions. The problem is to find the X in A such that the shortest distance from X to the border of A is maximized. The problem can be defined as an outer and inner problem as follows:
Outer Problem ##EQU2##
subject to
y-- Li ≦yi (X)≦y-- Ui, i=1, . . . , r
where di U (X) and di L (X) is obtained from the following inner problem:
Inner Problem ##EQU3##
The problem formulation in (7) is preferable because it locates the entire region that leaves just enough room for the tolerance needed, and allows room for optimizing other objectives such as the Type III objectives.
Many extant methods focus on approximating the Input Acceptability Region A with either piecewise linear polyhedra or ellipsoid. Then, the tolerance region RT (X) is embedded into the approximation. After the embedding step, the approximation is improved until no progress can be made. One problem is that as the dimension of the input parameters increases, the computation needed to maintain a good approximation to A grows exponentially. To overcome this curse of dimensionality, Monte Carlo methods are used to estimate the yield, and by an iterative process, a direction of search to improve yield is to be found and a line search along this direction is performed iteratively. There are numerous other related methods, but all of these suffer from the lack of ability to locate multiple or global optimums, high computation cost, and not taking advantage of the existence of a "region" of solutions as defined in (7) to further proceed to deal with Type III objective.
Type III Objective
This is the Multiple Objective optimization (MO) or the Multiple Criteria Optimization (MCO) problem. This objective is to maximize, minimize or drive to target all or part of the r responses Y=(y1, y2, . . . , yr) simultaneously. We can translate the problem to minimizing all the responses by inverting the signs of all the responses that are to be maximized, and substituting those responses to be driven to target with (yi -τi)2, where τi is the target for yi. The major difference between Type III objective and the traditional single objective optimization is that in a finite domain, there always exists at least one X that minimizes a single objective, while there usually does not exist any X that minimizes all of yi, i=1, . . . , r, simultaneously. It is very rare that all of the yi s have identical X in minimizing each of yi. Therefore, the single objective optimality is replaced by Pareto-optimality or noninferiority or nondominance or efficiency. Before we describe the noninferior solutions, we first define the feasible region Γy in the objective function space:
ΓY ={y|y=y(X), X.di-elect cons.ΩX }
Note that ΓY is the projection of Ω into the response space via the response mappings yi 's. An example is shown in FIG. 2, numeral 12 where ΓY for RIE (Reactive Ion Etching) process in semiconductor manufacturing. There are two responses, namely the etch rate and uniformity. Each response is modelled as a second order polynomial. Now, we define the pareto-optimal or non-inferior surface r solutions as:
Xx .di-elect cons. non-inferior surface if there exist no other X such that
(1) yi (X)≧yi (Xx) and
(2) yj (X)>yj (Xx).
In other words, for any point outside of the non-inferior surface is worse than any point in the surface for at least one response. Among the points in the non-inferior surface, switching from one point to another means gaining at some objective at the expense of another objective. That is why the non-inferior surface is also called the trade-off surface. In FIG. 2 the non-inferior surface is the outline of the feasibility surface enclosed by the rectangular box. The goal of MO or Type III objective is to find the non-inferior surface.
The most common existing methods is to bypass the difficult MO problem by merging the multiple objectives into a single objective, such as a linear combination or the sum of squares. FIG. 3, numeral 14, shows that optimizing the linear sum of all the objectives is equivalent to finding the tangent point of the hyperplane (or line in this case) formed by the weights used in the linear sum with the feasible region Γy in the response space. The solution is always one point on the non-inferior surface, but the usefulness of this method for general application is rather limited, since it is based on certain convexity-concavity assumptions and such assumptions are not always satisfied by most multiple-objective problems. Non-inferior solutions obtained by this method are often found to be so few and so extreme, that there seems to exist no middle "ground" that may actually exist.
In FIG. 4, numeral 16, the entire section of the non-inferior surface or front between the two tangent points of the straight line can never be reached by any kind of linear sum of the objectives.
Other approaches for obtaining non-inferior solutions include the weighted infinite-Norm technique and the weighted p-norm technique. These techniques are equivalent to bending the straight line in FIG. 4 so that it "touches" the portion in the non-inferior surface untouchable by the hyperplane for the linear sum approach. FIG. 5, numeral 18, depicts the situation, where the case with ρ→∞ is depicted. When ρ is finite, the two dashed line segments become a continuous bent curve, as shown in FIG. 6, numeral 20. The optimization problem is formulated as: ##EQU4##
Two other approaches to obtain non-inferior solutions are the so called "ε Constraint Method" and the "Proper Equality Constraints". These two, together with the p-norm and the linear sum technique, attempt to reach the non-inferior surface one point at a time, making it extremely expensive. Furthermore, they cannot be combined with Type II objective. Some authors did report methods to treat Type II objective as one particular objective in the MCO (Type III) formulation, but such a method is not practical. Furthermore, such formulation does not take advantage of the "region" of solutions in Type II objective.
The above mentioned several approaches, though slow and one point at a time, at least provide a means of attempting to get the entire set of the non-inferior surface. There are many approaches that casts all the objectives into one single objective using some sort of scalarization, resulting in getting only one point on the non-inferior surface. One example is the Desirability function approach that has been used a lot in some statistical packages (Expert Design, SAS, etc.). The geometric mean of all the responses is used as the objective.
A Few Observations
From the definitions and discussions of the three types of objectives in the previous sections, we can make the following observations:
a. Each of the objective of Type I and Type II is in general a constraint in the sense that there is one or more regions of solutions. Because of the existence of region, it leaves room for further optimization.
b. As a result, when considering all three types of objectives simultaneously, there are often time numerous constraints. There are the following categories of constraints:
1) Each of the r responses yi s has its own upper and lower specs (one of which could be at infinity), resulting in up to two constraints for each response. In many semiconductor or industrial process optimization problems, more than five or ten responses are not uncommon, meaning that ten or twenty responses as a result of the specs on responses happen easily.
2) The category above is due to the specifications on the responses, and they are the constraints defining the feasibility region A when maximizing the yield, but the constraints on the nominal set points or the center of the tolerance zone or process windows are a different set of constraints. There are more stringent constraints compared with those for the previous category and could be as many as r such constraints.
3) The constraints gi (X) in (2) represent any engineering constraints and there could be many.
4) The constraint in (7) for Type II Objective, i.e., RT (X).di-elect cons.A, namely, that the tolerance zone being completely inside the input feasibility region, is equivalent to about k constraints, where k is the number of parameters in input X. For example, if RT (X) is rectangular, than the constraint is (7) is equivalent to having the size for tolerance or uncertainty for each variable smaller than the closest distance from the boundary of input feasibility region A to X.
From the above, it is seen that if there are ten inputs and ten responses, there can be easily more than forty constraints. These constraints can be changed frequently. With conventional optimization techniques with constraints, the optimality (the Kuhn-Tucker equations) entails the derivatives of the constraints. The large number of constraints adds great difficulties to the computational burdens, the convergence and the robustness of the algorithms. Furthermore, since the constraints can be added in, deleted, changed, etc., each time a change is made, the optimization has to start all over again.
The Wish List (Which Become the List of Advantages for CSH)
With the above observations, together with the shortcomings of the existing techniques for the three types of objectives described in Sec. `Three-objective`, and the fact that no existing methods deal with all three types of objectives simultaneously, we arrive at the following `Wish List` for a desired methodology.
1) Able to consider all three types of objectives simultaneously.
2) When any constraint is changed, deleted or included, the procedure need not start all over again. The intermediate results should be used.
3) Able to locate multiple "pockets" of solutions.
4) Able to handle large amount of constraints without losing the robustness, ease of implementation, and the tractability.
It will be seen that the CSH method to be described below can satisfy the wish list.
The Methodology
The CSH approach deals with the large multitude of constraints sequentially, modularly and identically. The constraints are dealt with in the following order:
1) The constraints in the Type I objective applying to the nominal performance of the responses. The total number of constraints is r. They are:
y-- nominal-- Li ≦yi ≦y-- nominal-- Ui, i=1, . . . , r (10)
If however, that there is no constraint on the nominal performance of the responses, then the constraints on the statistical performance of the responses (those pertained to Type II objective) can be used instead. They are:
y-- Li ≦yi ≦y-- Ui, i=1, . . . , r (11)
where y-- Li and y-- Ui are the lower and upper specs used in defining the yield. In either case, the total number of constraints is r.
2) The constraints gi (X) representing the engineering considerations and constraints. The total number of constraint is Ng.
3) The constraint RT (X).di-elect cons.A used in the Type II objective.
There are a total of Ns =r+Ng +1 constraints. CSH method starts with a set of control points randomly distributed in the input domain ΩX in (1). These control points are driven into RT.sup.(1), which is the feasibility region for the first constraint y-- nominal-- L1 ≦yi (X)≦y-- nominal-- U1, still randomly distributed with the same number, by the Constraint Satisfaction Herding (CSH) operation (CSH will be described in detail later). Note that if there are no constraints on the nominal performance of the responses, then the constraints y-- L1 ≦y1 (X)≦y-- U1, will be used instead. Then these points are driven into the feasibility region for the next constraint, and so on. Now let's define the following notations:
Nc : the total number of control points at any stage
Φi : the collection of control points after all the Nc are driven to satisfy the ith constraint
RT.sup.(i) : the feasibility region satisfying all the constraints prior to and including the ith constraint
The number of points Nc is around 10 times the dimensionality of X. The process of applying CSH to drive Φi into Φi+1 is represented as:
Φi+1 =CSH Ii, i!{Φi } (12)
Φi+1 .di-elect cons.RT.sup.(i+1), Φi .di-elect cons.RT.sup.(i), and Ii-1 is the collection of indexes for all the constraints.
In (12), Ii and i enclosed in the bracket right after CSH indicates the set of constraints being satisfied. The first argument Ii, which is defined as Ii ={1, . . . , i}=ι(i), indicates the collection of indexes for the constraints that were already satisfied by Φi before CSH is applied, and the second argument i indicates the new constraint that is to be satisfied by CSH. CSH makes sure that not only is the new constraint satisfied, but also the old ones Ii. The details of CSH will be described later. Notice that if any constraint after the (i-1)th constraint is changed, all the work done before creating Φi need not be wasted. The procedures picks up from Φi. When all the three categories of constraints listed above are processed, ΦN.sbsb.s contains Nc control points randomly distributed in the RT N.sbsp.s, satisfying all the constraints. These Nc control points are then driven into the non-inferior surface ∂ΓY by multi-objective algorithm to be described below. Let CSHMCO denote this driving process or operator, then we have:
ΦMCO CSHMCO (ΦN.sbsb.s) (13)
All Nc control points in RT N.sbsp.s would then be spread out randomly in ∂ΓY and are the final solutions for the three objectives. They satisfy all the constraints, and are also the non-inferior solutions for Objective III. The designer or DM (decision maker) can choose solutions among these solutions in ΦMCO or optimize further with additional objectives. The following summarizes the procedures for obtaining ΦMCO :
Step 1: Establish Ns constraints, where the first r constraints are the ones in (10) if constraints on nominal performance are called for, or those in (11) otherwise. The next Ng constraints are the ones for gi 's. The last one is RT (X).di-elect cons.A.
Step 2: Generate Nc points Φ1 randomly filling Ω. Set i=1.
Step 3:
Φi+1 =CSH Ii, i+1!(Φi)
with Ii =ι(i).
Step 4: i=i+1;
If i<Ns, go to Step 3; Else, go to Step 5.
Step 5:
ΦMCO =CSHMCO (ΦN.sbsb.s)
