Recipe access control method, device, equipment and storage medium

Abstract

The present application discloses a recipe access control method, apparatus, device, and storage medium. The method calculates the user's identity base score in response to a user-initiated request instruction for accessing a recipe with access restrictions; calculates a confidentiality score for the recipe; calculates the user access score for the user accessing the recipe by combining the recipe, the user's historical operation data, and the identity base score; determines whether the user access score is greater than the confidentiality score; if so, opens the recipe access rights to the user; if not, provides the user with an access application mechanism for the user to initiate a corresponding application instruction based on the access application mechanism, and determines the user's access rights in response to the application instruction. The control method of the present application, which takes into account a full range of influencing factors, can cover various situations, achieve sophisticated recipe access control, and ensure the confidentiality and security of the recipe.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present application relates to the technical field of recipe access control, and in particular to a recipe access control method, apparatus, device, and storage medium. Background Art

[0002] A recipe is a precise combination of process parameters. In the semiconductor field, it encompasses various process parameters used in semiconductor manufacturing. Precise control of these parameters is crucial to ensuring chip performance, reliability, and consistency. Even the slightest deviation in these parameters can lead to chip failure, performance degradation, or reduced yield. A recipe also details the sequence and operation of the process steps, enabling engineers to precisely control the entire manufacturing process and achieve the transition from silicon wafers to high-performance chips. A unique recipe is often the culmination of technological R&D efforts by companies and research institutions, representing their core technological capabilities. If a recipe were to be obtained by a competitor, it could potentially lead to a loss of competitive advantage. Therefore, recipes are crucial and confidential, and cannot be easily accessed by others, requiring meticulous recipe management.

[0003] The existing access control methods for recipes are usually simple and do not take into account all kinds of influencing factors and situations. Therefore, it is impossible to implement fine-grained recipe access control, which affects the confidentiality and security of recipes. Summary of the Invention

[0004] In view of this, the present application provides a recipe access control method, apparatus, device and storage medium to solve the problem that the existing method of recipe access control is usually relatively simple and does not take into account various influencing factors and situations in an all-round way. Therefore, it is impossible to achieve fine recipe access control, which affects the confidentiality and security of the recipe.

[0005] To achieve the above objectives, the following solutions are proposed:

[0006] In a first aspect, a recipe access control method includes:

[0007] In response to a user-initiated request to access a recipe with access restrictions, calculating the user's identity basic score;

[0008] Determine the experimental project corresponding to the recipe, and calculate the confidentiality score based on the experimental project and the recipe;

[0009] Obtain the user's historical operation data, and calculate a user access score for the user accessing the recipe by combining the recipe, the historical operation data, and the identity base score;

[0010] Determining whether the user access score is greater than the confidentiality score;

[0011] If yes, then grant the user access to the recipe;

[0012] If not, an access application mechanism is provided to the user, so that the user can initiate a corresponding application instruction based on the access application mechanism, so as to determine the user's access rights in response to the application instruction.

[0013] In a second aspect, a recipe access control device includes:

[0014] An access request response module, configured to calculate a user's identity basic score in response to a user's request to access a recipe with access restrictions;

[0015] A confidentiality score calculation module, configured to determine the experimental project corresponding to the recipe and calculate the confidentiality score based on the experimental project and the recipe;

[0016] A user access score calculation module, configured to obtain the user's historical operation data and calculate the user access score for the user accessing the recipe by combining the recipe, the historical operation data, and the identity basic score;

[0017] A judgment module, configured to judge whether the user access score is greater than the confidentiality score;

[0018] a permission opening module, configured to open access rights of the recipe to the user if yes;

[0019] The access restriction module is configured to provide the user with an access application mechanism if no, so that the user can initiate a corresponding application instruction based on the access application mechanism, and determine the user's access rights in response to the application instruction.

[0020] In a third aspect, a Recipe access control device includes a memory and a processor;

[0021] The memory is used to store programs;

[0022] The processor is used to execute the program to implement each step of the recipe access control method as described in any one of the first aspects.

[0023] In a fourth aspect, a storage medium stores a computer program thereon, wherein when the computer program is executed by a processor, the computer program implements the steps of the recipe access control method as described in any one of the first aspects.

