- It would be a breach of a law to disclose the information;
- The information concerns an incomplete proposal or negotiation;
- The information comprises matters of supposition or is insufficiently definite to warrant disclosure;
- The information is generated for the internal management purposes of the entity; or
- The information is a trade secret; and
- The information is confidential and ASX has not formed the view that the information has ceased
to be confidential; and - A reasonable person would not expect the information to be disclosed
And it definitely doesn't limit or control what companies put on their website however if its price sensitive, in which case it should be announced to the market first. So is 4DS saying that the information is incomplete or that its a supposition? Or does the contract between Imec and 4DS have a restriction, in which case it cannot be announced to the market because then it would be breach of the law?
Now we're back to Imec limiting the release of information, which is partly what concerns me that for PCMO RRAM they aren't interested in announcing it? Don't want to put their stamp of approval on the analysis?
2nd April 2019 -
Imec collaboration announced3rd October 2019 -
Analysis completed on 4th Lot of 23 x 300mm wafersFast forward to
21 June 2021 - Analysis of Platform lot 2 and 3
17 August 2021 -
Amazing results from the analysis4 November 2021- After 1 month suspension -
That previous analysis we conducted isn't so good and acknowledge that test results from a single cell varies to the test results of a packaged chip which any 2nd year engineering student could tell you.
10 February 2022 -
4DS Decides to invest in testing equipment after giving Mike the boot and cutting Guido's pay while churning through JD, Ken, and Wilbert.
Since then we've had PL4, amazing results (well - the results match what 4DS announced in 2009 anyway), everyones happy.. but Imec wants this kept quiet? Why? How does this this not benefit them being involved in ground breaking research? Something that could apparently fix all the current problems with hardware tech for the AI industry? Very strange. Its like 1+1 = 2, but Imec doesn't want to be involved in stating that the answer is 2, perhaps they think the answer is 3?
What other research are they involved with that is better than this in memory?
So lets investigate by going to their webpage...
https://www.imec-int.com/en/what-we-offer/research/collaborative-research
An article on MRAM, and article for DRAM, CMOS, fabrication of 3D stacked wafersl, etc.
https://www.imec-int.com/en/press/imecs-extremely-scaled-sot-mram-devices-show-record-low-switching-energy-and-virtuallySo they are using
Pt ??
Mg
O for their MRAM?
It offers:
- high switching speed (in the sub-ns regime)
- unlimited endurance
- non-volatile
- we observed a switching energy below 100 femto-Joule (fJ) per bit, i.e., a reduction of 63% compared to conventional designs
No retention? Come on Imec....
Since 2020, Imec has pumped out or been involved with over 100 technical papers using
Mg
O in MRAM.
0 articles about using RRAM, which is what I'm finding odd and the few I do find is relating specifically to their old HfO design from 2010-2014.
My curiosity is such that I would really like to read through the contract between 4DS and Imec. 4DS blames Imec for not being able to release information (as per word of mouth, verbally informed posters on here).
Also.. to completely refute the "don't want to show favouritism".
In conclusion, there's still a lot we don't know and don't understand. I trust that between Ting and Peter we are heading in the right direction and that clarity can be provided both to the industry and share holders alike in the near future, but we need to keep a level head about things.