Now we consider a slightly more complex version of the algorithm. The intention is to locate all possible solutions when the feasibility region RT.sup.(i) is split into several disjoint regions, and the best solutions in all the regions are to be found. Due to the nature of Φi, namely that it is composed of a collection of points randomly filling the feasibility region RT.sup.(i) at each stage (after satisfying constraint i), clustering can easily be done on Φi so that those points in Φi belonging to each distinctive subregion are separated and further optimization is done on each subregion. First we define some notations. At the end of satisfying all the constraints for the nominal performance and the constraints due to engineering considerations (the first two types of constraints in Section 3), the feasibility region has been denoted as RT.sup.(r+N.sbsp.g.sup.). Let N-- #-- cluster be the number of distinctive subregions in RT r+N.sbsp.g, and let RT.sup.(r+N.sbsp.g.sup.)(i) be the ith subregion in RT.sup.(r+N.sbsp.g.sup.). Also, let Φr+N.sbsb.g.sup.(i) be the collection of points in Φr+N.sbsb.g that belong to RT.sup.(r+N.sbsp.g.sup.)(i). The clustering process becomes:
{Φr+N.sbsb.g.sup.(i) |i=1, . . . , N-- #-- clust}=CLUSTER(Φr+N.sbsb.g) (14)
After the clustering process, CSH is applied to each of the Φr.sbsb.--N.sbsb.g.sup.(i) for satisfying the constraint RT (X).di-elect cons.A for Type II objective now becomes:
ΦN.sbsb.s.sup.(i) =CSH Ir+N.sbsb.g, NS !Φr+N.sbsb.g.sup.(i) (15)
where superscript (i) indicates which subregion is referred to. Sometimes, at the end of the operation in (15), each subregion may further be clustered in a number of subregions. For each of the ΦN.sbsb.s.sup.(i), the clustering process will then produce N-- dcp-- clusterj clusters, as expressed below:
{ΦNs.sup.(i,j) |j=1, . . . , N-- dcp-- clusterj }=CLUSTER(ΦNs.sup.(i)) (16)
The Type III MCO is then applied to each (i,j)th region separately. In summary, the algorithm became the following:
Step 1: Establish Ns constraints, where the first r constraints are the ones in (10) if constraints on nominal performance are called for, or those in (11) otherwise. The next Ng constraints are the ones for gi 's. The last one is RT (X).di-elect cons.A.
Step 2: Generate Nc points Φ1 randomly filling Ω. Set i=1.
Step 3:
Φi+1 =CSH Ii, i+1!(Φi)
with Ii =ι(i).
Step 4:
If i<r+Ng (=Ns -1), go to Step 3;
Else, go to Step 5.
Step 5:
{Φr+N.sbsb.g.sup.(i) |i=1, . . . , N-- #-- clust}=CLUSTER(Φr+N.sbsb.g)
Step 6:
ΦN.sbsb.s.sup.(i) =CSH Ir+N.sbsb.g, Ns !(ΦNs.sup.(i))
Step 7:
{ΦNs.sup.(i,j) |j=1, . . . , N-- dcp-- clusterj }=CLUSTER(ΦNs.sup.(i))
Step 8:
For each (i,j), do the following:
ΦMCO.sup.(i,j) =CSHMCO (ΦN.sbsb.s.sup.(i,j))
In the above algorithm, note that Ns is the total number of constraints and is equal to r+Ng +1. FIG. 7, numeral 22, illustrates the algorithm.
Now we are ready to describe the details of the CSH operator.
CSH Operator
Recall that CSH operator is applied in the following Step in the main algorithm:
Φi+1 =CSH Ii, i+1!(Φi) (17)
with Ii =ι(i). Again, the operator CSH Ii, i+1! means that all the Nc control points in Φi, which already satisfy the constraints with indexes in Ii =ι(i)={1, . . . , i}, are driven by the CSH operator into Φi+1 satisfying (i+1)th constraint. The CSH operator will be built on top of the control random search (CRS) technique. The existing CRS techniques were mainly designed to optimize scalar functions. When it comes to constraints, CRS simply throw away points failing to satisfy the constraints (or equivalently, points not in the feasibility region). When the feasibility region is small relative to the entire optimization input space, CRS will take prohibitively long time because it is a hit-or-miss process in terms of constraints and therefore is not suitable for this purpose. The new CSH operator described in this invention is specifically designed to deal with constraints, though it can be used to optimize functions without constraints also. Here, the CSH operator not only can do scalar function optimization and constrained optimization, it also can be used (and primarily used here) for driving a group of points already satisfying a collection of constraints into a region further satisfying additional constraints. One of the key concepts is to convert the additional constraint (constraint i+1) into an objective function while keeping the old constraints as given constraints. If the constraint i is characterized by y-- Li ≦yi ≦y-- Ui, then we first convert it into the following new function G:
G(X)=0 if y-- Li ≦yi ≦y-- Ui (18a)
=yi -y-- Ui if yi >y-- Ui (18b)
=y-- Li -yi if yi <y-- Ui (18c)
The main motivation in converting the new constraint into objective while keeping the old constraints as constraints is that by defining G in (18a-c), minimizing G is equivalent to satisfying the constraint, but it is not necessary to start with points already satisfying the constraints. We use the modified CRS algorithm to drive the group of control points to minimize G(X) while satisfying the old constraints. Since the old constraints were already satisfied at initiation, the existing problem of the hit-and-miss problem of CRS in handling constraints is eliminated. As soon as the points hit the region where G(X) is 0, they are frozen there. It looks as if the points are attracted to the region and as soon as they hit the region, they are stuck there. Although G(X) may not be convex, due to the global optimization capability of CRS, all the control points will be driven away from the region in (18b) and (18c) despite the possibility of non-convexity and be driven into the region characterized by (18a). Furthermore, the region characterized by any of (18a), (18b) and (18c) need not be singly connected. Each one can be multiple regions. This gives us the capability of global optimization and locating multiple feasible regions in CSH operator as well as the entire CSH algorithm. Another feature CSH has that CRS does not is that if any of the variable in X is an attribute variable or categorical variable (meaning that it only has meaning at certain discrete values), CSH can still find the optimum while CRS is limited to continuous variable. This is captured in the following algorithm. It is cast in c code but it is only a pseudo code in the sense that some explanations are substituted into the real code for the purpose of clarity. First, the variables have the following meanings:
N: The total number of control points
nattrib: the total number of attribute variables
N1:The number of points in each of the 2**nattribute divisions of N so that equal number of points in the original N points are assigned for each configuration of the values for the attribute variables
i0 loop locates simplex with no duplicate points
i1 loop locates a new point satisfying the constraints
i2 loop locates a new point improving the worst point performance
i3 loop locates the global optimum
Now we begin to describe the pseudo code for the algorithm:
do {i3++; i1=0; i2=0;
Find maximum among the vector y of length N and return m as the index in y holding the maximum value ym
Find minimum among the vector y of length N and return pointer 1 as the index in y holding the minimum value yl
______________________________________do {i2 + +; rcrs 1! = *1; /* rcrs i! holds the index for the ith input variable. T rcrs specfies which among the N control points is now accessed */do {i1 + +;do {i0 + +;if(nattrib < 1){for(i = 2;i < = ncrs + 1;i + +)rcrs i! = (random( ) % N) + 1;/* rcrs are randomized, except for rcrs 1!,which holds the index for the minimum value of y*/} /* end of if nattrib < 1 */else {/* else for if nattrib < 1 */ibase = (random( ) % nattrib)*N1;/* ibase holds the offset needed to hop between groups of points for each of the 2**nattribe regions */for(i=1;i < = ncrs+1;i+ +) rcrs i! = (random( ) % N1)} /* end of else for if nattrib < 1 */} while(checksimplex(rcrs,ncrs + 1) = = 0); /* enddo for i0 loop */centroid(rcrs,x,g,ncrs); /*finds the centrold of the ncrs simplex points and store in g */for(i = 1;i < = ncrs;i + +)pcrs i! = 2.0*g i!-x = (rcrs ncrs + 1!)! i!;/* pcrs array holds the index for the mirror reflection of the worst point in the simplex */ }while(the old constraints are satisfied); /* enddo for i1 loop */ fp = G(x) evalued at newly found point at rcrs; } while (fp-ym > -epsm && (maximum iterations not yet reached)); /* enddo for i2 loop */if(fp < = ym-epsm){ y m! = fp; for(i = 1;i < = ncrs;i + +)x m! i! = pcrs i!/* the mth element in x holds the worst points in the entire group */ }} while (ym-yl > eps && (maximum iterations not yet reached));/* enddo for i3 loop */______________________________________
CSH Operator for Type II objective
Recall that the last constraint deals with the Type II objective. This requires further discussions and treatments here.
G(X) defined in (18a)-(18c) was specifically for the constraints in Type I objective. For Type II objective, it needs to be modified as follows:
G(X)=0 if RT (X).di-elect cons.A (19a)
=sizeof(RT (X)-A) if RT (X).epsilon slash.A (19b)
In the above, RT (X)-A means the portion of RT (X) that is outside of A, and A is the input feasibility region defined in (4). siezof() means the size of the region in the argument. In (19a) and (19b), the two key operations that need to be performed are the operation to find out whether RT (X).di-elect cons.A for any given X, and the operation of finding out the size of RT (X)-A for any given X. These can be done by three possible methods.
Method I
Note that since CSH operator always keeps all the control points satisfying the old constraints, which include the constraints for Type I objective, which ensures that X is feasible, or that X.di-elect cons.A. Thus, there always exists a positive scale factor s such that
S�RT (X).di-elect cons.A
In fact, there is always an s such that RT (X) barely fits inside A and is tangent to A at some point. The next step is to build an empirical mapping function S from X to such an s, using a few sample points as training samples, and use regression or neural network to estimate the mapping function. Since s in general is a smooth function of X, this can be done in a straightforward way. Once this function is built, the two key operations mentioned above are performed as follows:
RT (X).di-elect cons.A if S(X)≦1
sizeof(RT (X)-A)=S(X)-1
Note that the mapping function S(X) only has to be built once and then used for any X in any occasion.
Method II
First, use CSH operator to drive a group of control points ΦX to be outside of A but inside of RT (X). This is done by using the constraints that are the opposite or complement of the basic constraints for the responses defined in (2) and the constraints in (6) for RT (X). Since this is local to X, only a few control points are needed, and thus is not computationally expensive. Then compute the maximum span of these control points and denote it as Span(ΦX). Then the two key operations mentioned above are performed as follows:
RT (X).di-elect cons.A if Span(ΦX)>0
sizeof(RT (X)-A)=Span(ΦX)
Method III
This method entails estimating the s in Method I not with an empirical function such as regression or neural network, but with an algebraic method. This is done by constructing a few straight lines passing through X and estimating where the straight lines penetrate A. Then it is straightforward to determine the smallest s that makes s�RT (X) encloses all of these points of penetration. When all of the responses are polynomials, these points of penetrations can be computed by simple closed form solutions, as shown below:
For responses estimated with 2nd order regression or response surface models, we derive the computational formula as follows:
First, represent the straight line as
X=X0 +t�e (20)
where e is the unit vector representing the direction of the straight line and X0 is the base point of interest.
Next, use the following formula for 2nd order response surface model:
yi =b0 +bT �X+XT �B�X (21)
where b0, b, and B are a scalar, a vector and a matrix representing the second order response surface model. Next, we substitute (20) into (21) to find the t satisfies both (20) and (21). Once such t is found, this t, when substituted in (20), will give the point of penetration. With (20) in (21), we have: ##EQU5## where y0 is the value of yi at X0,
bt =bT �e+XO T �B�e+eT �B�X0
Bii =eT �B�e
Only the smallest t is desired. Since the specs on yi is generally two sided and defined in (2), we need to equate (22) with y-- Li and y-- Ui to get two values of t, and pick the smaller (in magnitude) of the two. Note that since X0 is already inside the feasibility region and that t=0 corresponds to X0, we are looking for two points of penetrations, one for postive t and the other for negative t. The following gives the procedures:
If Bii >ε, then:
if bt 2 -4Bii (y0 -y-- Li)>0, then ##EQU6## Else, t is infinity Else,
If |bt |>ε, t=2(y0 -y-- Li)/bt
Else, t is infinity.
In the above, ε represents a small constant equal to the machine arithmetic precision. Also, the � in the expression for t means there are two possible solutions. Note that y-- Li is used in the above formula. The same should be done for y-- Ui to compute the other t values. Among all these computed t values, the t that is positive and the smallest among all the positive values will be chosen to represent one of the point of penetration. The same goes for the negative t for the other point. If any of the point of penetration is outside of the input space ΩX in (1), the point of penetration will then be chosen to be the point when the straight line in (20) penetrates ΩX if no extrapolation is permitted.
For third order polynomial response surface, we have the following representation: ##EQU7## where θlmn is the leading coefficient for each of the triplet and and is estimated by normal regression or response surface model estimation, while xi is the ith component of X. Again, we use (20) to represent the straight line and xi0 be the ith component of X0. The goal is to find the various values of t to represent the point of penetrations with the boundary of the feasibility region A. Once the various values of t are found, the same logic used in the second order case for selecting the proper t values will be used.
Let the ith component of e be denoted as ei. By substituting (20) into (23) and equate the it to y-- Li (the constraint boundary), we have: ##EQU8##
From (24), we have
y-- Li =bt0 +bt1 t1 +bt2 t2 +bt3 t3 (25)
where ##EQU9##