[0024] It can be seen from the above technical solution that the present application first responds to a user-initiated request instruction for accessing a recipe with access restrictions, calculates the user's basic identity score; determines the experimental project corresponding to the recipe, and calculates the confidentiality score based on the experimental project and the recipe; obtains the user's historical operation data, and calculates the user access score for the user accessing the recipe in combination with the recipe, historical operation data and the basic identity score; determines whether the user access score is greater than the confidentiality score; if so, opens the access rights of the recipe to the user; if not, provides the user with an access application mechanism for initiating a corresponding application instruction based on the access application mechanism, so as to determine the user's access rights in response to the application instruction.

[0025] On the one hand, this application takes into account various situations such as personnel and experimental projects, all of which are factors that can affect recipe access control, so as to implement different permission controls according to different situations. For the experimental project corresponding to the recipe that the user wants to access, a confidentiality score is calculated taking into account that the experimental project and the recipe itself may have different management requirements; and different user identities may have different access requirements or access rights, so an identity-based score is calculated based on the user identity. At the same time, the user's historical operation status will show the user's own capabilities, etc., so historical operation data is obtained, and the user access score of the user accessing the recipe is calculated based on the historical operation data, the recipe and the identity-based score. The user access score can indicate the user's expressiveness based on the recipe, and it can be used as a judgment ability. Whether to open access rights to them, then by comparing the index with the confidentiality score, you can clearly set what kind of access rights for the user, thereby fully protecting the recipe from being leaked or exposed. If the user access score is greater than the confidentiality score, it is determined that the user will not threaten the security of the recipe, that is, the access rights are opened to them; if the user access score is less than the confidentiality score, it is considered that the user may be an unsafe user and access restrictions need to be placed on them. At the same time, an access application mechanism is provided, which is equivalent to providing users with an opportunity to abandon the traditional "one-size-fits-all" control method and form a flexible and controllable recipe access control method on the basis of ensuring security. The control method of this application that takes into account all-round influencing factors can cover various situations, can achieve fine recipe access control, and ensure the confidentiality and security of the recipe.

[0026] On the other hand, while ensuring the security of recipes, this application can also achieve efficient recipe sharing, allowing others (such as engineers and scientists from different companies or research institutions) to conduct research and development based on each other, helping to avoid duplication of work. For example, for a recipe that has been successfully executed, the user's access rights are opened based on the method provided by this application, so that the user can access and learn the recipe, which can help users improve their work and study efficiency, further promote rapid iteration and innovation of technology, and enhance the technical level of the entire semiconductor industry.

[0027] On the other hand, the permission control method commonly used in the existing technology is usually based on the RBAC (Role-Based Access Control) model, combined with ABE (Attribute-Based Encryption) and MFA (Multi-Factor Authentication). However, this method cannot effectively solve the problems of information sharing and technical confidentiality at the same time, and requires high confidentiality quality of the personnel themselves, which will also affect control efficiency. The present application is based on the applicant's pioneering semiconductor laboratory operation control system. On its advanced semiconductor equipment, when using robotic process automation (RPA) to assist in equipment operation, considering the simultaneous existence of on-campus, industry-university projects, basic teaching, and equipment training work, in order to better realize recipe management, the recipe access control method of the present application is proposed, which can balance different user identities and experimental projects, better utilize system resources and ensure confidentiality management in an environment where industry and teaching are parallel. While balancing project management, it promotes recipe sharing to improve the level of recipe use, execution and permission control. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0028] In order to more clearly illustrate the embodiments of the present invention or the technical solutions in the prior art, the following briefly introduces the drawings required for use in the embodiments or the description of the prior art. Obviously, the drawings described below are merely embodiments of the present invention. For ordinary technicians in this field, other drawings can be obtained based on the provided drawings without paying any creative work.

[0029] Figure 1 An optional flowchart of a recipe access control method provided in an embodiment of the present application;

[0030] Figure 2 A schematic diagram of the division of basic identity types provided in an embodiment of the present application;

[0031] Figure 3 A schematic diagram of role division provided in an embodiment of the present application;

[0032] Figure 4 A schematic diagram of a voting window for destroying an executed recipe provided in an embodiment of the present application;

[0033] Figure 5 A schematic diagram of another executed recipe destruction voting window provided in an embodiment of the present application;

[0034] Figure 6 A schematic diagram of a parameter input interface provided in an embodiment of the present application;

[0035] Figure 7 A schematic diagram of the structure of a recipe access control device provided in an embodiment of the present application;

[0036] Figure 8 A schematic diagram of the structure of a recipe access control device provided in an embodiment of the present application. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0037] The following will be combined with the drawings in the embodiments of this application to clearly and completely describe the technical solutions in the embodiments of this application. Obviously, the embodiments described are only part of the embodiments of this application, not all of the embodiments. Based on the embodiments in this application, all other embodiments obtained by ordinary technicians in this field without making creative efforts are within the scope of protection of this application.