In the above, at the end, the array t holds the three values of solutions, while a1, a2, a3, Q, R, Q2, theta, Q1 are all temporary variables. If nroot=1, then only one real root exists. Again, (25) is to be repeated with y-- Li replaced by y-- Ui for computing other values of t for points of penetrations between the straight lines and A. The smallest values (in magnitude) of positive and negative t are to be retained for the final solutions for the points of penetrations. The extrapolation issue is dealt with the same fashion as the second order case described above. In DOE, polynomials of order greater than 3 are seldom used since this usually causes sensitivity problems in regression. Thus, with Method III, a closed form solution can usually be obtained and quite efficient.
A flow chart characterizing the algorithm of the system for Type I and Type II objectives is shown in FIG. 8, numeral 24.
CSHMCO Operator
Now we are ready to describe the CSHMCO operator, which does the following step in the main algorithm:
ΦMCO.sup.(i,j) =CSHMCO (ΦN.sbsb.s.sup.(i,j))
It drives all the points in ΦN.sbsb.s.sup.(i,j) into the the non-inferior frontier ∂ΓY, becoming ΦMCO. Before we describe the algorithm, we need to define the utopia point Yutopia in the response space. This is the point where each component yi for Yutopia is at its minimum. Note that usually since, the X that minimizes each response is different for each response, there is no X that maps to Yutopia and so it is outside of the feasibility region. The procedure is described as follows:
Step 1
For all the N, points in ΦN.sbsb.s.sup.(i,j)), rank them according to how close each point is to the utopia point Yutopia in the response surface. Let ranki holds the index for the element that is ranked the ith. For example, if rank3 holds the value of 5, it means that the 5th element in ΦN.sbsb.s.sup.(i,j)) ranked 3rd in its closeness to the utopia point Yutopia.
Step 2
Find the non-inferior subsets among the Nc points in ΦN.sbsb.s.sup.(i,j)) with the following procedure (note that here, the non-inferior subsets may not be on the real non-inferior surface. It only means that they are not dominated by any other points in ΦN.sbsb.s.sup.(i,j)))
Step 2.a
Setup an array frontier-- flag of size Nc, where frontier-- flagi denotes whether the ith point in ΦN.sbsb.s.sup.(i,j)) is part of the non-inferior subset. When frontier-- flagi is set to be off, the ith point is dominated by some point in ΦN.sbsb.s.sup.(i,j)). At the end of Step 2, which ever flag that is not set off is part of the non-inferior subset.
Step 2.b
Set all frontier-- flagi to be on. Set i=1. For each point, compute and store its r response values into array yij, where the subscript i denotes which response it is, while j denotes which point it is.
Step 2.c
Find out whether the ith point is dominated by some other point by the following procedure:
Step 2.c.1: Set j=1
Step 2.c.2
If point i dominates point j, then
set frontier-- flagj to be off.
Step 2.c.3
If j<Nc go to step 2.c.2
Else, proceed to Step 3
Step 3
Gather all the points with :frontier-- flag not marked off into an array for the non-inferior set, and call it ∂ΦN.sbsb.s.sup.(i,j)), and let Npareto denotes the number of points in this set. Now use a similar procedure as the CSH operator to migrate ∂ΦN.sbsb.s.sup.(i,j)) toward the true non-inferior surface. At this point, Npareto is most likely much less than Nc. As we apply a CSH like procedure to migrate toward the true non-inferior frontier, instead of always maintaining the same number of point as in CSH operator, here we let the number of points grow during the migration until Npareto reaches Nc, or any other number the DM chooses in terms of how many non-dominated solutions are desired at the end for choice. For now, we assume Nc to be the final number for Npareto. The whole procedure is described below:
Step 3.a
Use the same random procedure in CSH operator (see Sec. III.4 on CSH operator) to generate a new point from ∂ΦN.sbsb.s.sup.(i,j)), and use the same procedure in CSH operator for rejecting the point using the Ns constraints in Type I and II objectives.
Step 3.b
If the new point is accepted in Step 3.a, then:
If the new point is not dominated by any point in ∂ΦN.sbsb.s.sup.(i,j)), then:
If any existing point is dominated by the new point, then:
Discard the dominated old points,
Include this new point in ∂ΦN.sbsb.s.sup.(i,j)),
Npareto =Npareto +1
If Npareto <Nc, then:
Include this new point in ∂ΦN.sbsb.s.sup.(i,j)),
Npareto =Npareto +1
Else, discard the new point
Else, discard the new point
(there are two versions or alternatives from this point on)
Step 3.c (version 1)
Repeat Step 3.a and 3.b until any existing point is deleted as a result of having found a new point that dominates it but the amount of domination (that is, the largest difference in response value) is less than a small value ε, which could be taken as machine arithmetic precision. The remaining points in ∂ΦN.sbsb.s.sup.(i,j)) are the final solutions for the entire procedure. Exit.
Step 3.c (version 2)
Repeat Step 3.a and 3.b until Npareto has reached Nc. Then drive the existing points in ∂ΦN.sbsb.s.sup.(i,j)) to the true non-inferior surface by the following procedure:
Step 3.c.1
For each point that mains in ∂ΦN.sbsb.s.sup.(i,j)), drive it to the true non-inferior surface by starting with this point and minimize the following function ##EQU10## with the weights wi given by the following:
wi =1/yi.sbsb.--0
In the above, yi.sbsb.--0 for the computation of the values for wi is the initial value of yi for the given point, whileyi in (27) is the intermediate values of the ith response during the process of minimization toward driving the point to the true non-inferior surface. Since the starting points are already close to the true non-inferior surface, H(X) in (27) only need to be minimized with one or two iterations using Conjugate Gradient method.
Again, the remaining points in ∂ΦN.sbsb.s.sup.(i,j)) are the final solutions for the entire procedure. Exit.
An example of the present invention is now provided, and reference is made to FIGS. 9-17.
FIG. 9 shows a general system architecture 26 of the present invention. In overview, the system architecture 26 comprises a DOE module 28 (Design of Experiment), an RSM module 30 (Response Surface Modeling), and a PWO 32 module (Process Window Optimization). Also shown are sundry input/output entities and a module 34 entitled Run experiments or simulation.
In particular, the DOE module 28 preferably determines a minimum number of runs needed to build the most accurate response surfaces, and to determine the optimum recipe and process windows. The RSM module 30 computes the response surface that fits the data, preferably such that the sum of square error between the data and the response surface is minimized. The RSM module 30 also determines the relative importance of all the input variables for the measured response, and computes the variable and effect ranking chart. The PWO module 32, in turn, can compute the optimum process recipe in the input variable space satisfying Types I, II and III objective, given the response surfaces generated in the RSM module 30. The PWO module 32 can determine the center of the window (i.e., the optimum recipe), the predicted responses for this recipe, and the size of the windows.
The FIG. 9 system architecture 26 can provide a system for optimization of a physical process. Elements of such a system have been summarized above, page 5. These elements are now traced through again, with an intent of referencing by way of figures and tables, particular or preferred such elements.
The first element summarized above comprises means for specifying a sequence of experiments on the physical process, and may be mapped to the FIG. 9 DOE module 28. FIGS. 10 through 14 (numerals 36-44) provide examples, respectively, of input variables, output responses, constraints, effects and chemistry Experiments illustrative of the first element, and based on an enhanced industry standard semiconductor wet-chemical cleaning.
The second element summarized above comprises means for creating a mathematical representation of the physical process, and may be mapped to the FIG. 9 RSM module 30. FIG. 15, numeral 46, provides an example of the second element, and comprises a BestDesign response surface.
The third element summarized above comprises means for optimizing a steady state performance of the physical process based on the composite three objective types, and may be mapped to the FIG. 9 PWO module 32. FIG. 14, supra, provides an example of the third element. The third means effects a solution satisfying simultaneously the three objective types. An illustration of such a solution is illustrated in FIG. 16, numeral 48, comprising a range of variables for screening and main runs.
The class of computers known as Von Neumann computers comprise a memory, a bus, zero or more input/output devices, an interactive display unit with GUI (Graphical User Interface), and a central processing unit (CPU) containing an arithmetic/logic unit, a control unit, and a program counter. The program counter may be considered to be part of the control unit. The bus connects the memory, the input/output (I/O) devices, and the control unit and Graphical User Interface (GUI). (See FIG. 17, numeral 50.)
The memory contains storage locations that have addresses. The addresses are usually numerical. Data at each storage location can be read, and, usually, written. Every Von Neumann machine has some memory that can be written, while some of the memory may be read-only.
The bus is able to represent the address of a memory location, the contents of a memory location, and whether the memory location is to be written or read. It may also be able to represent conditions such as changes in the status of I/O devices. The I/O devices are able to receive instructions via the bus, are able to send status information via the bus, and are able to receive data from the bus and write data on the bus when signaled to do so by the bus. The I/O devices may be able to control the bus, but this is not required. Input devices are able to read data stored in the devices of read from external media and place that data on the bus. Output devices are able to write data from the bus to storage in the device or to external media. Some I/O devices are able to do both. In the present invention the user input information may be loaded into the input device.
The central processing unit (or microprocessor) contains an arithmetic/logic unit, a program counter and a control unit (which may also be referred to as an instruction unit). The control unit is what distinguishes Von Neumann computers from calculation.
The central processing unit is able to put address on the bus, read data from the bus, and write data to the bus. In this way, the processing unit is able to cause data to be read from specified memory locations or I/O devices or write data to specified memory locations or I/O devices.
The central processing unit is able to read data from memory locations and treat the data as instructions that control the actions of the control unit and arithmetic/logic unit. At any point in time after the initialization of the computer, the program counter will contain the address of a memory location. In the computer's instruction Cycle, the processing unit will read the instruction stored at the location specified by the program counter, increment the address in the program counter so that it contains the address of the instruction in memory that follows the instruction just read, and execute the instruction just read.
The central processing unit generally has a relatively small amount of storage which can represent the contents of one or more memory locations. This storage is referred to as the register or registers.
The instruction can cause any of the following to happen:
read data from memory or an I/O device into a register;
write data from a register to memory of an I/O device;
performance an arithmetic or logic calculation using data in one or more registers and/or (optionally) memory locations or I/O devices and writing the result to a register or (optionally) memory locations or I/O devices;
cause the contents of the program counter to be changed, optionally storing the previous value in a register or memory.
Whether the contents of the program counter are changed can be based on the result of an arithmetic or logical calculation or based on a value in a register. This allows different sequences of instructions to be executed.
The display and GUI unit allows the user to interact with the BestDesign optimization process, observe the CSH operation in progress, understand and characterize the process as well as change the parameter settings for the optimization process.
This describes the fundamental properties of a Von Neumann computer. Many extensions are possible, for example, there may be instructions that read and write memory in one instruction cycle. There may be multiple buses. The I/O devices may be able to take control of the bus (or Buses) and read or write data from the memory without the processing unit's intervention or assistance. The processing unit may be able to fetch and execute multiple instructions concurrently while providing the abstraction that only one instruction is executed at a time. The computer may provide a virtual memory abstraction, meaning that virtual addresses are mapped to different physical addresses in the memory, allowing programs to use more memory addresses than the computer has in physical memory.
We now intercalculate elements of the system of the present invention (summarized above) with the FIG. 17 computer 50. Recall that the elements comprise first through fourth means. The first means (Design of Experiment) module, requires action by the memory and CPU. The second means (Response Surface Modelling) requires action by the CPU, as does the third means (Process Window Optimization). The computer display and GUI may be used to image a solution of the type exemplified in FIGS. 1,2,3,16, supra, and allows the user to interact and understand the optimization process, as well as the physical process being optimized.
Patent Citations
Non-Patent Citations
Referenced by
Legal Events
Original Image