[0038] The present invention can be used in a variety of general-purpose or special-purpose computing device environments or configurations, such as personal computers, server computers, handheld or portable devices, tablet devices, multi-processor devices, and distributed computing environments including any of the above.

[0039] The embodiment of the present invention provides a method for controlling access to recipes. The method can be applied to various computer terminals or smart terminals. The execution subject can be a processor or server of the computer terminal or smart terminal. The method flow chart of the method is as follows: Figure 1 As shown, specifically including:

[0040] S1: In response to a request from a user to access a recipe with access restrictions, calculate the user's identity basic score.

[0041] Recipes specify various process parameters, including temperature, pressure, gas flow, ion implantation energy and metering, photolithography exposure time and intensity, and more. Semiconductor manufacturing involves extremely complex process steps, such as multi-layer photolithography, high-aspect-ratio etching, and high-precision thin-film deposition. Therefore, possessing advanced recipes can give enterprises and research institutions significant advantages in terms of chip performance, power consumption, and cost. However, for such important recipes, security considerations must be carefully considered, ensuring that access is by the user.

[0042] Specifically, the present application can be applied to any semiconductor public platform, specifically a semiconductor laboratory control operating system. For example, a user can initiate an access request for a recipe with access restrictions through the semiconductor laboratory control operating system. Then, the present application can respond to the request instruction and calculate the identity basic score, which is the score related to the user's identity.

[0043] From research institutes, enterprises, and universities to laboratories, experimental projects, and research groups, different personnel have different identities. For the purposes of this application, the person requesting access can be referred to as a user. Therefore, users with different identities have different levels of work or study, different management permissions, and different levels of knowledge of technical secrets. These permissions are then mapped to recipes, and the basic identity score is calculated based on each identity, clearly indicating the user's confidentiality level.

[0044] S2: Determine the experimental project corresponding to the recipe, and calculate the confidentiality score based on the experimental project and the recipe.

[0045] Each recipe corresponds to a specific experimental project (or scientific research project). Different recipes may play different roles in the same or different experimental projects, or involve different levels of confidentiality. Therefore, the confidentiality score is closely related to the specific experimental project. At the same time, the recipe itself also has certain characteristics and features, so the confidentiality score can be calculated based on the experimental project and the recipe itself.

[0046] It is understood that the higher the confidentiality score, the higher the required confidentiality level, and the lower the confidentiality score, the lower the required confidentiality level. Therefore, the recipe confidentiality score calculated in this step can clearly determine the confidentiality level of the recipe, facilitate the authority judgment and control of access users, and provide a specific basis for subsequent access permission control.

[0047] S3: Obtain the historical operation data of the user, and calculate the user access score of the user accessing the recipe by combining the recipe, the historical operation data, and the identity basic score.

[0048] In the semiconductor manufacturing field, from the user's perspective, factors that can affect recipe security include not only the user's identity, but also the user's personal experimental operation ability, learning ability, etc. These factors that express ability will be reflected in their historical operation data. Therefore, when calculating the user access score, it is necessary to obtain this data and then combine this data, recipe, and identity-based score to calculate it.

[0049] This application fully considers the user's identity, historical operation data, and the recipe itself for comprehensive analysis and calculation, and quantifies the user's confidentiality level in the form of a clear score, thereby using the user access score as an indicator for subsequent opening or restricting recipe access, thereby achieving efficient recipe permission management.

[0050] S4: Determine whether the user access score is greater than the confidentiality score.

[0051] Comparing the user access score with the confidentiality score, and quantifying the user's confidentiality ability based on the comparison results, breaks through the traditional single role-based management model and no longer grants the same permissions to a certain type of user on a "one-size-fits-all" basis. Both the user access score and the confidentiality score are the results of multi-dimensional quantitative evaluation calculations, which can achieve refined, personalized, and flexible access control needs.

[0052] In addition, this method is also dynamically adaptable. For example, the identity of the same user applying for access at different times may be different, and the recipe for each access may also be different. The attributes of the same or different recipes in different experimental projects may also be different. Therefore, the access control method provided in this application can achieve precise control based on actual conditions and comprehensively ensure the confidentiality and security of each recipe.