text:
To embed, copy and paste the code into your website or blog:
Should corporates that are tempted to self-report to the SFO look away now?
David Green CB QC, the director of the SFO, has issued revised SFO policies concerning facilitation payments, business expenditure (hospitality) and corporate self-reporting. The new policies were published on 9 October 2012.
The new policies can be summarised as follows:
Facilitation Payments Policy - They are illegal; decisions to prosecute will be based on the Prosecutor's Code (the "Code")[1] and the Joint Guidance (the "Guidance") and the making of these payments may lead to prosecution under the Bribery Act 2010 and/or the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.
Gifts and Hospitality Policy - They may be legitimate expenditures but they may also be bribes; decisions to prosecute will be based on the Code and the Guidance and the making of these payments may lead to prosecution under the Bribery Act 2010 and/or the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002.
Please see full alert below for more information.
Firefox recommends the PDF Plugin for Mac OS X for viewing PDF documents in your browser.
We can also show you Legal Updates using the Google Viewer; however, you will need to be logged into Google Docs to view them.
Please choose one of the above to proceed!
LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.
DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.
© K&L Gates LLP
Read fresh new writing on compliance, cybersecurity, Dodd-Frank, whistleblowers, social media, hiring & firing, patent reform, the NLRB, Obamacare, the SEC…
…or whatever matters the most to you. Follow authors, firms, and topics on JD Supra.
Create your news brief now - it's free and easy »
K&L Gates LLP delivers legal services on an integrated and global basis, with more than 2,000...
View Profile »
See more »
Sign up for your custom alerts now, using LinkedIn ›
Back to Top
Copyright ©

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Pronunciation: effrontery
Added on: 2009-12-02 Listened: 324 timesin: Add categories to effrontery
Pronunciation in English [en]
- Pronunciation by Duncan1962 (Male from United States)
- Pronunciation by monk (Male from Ireland)
0 votes
Could you do it better? different accent? Pronounce effrontery in English
Accents & languages on maps
- Random word: Norman Wells
by PhotransEdit Phonetic spelling:
Not satisfied?
Modify word:
· Add languages
· Add categories
Report word:
Is there anything wrong with this word?
Please report it here.


text:
Staff Reports
WEST MILTON — Competing at home for the second straight weekend, the Milton-Union Bulldogs swept the seven-team Kenny Beard Invitational on Saturday at the Lowry Complex, with the boys edging out Twin Valley South 191-189 and the girls defeating the Panthers 178-166.
For the girls, Kinsey Douglas was first in the high jump (5-0), second in the long jump (13-9.25)and was on the 4x100 relay team of Kim Rohr, Rachel Paden and Brooke Hilling that finished first (55.71 seconds).
Caitlyn Hurd won the discus (97-6), shot put (30-4.25) and helped the 4x100 iron woman team finish second (1:11.97). The 4x400 team of Rohr, Maddie Brown, Jessica Albaugh and Macy Whittington also won (4:43.2), and Sarah Motz (7-6) and Lydia Black (7-0) finished one-two in the pole vault.
Brown was also second in the 400 (1:05.99), and the 4x800 team of Grace Warner, Katie Litton, Haily Bohse and Rohr was second (11:40.01).
Troy Christian's girls finished third with 68 points. Meredith Haddad won the long jump (16-6.75), the 100 (13.51 seconds) and the 200 (27.56 seconds) and was second in the discus (84-0). Anastasia Muzart was second in the 100 (13.58 seconds).
On the boys side, Ryan Nichols swept the hurdles, winning the 110 hurdles (17.07 seconds) and 400 hurdles (1:03.53). Davontee Fugate was first in the 200 (24.94 seconds) and 100 (11.94 seconds), with Canyon Spicer finishing second in the 100 (12.03 seconds). Fugate was also on the 4x100 relay team of Quentin Weiss, Kodey Wolfe and Joey Swafford that was first (47.02 seconds).
Skyler Deeter won the 800 (2:08.4) and was on a trio of second-place relay teams: the 4x800 with Chris Johannes, River Spicer and Eric Swartz (8:54.6), the 4x200 with Blake Smith, Chase Martens and Andrew Lynn (1:39.67) and the 4x400 with Zach Pricer, Johannes and Smith (3:49). Milton-Union's 4x100 ironman team also won in 50.3 seconds).
• Baseball
TROY — The Troy Christian Eagles made up some ground Saturday with a pair of makeup games, sweeping Metro Buckeye Conference foe Xenia Christian in a doubleheader, 9-3 and 16-6.
Spencer Thomas was 3 for 4, Jordan Sloan was 3 for 3 and Chase Hayden doubled in the first game as Troy Christian (6-11, 5-2 MBC) outhit the Ambassadors 15-4, while Jacob Williams got the win on the mound.
And the offensive explosion continued for the Eagles in the second game, with Thomas going 2 for 4 with a double and Kevin Ward and Payton Forrer each adding doubles as the Eagles outhit the Ambassadors 16-5 in the six-inning run-rule game. Scott Douglas was the beneficiary, getting the win on the mound.
Troy Christian travels to Yellow Springs Monday for another MBC contest.
WEST MILTON — Milton-Union snapped a six-game winless streak — one that includes a 6-6 tie against Urbana — in convincing fashion Saturday, routing Franklin Monroe 9-1 at home.
Matt Bracci was 2 for 2 with a double and Sam Morgan was 2 for 3 for the Bulldogs (8-12), who plated eight runs in the bottom of the second and never looked back. That was plenty of support for Jake Roberts, who got the win on the mound as the Bulldogs outhit the Jets 10-8.
Milton-Union faces Miami East Monday.
• Softball
Cov 14, Celina 2;
Celina 4, Cov 3
CELINA — The Covington Buccaneers split a doubleheader at Celina Saturday, winning the first game in five innings 14-2 and falling in the second 4-3.
Morgan Arbogast was the winning pitcher in the first game, while Haley Adams went 3 for 3, Jessica Dammeyer went 2 for 4 and Ashley Cecil went 2 for 2.
In the second game, though, Brooke Gostomsky was the losing pitcher despite not giving up any earned runs as errors cost the Buccs. Dammeyer led Covington's offense, going 2 for 2 with a double.
Covington (14-5) hosts Milton-Union Tuesday.