[0053] S5: If yes, grant the user access rights to the recipe.

[0054] If the user's access score is greater than the confidentiality score, it is determined that the user has the ability to keep the recipe confidential, so the user is allowed to access the recipe. For example, the user can view the specific content of the recipe.

[0055] S6: If not, provide the user with an access application mechanism, so that the user can initiate a corresponding application instruction based on the access application mechanism, so as to determine the user's access rights in response to the application instruction.

[0056] If the user's access score is not greater than the confidentiality score, the user is considered to have a confidentiality risk and needs to be restricted. However, in order to achieve flexible control and management, this application provides users with an access application mechanism, giving them an opportunity to apply for access, abandoning the traditional "one-size-fits-all" approach. This can not only ensure the security of the recipe, but also improve the user's access experience.

[0057] After receiving the application instruction initiated by the user, partial permission control can be considered for the user based on the specific situation of the user, the specific situation of the recipe, the specific situation of the experimental project, the specific situation of the laboratory where the experimental project is located, and the specific situation of the unit where the laboratory is located, so as to further achieve more flexible and dynamic control management.

[0058] It can be seen from the above technical solution that, on the one hand, this application takes into account various situations such as personnel and experimental projects, all of which are factors that can affect the access control of recipes, so as to implement different permission controls according to different situations. Among them, for the experimental project corresponding to the recipe that the user wants to access, a confidentiality score is calculated taking into account that the experimental project and the recipe itself may have different management requirements; and different user identities may have different access requirements or access rights, so an identity-based score is calculated based on the user identity. At the same time, the user's historical operation status will show the user's own capabilities, etc., so the historical operation data is obtained, and the user access score of the user to the recipe is calculated based on the historical operation data, the recipe and the identity-based score. The user access score can indicate the user's expressiveness based on the recipe, and it is used as As an indicator for judging whether access rights can be opened to the user, the indicator is compared with the confidentiality score to clearly define what kind of access rights are set for the user, thereby fully protecting the recipe from being leaked or exposed. If the user access score is greater than the confidentiality score, it is determined that the user will not threaten the security of the recipe, that is, the access rights are opened to the user; if the user access score is less than the confidentiality score, it is considered that the user may be an unsafe user and access restrictions need to be placed on the user. At the same time, an access application mechanism is provided, which is equivalent to providing users with an opportunity to abandon the traditional "one-size-fits-all" control method and form a flexible and controllable recipe access control method on the basis of ensuring security. The control method of this application that takes into account all-round influencing factors can cover various situations, can achieve fine recipe access control, and ensure the confidentiality and security of the recipe.

[0059] On the other hand, while ensuring the security of recipes, this application can also achieve efficient recipe sharing, allowing others (such as engineers and scientists from different companies or research institutions) to conduct research and development based on each other, helping to avoid duplication of work. For example, for a recipe that has been successfully executed, the user's access rights are opened based on the method provided by this application, so that the user can access and learn the recipe, which can help users improve their work and study efficiency, further promote rapid iteration and innovation of technology, and enhance the technical level of the entire semiconductor industry.

[0060] On the other hand, the permission control method commonly used in the existing technology is usually based on the RBAC (Role-Based Access Control) model, combined with ABE (Attribute-Based Encryption) and MFA (Multi-Factor Authentication). However, this method cannot effectively solve the problems of information sharing and technical confidentiality, and requires high confidentiality quality of the personnel themselves, which will also affect control efficiency. The present application is based on the applicant's pioneering semiconductor laboratory operation control system. On its advanced semiconductor equipment, when using robotic process automation (RPA) to assist in equipment operation, considering the simultaneous existence of on-campus, industry-university projects, basic teaching, and equipment training work, in order to better realize recipe management, the recipe access control method of the present application is proposed, which can balance different user identities and experimental projects, better utilize system resources and ensure confidentiality management in an environment where industry and teaching are parallel. While balancing project management, it promotes recipe sharing to improve the level of recipe use, execution and permission control.

[0061] In the method provided in the embodiment of the present invention, the process of calculating the user's identity basic score is specifically described as follows:

[0062] Obtaining the basic identity of the user, and matching a first identity score corresponding to the basic identity from a pre-established basic score table;

[0063] Obtain the laboratory where the experimental project is located;

[0064] Calculating a second identity score of the user according to the laboratory and the experimental project;

[0065] The first identity score and the second identity score are summed to obtain the identity basic score.

[0066] Specifically, in addition to the basic identity, other identities of the user can also be considered. Therefore, this application sets two dimensions for the identity basic score. One is the most basic identity of the user itself, that is, the basic identity, and the other is the user's other additional identities.

[0067] For the user's basic identity, a basic score table is pre-established, which contains the score set for each basic identity. In an example of a Recipe lab scenario, the basic score table is shown in Table 1 below:

[0068] Table 1

[0069]

[0070] like Figure 2 As shown in the figure, laboratory personnel refer to the personnel responsible for managing the entire laboratory, that is, academic leaders, including principals, engineers, etc.; laboratory personnel category 1 may include professors, lecturers, assistant researchers, postdoctoral fellows, etc. belonging to the laboratory; laboratory personnel category 2 may include doctoral students, master's students, etc. belonging to the laboratory; laboratory personnel category 3 may include learners, such as new members of the laboratory / experimental project / recipe. The basic identities of these new members may change over time or with the accumulation of experience; non-laboratory personnel refer to personnel who do not belong to the laboratory, including personnel who temporarily / short-term enter the laboratory for learning, technical experts, equipment manufacturers, visitors, etc.

[0071] The basic score table can be dynamically adjusted according to the user's office / learning environment to improve adaptability. The first identity score can be set differently according to the detailed identity of each level in the basic identity type. This embodiment does not limit this.

[0072] Since the recipes involved in this application have a certain relationship with their experimental projects and the laboratories in which they are located, people with different roles will also have different permissions. It can be understood that for the recipe, it will correspond to laboratory equipment. For example, different laboratories and different experimental projects will use different quantities and types of laboratory equipment. Therefore, the user's other additional identities can be set from the perspective of laboratory equipment and experimental projects to calculate the user's second identity score.

[0073] The first identity score and the second identity score are summed up to obtain a comprehensive basic identity score.

[0074] Optionally, the process of calculating the second identity score of the user based on the laboratory and the experimental project may include the following steps: Calculating the second identity score using the formula:

[0075] ;

[0076] in, Indicates the user's second identity score, Indicates the first laboratory and / or experimental project to which the user belongs. kind of roles, Indicates the number of roles the user belongs to. Indicates the user's The role value of the role, Indicates the user's The weight of the role.

[0077] In a specific embodiment, a university laboratory is used as the background, such as Figure 3 As shown in the figure, starting from the laboratory equipment and experimental projects, users will have certain roles for laboratory equipment, and users will also have certain roles for experimental projects. For laboratory equipment, these roles include equipment managers, equipment users, and equipment manufacturers.

[0078] Equipment management personnel include internal management personnel and third-party management personnel. Third-party management personnel are also managed by internal management personnel. Internal management personnel include primary and secondary management personnel, while third-party management personnel also include primary and secondary management personnel. For example, in one example, a laboratory has 100 devices, corresponding to 12 internal management personnel. For each device, there is one or more primary and secondary management personnel.

[0079] Equipment users include both on-campus and off-campus personnel; on-campus personnel include leaders and experimenters; off-campus personnel also include leaders and experimenters. For example, in one example, regardless of whether the personnel are on-campus or off-campus, the experimenter can be a student / assistant / assistant, and the leader can be the experimenter's mentor.

[0080] Equipment manufacturers refer to enterprises or companies that produce instruments, equipment and other equipment needed for laboratories.

[0081] For experimental projects, it can include project responsible personnel, project executors, on-site management personnel, and on-site liaison personnel; project responsible personnel include first-level responsible persons and second-level responsible persons; project executors include executive team leaders and ordinary executive personnel.

[0082] The project manager refers to the core person responsible for the planning, execution and delivery of experimental projects. Among them, the first-level manager refers to the highest manager of the project, who bears the ultimate responsibility for the overall success or failure of the project. The second-level manager refers to the person in charge of the specific modules or sub-topics of the experimental project and reports to the first-level manager.

[0083] Project executors refer to the personnel who specifically execute the experimental project; among them, the executive team leader refers to the person in charge of the execution of the experimental project and team coordination, and ordinary executors refer to the basic executors of the experimental project, who are responsible for completing specific experiments, data analysis or other tasks according to the arrangements of the project leader or the executive team leader, and do not bear management responsibilities.

[0084] On-site management personnel refer to the personnel who carry out overall management at the execution site of the experimental project, and on-site docking personnel refer to the personnel who carry out project docking at the execution site of the experimental project.