text:
Andrey Finonchenko and Yevgeni Tarasov had put the home side 2-0 up in five first-half minutes but Hen Ezra pulled one back for Haifa and Turgeman levelled the scores in the 78th minute.
The result gave both sides their first point of the group stages after they lost their opening fixtures.
Finonchenko opened the scoring for the Kazakh side in the 40th minute when he headed in Gevorg Ghazaryan's cross from the left.
Tarasov then doubled the lead seconds before the half-time whistle with a close-range strike into the right-hand corner of Bojan Saranov's net.
Ezra hit back early in the second half for Haifa when he drilled the ball into the home side's net but the game seemed to be heading towards a win for Shakhter until Turgeman's brilliant effort drew the sides level.
The former Israel Under-21 international took aim from distance and beat Shakhter goalkeeper Aleksandr Mokin with a sensational dipping drive from 20 yards out.
Shakhter striker Sergey Khizhnichenko had the chance to snatch a late win for his side but he headed his 87th-minute effort over the bar.


text:
Designer: Goody Clancy
Construction Manager: Walsh Brothers
Project Type: CM at Risk
Est. Preliminary Project Cost: $182 million
Gross Square Feet: approx. 220,000
Est. Substantial Completion Date: Fall 2014
This project came about as a result of aging, undersized and outmoded research facilities at UMass Boston and the desire of the facility to enrich and invest in its research programs. Objectives for this state of the art research lab building include creating:
A signature building expressing the commitment to science research and teaching
- A building that will support the programs in a flexible manner as needs and requirements evolve
- A comfortable workplace for the building's occupants
- A facility which will help the University attract and retain the best students and faculty in the science departments
- A sustainable building that UMass Boston will be able to maintain and operate economically
Additionally, there will be an animal research facility, a public lobby / café, and a "sandbox lab" intended to encourage both undergraduate science and non-science major use.
Project Features
- Biology
- Chemistry
- Psychology
- Physics and Engineering
- Environmental, Earth and Ocean Science (EEOS)
- Developmental Sciences Research Center
- Center for Personalized Cancer Therapy
The Groundbreaking Ceremony for this project took place on June 8, 2011.
A web camera to this project site is available at www.umb.edu/news_events_media/construction/isc_webcam/
Building erection begins at UMass Boston
Recommended Content
People also viewed...
You recently viewed...
Personalization is OFF. Your personal browsing history at Mass.gov is not visible because your personalization is turned off. To view your history, turn your personalization on.
Learn more on our .
*Recommendations are based on site visitor traffic patterns and are not endorsements of that content.


text:
Jerusalem plan would demolish Palestinian homes
Just to the west of al-Bustan is a newly constructed archaeological park called the City of David, run by Jewish settlers.
Settlers have illegally erected an apartment building elsewhere in Silwan, and on Monday a security guard was shot and wounded there. On a recent morning, residents of the building showed reporters black marks caused by Molotov cocktails thrown at the front door.
Silwan has become a nexus of tension between Palestinians fearful of eviction and Jews determined to ensure the holy city remains Israel's undivided capital. It's also become a flashpoint of potential friction between Israel's right-leaning government led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and an international community seeking to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
"We're trying to reduce tensions at the current time, not exacerbate them," said Richard Miron, spokesman for the U.N.'s Mideast envoy. "Whatever the intentions behind such a project, Israel needs to understand that demolishing Palestinian homes in east Jerusalem demolishes confidence among Palestinians and frankly, also internationally."
Israeli-Palestinian peace talks broke down more than a year ago, when Israel launched a bruising offensive against the Gaza Strip's Hamas rulers.
Barkat's announcement came as the U.S. is pushing hard to restart the talks. Vice President Joe Biden is due to arrive in the region next week, and U.S. envoy George Mitchell has been shuttling between the sides in recent months to try to resume negotiations.
Additional reporting from Dalia Nammari in Jerusalem.
The Associated Press


text:
Related Publications
- Related by Author
- Related by Topic
A Post-Modern Jewish Peoplehood for Israel
International School for Jewish Peoplehood Studies (SJPS) at Beit Hatfutsot, Fall 2008
Topic: Diaspora Relations, Peoplehood, Networking, Israel-Diaspora Relations, Jewish Identity, Globalization, Unity, Zionism, Identity
Name of Publication: The Peoplehood Papers
Editor: Serkin, Tova
Volume/Issue: Volume 3
Page Number(s): 4-8
Genre: Essay
Coverage: Israel , United States
Language: English
Copyright Holder: Publisher
Copyright Information: Download for personal use, freely distribute link
Bibliographic Information:
Engelberg, Ari. A Post-Modern Jewish Peoplehood for Israel. The Peoplehood Papers. International School for Jewish Peoplehood Studies (SJPS) at Beit Hatfutsot. Fall 2008: 4-8. http://www.bjpa.org/Publications/details.cfm?PublicationID=11772
» View Publication
(PDF, 160 Kb)


text:
News from WTOP
News from the AP
Mike Causey
Shows & Panels
Shows & Panels
- Agency of the Month
- Business of Government Hour
- The CFO Agenda: Delivering value from financial transparency and audit efforts in the public and private sector
- Cloud-Driven Data Insights in Government
- CXO Surveys
- Disaster Resilience for America
- Federal News Countdown
- Government Perspectives on Mobility and the Cloud
- Reducing Risk in the Cloud
- Reimagining the Next Generation of Government
Shows & Panels
- AFCEA Answers
- American Readiness: Renewable Power and Efficiency Technologies
- Ask the CIO
- The Business Case for Cloud Computing in Government
- Cloud-Driven Data Insights in Government
- Connecting the Dots: Digital Authentication in Government
- Cybersecurity Game Changer: Real-Time Event Processing in Government
- Data-Centric Approaches to Government in the Cloud
- Delivering the Digital Government Mission
- Federal Executive Forum
- Federal News Radio's National Cyber Security Awareness Month Special Panel Discussion
- Federal Tech Talk
- The Future of Government Data Centers
- Government Perspectives on Mobility and the Cloud
- Industrialized, Interoperable and Insight-driven Federal Health Panel
- Innovation and Tech Superiority through Acquisition Reform
- Mitigating Insider Threats in Virtual & Cloud Environments
- Moving Agency Applications to the Cloud with PaaS
- Reducing Risk in the Cloud
- Security in the Age of Targeted Attacks
- Air Traffic Management Transformation Report
- The Business of Cloud
- Cloud First Report
- Data Driven Cloud Series
- Disaster Resilience for America
- General Dynamics IT Enterprise Center
- Gov Cloud Minute
- Government in Technology Series
- Homeland Security Cybersecurity Market Report
- The Intersection: Where Technology Meets Transformation
- Modern Mission Critical Series
- National Cybersecurity Awareness Month
- The New IP for Federal IT
- The Social Platform Solution for the Department of Veterans Affairs
- Technology Insights
- The Cyber Security Report
- The Next Generation Cyber Security Experts
Shows & Panels
- Cloud-Driven Data Insights in Government
- Disaster Resilience for America
- F-35 Lightning II Program
- Government Perspectives on Mobility and the Cloud
- On DoD
- Pentagon Solutions
- Reducing Risk in the Cloud
- Reimagining the Next Generation of Government
- Transforming Business Operations at the Defense Department
Lawmakers call for review of DoD improper payments
Friday - 4/29/2011, 4:38pm EDT
By Jolie Lee
Federal News Radio
A bipartisan, bicameral group of 13 lawmakers led by Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.) sent a letter to the Defense Department today urging greater efforts to eliminate improper payments.
Carper is the chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management.
A 2009 report by the Government Accountability Office found "significant weaknesses" in DoD's payment information reporting. GAO found as $322 billion in agency payments were excluded from improper payment reviews.
In fiscal year 2010, DoD's reported improper payments was about $1 billion, but the estimates "have not been complete or accurate," according to the letter.
"Without a thorough process to review expenditures and identify the full extent of improper payments, the Department will not be able to identify internal controls aimed at reducing improper payments and better protecting the taxpayer," the lawmakers wrote. "Nor will the Department be able to effectively recover improper payments. In these times of ever tightening budgets, a soaring deficit, and record levels of improper payments across the government, the Department has to do a much better job in identifying and eliminating improper payments. We need to look in every nook and cranny of federal spending - domestic and defense - to find ways to cut waste and fraud."
Last year, President Obama signed the Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Act with a goal of reducing wasteful, improper payments by $50 billion by 2012.


text:
See your color on these designs right now!
Enter your colors here, then click the icon below any design to preview it in your colors.
Recommended Just For You
Customer Raves & Reviews
Great Start!
Wow The service was surprisingly fast! we are extremely happy with our Save the Dates ! great quality!