[0085] Therefore, considering both laboratory equipment and experimental projects, the same user may have multiple different roles. For example, a user's roles include equipment manufacturer and on-site docking personnel. is 2.

[0086] In one embodiment, the calculation formula for the identity basic score is:

[0087] ;

[0088] in, Indicates the basic identity score, Indicates the first identity score.

[0089] The following is a detailed description of the process of calculating the confidentiality score based on the experimental items and the recipe in this application.

[0090] Acquire the project type of the experimental project, and determine the project basic score of the experimental project based on the project type;

[0091] Calculate the sensitivity score and uniqueness score of the recipe;

[0092] The basic score, sensitivity score and uniqueness score of the project are added together to obtain the confidentiality score.

[0093] Specifically, the project type can be deepened from two aspects, including the type determined by the nature of the project itself, and the type determined by the project status. The types determined by the nature of the project itself can include internal R&D, technical exchange, technical cooperation, training and learning, etc., and the type of the project itself can also be determined from the project contract and funds, such as R&D projects supported by corporate funds, scientific research projects supported by external paying users, etc.; the type determined by the project status can be based on the time of project advancement, such as early type, mid-term type, late type, etc. The basic score of the project can be set in advance and calculated based on the nature of the project itself and / or the project status. For example, in an optional embodiment, the calculation formula for the basic score of the project is:

[0094] ;

[0095] in, Indicates the basic score of the project. Indicates the score of the project itself. Indicates the project status score, 、 All are weights.

[0096] The preset specific scores can be shown in Table 2 below:

[0097] Table 2

[0098]

[0099] The above setting method takes into account that the confidentiality levels of internal R&D, technical cooperation, technical exchange, and training and learning categories decrease in sequence, so the scores of the nature of the projects themselves also show a decreasing trend; at the same time, from the perspective of the time of project advancement, the longer the project is advanced, the more recipes or other data are involved, and the degree of confidentiality required becomes deeper and deeper. Therefore, according to the early, mid-term, late, and completed time stages of the project, the project status scores show a trend of increasing in sequence. For types determined by project status, it can also include project termination, and the specific reasons for termination are considered to set the project status score. For example, if there are problems with the experimental project itself, the project status score is 0; in addition, for the types of completed projects, the completion time limit of the experimental project can be obtained, and the project status score can be adjusted according to the time limit. It can be understood that according to different application scenarios and actual needs, the above specific scores can be determined according to the circumstances, and this embodiment does not limit this.

[0100] The sensitivity score refers to the score corresponding to factors that affect the sensitivity of a recipe; a higher sensitivity score indicates greater sensitivity. The uniqueness score refers to the score corresponding to factors that affect the uniqueness of a recipe; a higher uniqueness score indicates greater uniqueness. Therefore, when calculating the recipe confidentiality score, in addition to considering the project's base score, it is also necessary to consider these factors that can affect the privacy of the experimental project and assign corresponding scores based on the strength of privacy. By comprehensively considering various factors, strict yet flexible control and management can be achieved.

[0101] Optionally, the calculation formula for the sensitivity score of the above recipe can be:

[0102] ;

[0103] in, Represents the sensitivity score, Indicates the recipe's A sensitive factor, Indicates the number of sensitive factors, Indicates the recipe's The sensitive sub-value of each sensitive factor, Indicates the The weight of the sensitive factors.

[0104] Specifically, a recipe may have multiple sensitive factors, including the recipe executor, the data involved in the recipe, and the equipment used in recipe execution.

[0105] Among them, different recipe executors have different sensitivities. For example, if the recipe executor is a user with a higher identity base score, the recipe sensitivity will be stronger. This is because the higher the identity base score, the more valuable the recipe developed or executed by it will be. Different recipes involve different parameters and process flows. For example, a recipe is related to the achievements and development of the entire experimental project or laboratory, and contains core process parameters and specific technologies. In this case, the sensitivity of this recipe will be stronger. Different recipes use different numbers of equipment and different levels of importance of equipment. Correspondingly, the sensitivity of the recipe will also be different. For example, if a recipe uses a large number of devices or the devices used are of high importance, the sensitivity of this recipe will also be stronger. Alternatively, if the equipment used in a recipe is more likely to trigger illegal use or has a greater risk of use, the sensitivity of this recipe will also be stronger.

[0106] Therefore, for factors with stronger sensitivity, the corresponding sensitivity sub-value is larger. The sensitivity sub-value can be determined according to the specific application scenario and actual situation, and this embodiment does not impose any limitation on this.

[0107] Optionally, the uniqueness score of the above recipe is calculated as follows:

[0108] ;

[0109] in, represents the uniqueness score, Indicates the recipe's A unique factor, Indicates the number of unique factors, Indicates the recipe's The uniqueness value of each uniqueness factor, Indicates the The weight of the uniqueness factor.

[0110] Specifically, there may be multiple factors that make a recipe unique, including recipe process maturity, technical uniqueness, the impact of indicator comparison, historical disclosure records and scope, etc. The uniqueness of a recipe can be judged through databases or tools such as historical recipes, historical process data, AI, and large models in the semiconductor field.

[0111] Among them, different recipes have different process maturity. If the process maturity of a recipe is already very sufficient, its uniqueness is low; different recipes have different corresponding laboratory characteristics and project characteristics. For example, the recipe is data unique to the laboratory, or data unique to the experimental project, and other laboratories or experimental projects do not exist or involve it, then its uniqueness is high; different recipes have different experimental results after execution. For example, the experimental results obtained after the execution of the recipe are better than the standard implementation results specified in the semiconductor field, then its uniqueness is high; different recipes have different historical disclosure situations. For example, the recipe is completely existing, or there are only slight differences compared with existing recipes, and it has no actual effect or use, then its uniqueness is low. The degree of uniqueness can be determined based on the disclosed records and scope.

[0112] Therefore, for a factor with stronger uniqueness, its corresponding uniqueness sub-value is larger. The uniqueness sub-value can be determined according to the specific application scenario and actual situation, and this embodiment does not impose any limitation on this.

[0113] In one embodiment provided in this application, the calculation formula for the confidentiality score is:

[0114] ;

[0115] in, represents the confidentiality score, Indicates the basic score of the project.

[0116] The following embodiment explains in detail the step of calculating the user access score of the user accessing the recipe by combining the recipe, historical operation data, and identity-based score in this application.

[0117] Calculating the user's historical execution evaluation score and special recipe contribution score based on the historical operation data;

[0118] Obtaining the user's trust index, and calculating the recipe public score based on the trust index;

[0119] The identity basic score, historical execution evaluation score, special recipe contribution score and recipe public score are summed up to obtain the user access score.

[0120] Specifically, the user's historical execution evaluation score can be calculated from the historical operation data. The historical execution evaluation score refers to the evaluation score of the user in the past execution of historical recipes, such as success, failure, independent completion, efficiency, etc. These situations can all demonstrate the user's ability. If the user has a high success rate, good independent completion or high efficiency, the user's historical execution evaluation score will be larger; however, historical operation data can also be viewed from another perspective. For example, if the user always encountered difficulties or ultimately failed when executing various historical recipes in the past, it is considered that the stronger the purpose of learning and accessing recipes, the corresponding possibility of leakage is weaker, and a larger historical execution evaluation score can be set for it.

[0121] The user's special recipe contribution score can also be calculated from historical operation data. The special recipe contribution score refers to whether the user has contributed to one or more special recipes. Special recipes can also be regarded as specific recipes. For example, recipes with special significance to the semiconductor field, recipes that have brought significant progress to the semiconductor field, and recipes that are the most studied or widely used can be considered to have special characteristics. Therefore, if a user has made contributions to these recipes, the user's personal ability is considered to be relatively strong, and thus their special recipe contribution score will be relatively high.

[0122] The recipe publicity score can be calculated based on factors such as whether the recipe itself tends to be public or whether the user is a trusted user of the recipe. For example, if the recipe itself tends to be public, and / or the user is a trusted user of the recipe, the recipe publicity score is higher.

[0123] Finally, the user access score is calculated by summing up the basic identity score, historical execution evaluation score, special recipe contribution score, and recipe public score. By considering various factors and influences in such a multi-dimensional way, a more accurate judgment standard can be obtained, which better protects the security of recipes.

[0124] Optionally, the process of calculating the user's historical execution evaluation score based on the historical operation data may include:

[0125] Extracting the total number of times the user's historical recipes were executed and the execution result of each execution of the historical recipes from the historical operation data;

[0126] Calculate the execution failure probability based on the total number of historical recipe executions and execution results;

[0127] Comparing the total number of executions of the historical recipe with a preset evaluation reference number to determine a first evaluation score;

[0128] Comparing the execution failure probability with a preset evaluation reference probability to determine a second evaluation score;

[0129] respectively setting evaluation coefficients corresponding to the first evaluation score and the second evaluation score;

[0130] The first evaluation score and the second evaluation score are weighted and summed according to the evaluation coefficient to obtain a historical execution evaluation score.