text:
Serve Help - PS: Serving on Knees Drill is Amazing!
Hello, thanks again to everyone who has helped me in the past!
Any advice would be greatly appreciated! :)
I recently practiced serving maybe 15-20 balls on my knees, and personally I think it helped a lot in terms of pronation and my ball toss.
Serving on knees: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LDcBjzG-nyg
Flat Serves: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrqnXcS_t5s
"Kick" Serves: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OU6PMXRrMFo
-I see improvements in pace and consistency but my serves aren't really kicking up a lot. Any kick serve wizards out there that can help me out?
Previous Serves: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yxE6H...2gBOsw&index=7
Thanks in advance!
Nice improvement, RA!
Good pace on the kickers.
Did you hit the kick serves after flats? You might have translated the "through" component of the flat into your kick swing a bit. What you can do is think of swinging along the baseline and opening up your chest to the net slightly later. Also, higher trajectory over the net = more time for the ball to dip down = higher angle of incidence = higher bounce.
good luck! hope this helps.
Thanks for the tips and comments! :)
*bump* Any more comments? >_>
Dude, really nice serve. Seriously. Regarding the kicker -- welcome to "top/slice" hell. This is where a lot of kick serves get stuck.
Due to the angle of the camera, I can't completely tell what your toss or swing forward looks like... but... here's something to make sure of.
First, toss into the court. With your racquet head speed, I'd say you should toss two feet into the court. So continue keep the toss at 12 o'clock over your head... but toss two feet into the court at the same time.
Secondly, you are definitely closing your shoulders towards the net way too soon. The timing of the shoulder closing is more in line with a slice or flat serve. You need to keep the shoulders facing that side fence almost up until a split second before contact. It should almost feel like you are going to serve into the side fence.
Lastly, check your grip. Once I started tossing into the court, I had to change my grip to eastern backhand. That will generate the necessary additional spin you need.
Maintain that racquet head speed whatever you do. Just translate it into more spin instead of pace.
Great stuff.
Definitely try to keep your shoulders from turning as square to the net prior to contact. Look back at your clip where you're serving from your knees - you actually have more "action" on the ball because you cannot physically get your upper body turned as far toward the net from that position. By doing so you enhance your ability to get an ideal angle of attack on the ball toss for the "kicker."
Thanks for posting the vids RoddickAce. Very nice serve. My only suggestion is to get a tripod so you can mount the camera higher.
I guess TomT beat me to it! :mad:
But trust that your wrist/arms will make the natural adjustments the swing after some repetition. Always keep in mind that the contact point of the strings to the ball is not fully *behind* the ball. It actually is a little under the ball and also contacting the side of the ball closest to you.
Once you can keep your shoulders sideways and hit the serve in, you will have hit a kick serve. Even if it is really slow.
nice serves. A good kicker is something I"d like to have too!! The only real feeling I have when I hit one, is that I have hit "across" the ball, not through it and with good racquet head speed.
Looks like you are well on your way though, just a little practice and adjustment needed.
Serving from knees promotes loose relaxed wrist to gain a fast head speed.
BUT, more important, it teaches you to finish your serve swing early, at the top, so you don't followthru crushing your racket on the court.
Take that lesson standing up, you get a high elbow, high hand finish after you strike the ball, exactly what I preached to every single video server who posts his vids.
The leg thrust and some trunk motion probably stretch the muscles that drive the serve. This muscle is probably mostly the lat. Apparently, even without the leg thrust a lot of stretch still can occur. ?
Earlier thread discussing serving from the knees.
While having some lats is good (I"m a long time big wave surfer going out in places with the hardest paddleouts), I don't see the connection between lats and a service motion.
The lat is connected to the front of the upper arm at the humerus. The pec is also attached there. When both the lat and pec have been stretched by the earlier 'kinetic chain' motions such as the leg thrust they are capable of shortening very rapidly. With the arm and shoulder blade raised high as in the service motion when the lat and pec shorten it causes the arm to rotated around its axis by internal shoulder rotation.
I thought most of the service power comes from the trophy position onwards and upwards, before the lats are stretched.
The lats might affect followthru, but I don't see it affecting the initial throwing motion.
OTOH, I don't see much, I have slanted eyes.
See image with lat shown in red.
Now picture what happens when the lat - in red - shortens rapidly while the arm stays up as in the serve. The lat is attached to the front of the arm and the upper arm, and with it the entire arm, rotates rapidly.
The result is the twitch-like arm rotation seen in the video thumbnail.
Well, I can't argue, because I don't know, and still can't see where muscles would help if the ball is being hit as the muscle is being started.
Anyways, OP is swinging much harder than ever before. Stands to reason his serve is better.
Seriously great serving there mate. Consistency looks pretty much professional standard to me. A lot of Federer in your action. Congrats on the improvements and good luck with your tennis.
|All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:59 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
© 2006 - Tennis Warehouse


text:
September 2009: For The Record
September 2009
For The Record
A Mason Contractor's Role in Politics
Have you ever thought about running for a public office in your community? If you could directly apply your experience as a mason contractor and business person to positively affect your community, would you?
Ed Stevens wasn't so sure he wanted to run for Township Supervisor in New Castle, Pa., but dozens of his supporters convinced him. The president and co-owner of Stevens Masonry Construction Co., he ran for and was elected to the position. Now, he's working full-steam ahead to make his township a fair and honest place, operated in a transparent manner.
|Ed Stevens
"I want to make Neshannock Township a better place," says Stevens. "My goal is to run the township the way I have run my business for 23 years: fairly and honestly, and on behalf of the people of the township. I want to use my experience as a mason and contractor to handle affairs and tighten the bond in our local community."
Stevens Masonry Construction is a third-generation company started by Stevens' grandfather. "I want to get rid of agendas and politics as usual," he says. "I want to help bring new businesses in, lower taxes and increase jobs – constructive progress and constructive change."
Stevens says he'd like to create more opportunities for young people and families, like biking trails and expanded physical fitness facilities.
"I don't want people to be afraid of local government," he says. "They should understand that they own their government."
Although Stevens is green in his elected, unpaid position, he has had a smooth transition into his new role. He has plenty of support from his company staff, so there aren't concerns regarding the time that his Supervisor position will consume. Stevens' main focus is on running his business ethically and not crossing any political lines. He promises to serve his township in a way that works with his new role as he continues to grow his business.
Related Posts
- 38Put-in-Place Construction to Reach $1.04 Trillion in 2015 FMI, an organization offering management consulting, investment banking and people development services to the engineering and construction industry, released its 2015 U.S. Markets Construction Overview. FMI researchers predict 2014 will end with about 7 percent growth in construction put in place. This rate of growth is expected to continue…
- 37Construction employers added 29,000 jobs in February and 321,000 over the past year, reaching the highest employment total in six years, as the sector's unemployment rate fell to an eight-year low of 10.6 percent, according to an analysis by the Associated General Contractors of America. Association officials cautioned, however, that construction jobs in the highway…
- 36August 2011 Business Building Can't Find Enough Good Help? By George Hedley Builders, contractors and subcontractors continually complain that they can't find enough trained help to get all their work done. People, or a lack of them, is their biggest problem. This leads me to believe that construction business owners should make finding, training and…
- 35September 2012 Business Management What It Takes Interview by Jennifer Morrell The best way to learn what it takes to keep a masonry construction business in the black is to go straight to the sources. Masonry consulted three of our industry's best, each with a unique perspective on successfully managing his masonry business. We spoke…
- 33March 2009 Convention Report 2009 MCAA Convention Entertainer and speaker Alan Thicke addresses the crowd during the Opening Session of the MCAA Convention. The 2009 MCAA Convention was held during the World of Concrete/World of Masonry show in Las Vegas last month. Mason contractors, suppliers and allied industry representatives from across the United States met…


text:
|Property type
|Minimum Stay
|7 nights
This cozy, comfortable cottage is on 120 feet of sandy beach on Lake Huron. Enjoy panoramic views from the deck and observe the occasional freighter or sailboat from our telescope. A postcard view from every angle. The house in serenely nestled on a wooded lot. Build memories around a fire on the beach or playing games in the gazebo. Great care has been taken to ensure comfort. All linens, cookware, and dishes supplied - just walk in and enjoy. A great place to just relax and unwind. Once you arrive you'll never want to leave!
A short walk down the road has a playground great for the kids. Numerous casinos close for the adults. Minutes from a state park for hiking or snowmobiling. A short drive to the launch for a day at Mackinac Island. Shopping and restaurants nearby. This is a well-loved cottage perfect for enjoyment of all seasons.
Keywords: House
My family (wife and 2 kids; ages 4 and 7) and I stayed at the house for a week in August. The home was as described and had everything we needed for our stay. There was plenty of room inside for all of us and our stuff. The beach area is a bit rocky (this is Lake Huron after all) so you should probably bring water shoes, but overall the lakefront is beautiful. There's a nice lighthouse view and you'll be treated to a steady stream of freighters and other large boats passing by. The constant lapping of the waves on the shore is one of the most relaxing sounds imaginable, and makes for great background "noise" as you end your day by a bonfire. Location is perfect: a short drive to downtown Cheboygan and only a half hour or so to Mackinaw City, so the house works great as a launching pad to other are activities. Some of our favorites were: Mackinac Island, Ocqueoc Falls, and the Headlands International Dark Sky Park.
Let me preface my review by saying if you are looking for luxury, stay at the Grand Hotel a little further north. If you want a peaceful cottage getaway with a great spot on Lake Huron where you will often be the only person on the beach, you have found your spot. Like any cottage, this one has its eccentricities and quirks but that is what makes it a cottage. The cottage was clean and ready for us when we arrived and all of the staples were ready and waiting. We used the kayaks and bicycles that were there for our use and they were in great condition. We swam in Lake Huron (brisk but refreshing) and would definitely recommend water shoes for this due to the rocks on the bottom. There is a fabulous gazebo where we ate almost all of our meals and one of our children slept at night. It was decorated in an eclectic maritime fashion The gazebo overlooks the lake and we loved sitting in it and relaxing. The kitchen was stocked with everything we needed to cook our meals. The neighboring houses are fairly close in proximity but the trees make it feel like you are very isolated. The cottage is about 6 minutes from Cheboygan and 20 minutes from Mackinac City so you can zip to either for a meal or other activities. We had a very relaxing experience and would recommend it to friends and family!
I recently needed a place to get away from the rat-race and relax. I spent a few days at this cottage and was able to completely unwind. It is so peaceful and relaxing up there and the views are fantastic! Not only that, but I was pleasantly surprised to see an eagle swooping over the beach. I had never seen one before; it was awesome!
this was the best vacation in a long time, and this place made the trip! The beach was great, the place was clean and cozy. We can not wait until next year when we return!
This is a great place to relax and unwind! The views are great and it is tucked back in the woods so you get that "Up North" feeling. The owners were very pleasant and easy to deal with. Had a great time and looking forward to going back next year!
|Rate Period
|Weekend Night
Jul 2 - Aug 31
7 nights
|Property Damage Protection
$1200 a week. We are not considering partial weeks for July and August.
$1200 a week. PayPal payment is available
Payment is usually accepted in the quoted currency (USD) unless the currency and the amount is specifically agreed in advance with the owner / advertiser.


text:
Let's Play D&D 4th Edition...
Let's Play #004
Goodman Games DCC54
Forges of the Mountain King (Level 1)
Session 3.
Encounter #9 Company of the Blackhammer (1-23)
The Company of the Blackhammer are located in area 1-23 on the map (see below).
Ragnarr quietly ensures the door is unlocked and will open easily, it has after all been well-maintained- Tordek readies his boot.
And they're in, the chamber is a barracks room, there are eight dwarves present- four of them in bunks, asleep; two are knelt on the floor in prayer and two are chatting in the middle of the chamber. The two standing are armed with greatswords, sheathed; the others all have similar weapons within reach- all of them are armoured, even those asleep.
Bad Guys 800 XP Level 3 Encounter.
Dwarf Cult Warrior Level 1 Soldier x8
Ragnarr spins out a dagger with a Deft Strike and the first is bloodied, Fenchurch's Staggering Note shakes the same dwarf up with its thunderous attack- the rest of the adventurers scuttle in to the action but are ineffective in their attacks.
Ragnarr spins out another dagger but its high and wide- the foul dwarf guards react, rolling out of their beds and/or grabbing out their greatswords; Tordek is slashed and cut twice.
Koda skitters in to the centre of the chamber and unleashes his Five Storms in to the mix- all three of his targets take a beating, one of the nasty fellows crashes to the floor, another two are injured in the Flurry.
Grimm sees his opportunity and launches his Thunder and Echo (Daily), alas again he's mostly off target, one of the foul dwarves is left bloodied and battered, flung in to a wall; another is only slightly injured.
Tordek fails again to land his Steel Serpent Strike and so tries once more with a Weapon Master's Strike (Action Point), he slices and another foul dwarf is bloodied. Fenchurch's Shout of Triumph is still underperforming, another of the dwarf guards clutches at his ears- left bleeding and bloodied- but the rest of his enemies are unaffected by his roaring menace. The bard however adds some Majestic Words to the mix and Tordek's wounds heal over.
There was a brief chat at this point between the players, their conclusion- time for their daily powers, not so much because they're desperate but because they think this is going to be the last fight before another Extended Rest- some of them are low on Surges.
Ragnarr unleashed a Blinding Barrage, but again with only limited success, two of the dwarves a cut- actually scratched, a third is killed.
Two of the guards double team Tordek, the fighter is very swiftly bloodied- another two attempt to get past him- to the softer Fenchurch back in the doorway. Tordek is having none of it- he cuts both of the foul dwarves, stops them in their tracks and leaves them bloodied for good measure.
Meanwhile Ragnarr and Koda are sliced and cut- it's a real melee now, and Koda is perfectly placed- Five Storms and Flurry follow, two of the guards are killed outright, another left staggering (on 1 hit point) and a fourth is injured.
Tordek slashes at another, leaves it staggering and bloodied (on 2 hit points), and then sucks up the hurt and gets his Second Wind.
Fenchurch finishes off another of the enemies with a Staggering Note, actually on his second attempt (Action Point), the first being a bum note.
There are only three guards left, make that two- Ragnarr cuts one down with a Clever Strike.
"RuUuNN!" the first guard groans and then follows his own instructions, en route the foul fellow is chopped by Tordek, punched by Koda, and then finally just as he's opening the door taken out as Koda comes again, Opening the Gate of Battle on his ass.
The second guard, the last guard, is in motion- trying to escape; Grimm, at last, gets in to the action, he swears his Oath and brings a Focussed Fury, and the last guard is cut down.
800 XP Level 3 Encounter.
Dwarf Cult Warrior Level 1 Soldier x8
The adventurers are pretty low on resources, and they can hear a loud rhythmical chanting coming from the open door, through which the guards tried to escape. Ragnarr is ordered to take a look- he's helped by the fact that the doorway is covered by curtains, or else a tapestry- either way he hides behind the hanging and observes.
The chamber beyond is massive…
Ragnarr spies on area 1-24 on the map (see below).
The chamber is an enormous temple, ahead a towering stone statue of a mad looking dwarf with a beard seemingly made of writhing tentacles, the statue is at least fifty feet high- stretching all the way up to the domed ceiling. Hissing steam escapes from the statue's mouth- Ragnarr shudders.
Scattered around the chamber are easily a dozen bedrolls, towards the far side a trio of dwarves pray before the statue- there seems to be a ledge above also, possibly for the temple priests to stand upon to conduct their foul ceremonies, there's movement up there.
One by one the other draws are ushered in to the doorway to take a moment to stare at the defiled temple.
The guys are not sure- they have enough XP for level 2 and they're very low on resources, two of the players have only one Healing Surge, another only has two. They're also worried that this chamber could prove to be very dangerous, and so after talking amongst themselves, after a little light searching of the chamber and a short rest, they have a proposition- for me.
The guys don't want to lose another comrade and so they propose to stay in this chamber, to try and take an Extended Rest, and level up- but they will constantly observe the temple, after wedging the waterlogged door behind them, they will abandon their rest if anyone approaches, or else it looks like something untoward is going to happen (particularly to another of the prisoners).
I realise there's a fair amount of OOC information that has been thrown in to the mix here but, it's a game- and fun, and while it would be fun for me to see them go against what I have in store for them in this chamber with their PCs level 1… I figure, what the hell, there's a good chance it's going to be a TPK even if they're level 2- go for it.
And so the guys settle down to rest, to watch and to wait.
Comment: An odd encounter, in that eight bad guys all the same, shows you how much Goodman Games had not got the hang of the different rolls for monsters, but hey-ho, short and bloody and brutal will suffice.
Looking forward to the next encounter, meantime to follow the PCs are level 2.
Part 16 The PCs Level 2
Or, LP#4 Main Page


text:
Results 1 to 3 of 3
Thread: Can babies be iron deficient?
18-04-2012, 03:39pm #1
Can babies be iron deficient?
Annabel is on Hipp follow on milk, and has always liked her sleep but lately she is even more sleepy, she is only managing to be up for about two hrs then is tired enough to go bed again. I wonder if its just tiredness from being more active or whether she may have low iron. What do you think?
18-04-2012, 03:59pm #2
Re: Can babies be iron deficient?
Yes they can be - does she eat much red meat/green veg as well as the follow on formula (I believe some have iron added but I couldn't tell you which ones). For a kid friendly spinach rich meal try AK's popeye pasta recipe. It happens to be one of Ava's favourites and as I use frozen chopped spinach is a great fall back meal.
18-04-2012, 04:47pm #3
Re: Can babies be iron deficient?
She woke up for her food, but didnt have much so i gave her a bottle and then she was a bit sick so put her back to bed after some calpol. Im trying to get an apt at the docs as she just seems so weak today
I will search out that popeye recipe when shes better thanks x


text:
Easily create slide-up or slide-down banners on your site with a simple shortcode.
Everything about this plugin is great, except the part that really matters. I put the banner in my sidebar, it rotated and then disappeared. Same happens with single or multiple banners.
You must log in to submit a review. You can also log in or register using the form near the top of this page.