[0131] Specifically, the execution failure probability is considered here, and the higher the execution failure probability, the lower the possibility of leakage. At the same time, we also consider that if the user has a small number of historical executions but a high success rate due to good luck, the execution failure probability will be relatively low. Therefore, judging solely by the execution failure probability is not accurate. Therefore, combining the execution failure probability and the total number of historical recipe executions to calculate the historical execution evaluation score can greatly improve accuracy.

[0132] The evaluation scores corresponding to the preset evaluation reference times and evaluation reference probabilities can be shown in Table 3 below:

[0133] Table 3

[0134]

[0135] The comparison reference of the first evaluation score and the second evaluation score can be determined according to the specific scenario and actual situation, and this embodiment does not impose any limitation on this.

[0136] In one embodiment, the calculation formula for the historical execution evaluation score is:

[0137] ;

[0138] in, Indicates the historical execution evaluation score, Indicates the first evaluation score, Indicates the second rating score, and are the evaluation coefficients of the first evaluation score and the second evaluation score respectively.

[0139] Optionally, the calculation formula for the above special recipe contribution score is:

[0140] ;

[0141] in, Indicates the contribution score of a special recipe. Indicates the total number of times the user has participated in executing a special recipe. Indicates the user's first Contributing factors, represents the number of contributing factors, Indicates the user's first The contribution sub-score of each contributing factor, Indicates the The weight of the contributing factors, 、 Both represent coefficients.

[0142] Specifically, the contributing factors may include whether the user has achieved the preset indicators of the experimental project corresponding to the special recipe efficiently, whether the special recipe has been optimized to achieve better execution results, whether the user has worked hard on the technical documentation corresponding to the special recipe, etc. The historical operation data can be used to determine whether the user has these contributing factors. If so, then the corresponding The calculation of the contribution sub-score is taken into account in the formula. If not, the corresponding number of contribution factors can be regarded as 0.

[0143] Optionally, the steps of calculating the recipe public score based on the trust indicator are as follows:

[0144] Obtaining the user name of the user and the laboratory where the experimental project is located, and using the user name, laboratory, and experimental project as trust indicators;

[0145] Determine whether the user name, experimental project, or laboratory is included in each trusted subject preset in the recipe to determine the number of included subjects;

[0146] Determining a first trust score based on the number of inclusions;

[0147] Determine whether the recipe is marked as publicly available data;

[0148] If so, the first preset value is used as the second trust score;

[0149] The first trust score and the second trust score are added together to obtain the recipe public score.

[0150] Specifically, considering the public disclosure of the recipe itself and its specified list of trusted users, two trust scores can be calculated respectively:

[0151] (1) First trust score: Recipe specifies a list of trusted subjects, which means that each trusted subject in the list is assumed to be a subject with strong confidentiality. Trusted subjects can be divided into three categories, namely user name, laboratory, and experimental project. Therefore, if any of the user's user name / recipe corresponding experimental project / recipe corresponding experimental project's laboratory belongs to a trusted subject in the list, the user is considered to have a certain degree of confidentiality. At the same time, the more corresponding trusted subjects there are, the stronger the confidentiality, and the higher the first trust score.

[0152] (2) Second trust score: If the recipe itself is publicly available data, that is, the recipe can be made public, then its confidentiality is relatively weak. From another perspective, if the person in charge or owner of the recipe does not mind making it public, then everyone can be considered its trusted subject. Therefore, the second trust score is higher and can be directly set to 100 points.

[0153] In the above scheme, the setting of user names can be distinguished according to the above basic identity types. For example, for laboratory personnel / laboratory type 1 personnel / laboratory type 2 personnel / laboratory type 3 personnel, the naming rule can be: IN_professional abbreviation_name abbreviation_work number; for personnel outside the laboratory, the naming rule can be EX_company / laboratory abbreviation_name abbreviation_work number. This embodiment does not impose any restrictions on this.

[0154] In a specific embodiment, the calculation formula of the user access score is:

[0155] ;

[0156] in, Indicates the basic identity score, Indicates the historical execution evaluation score, Indicates the contribution score of a special recipe. Indicates the public score of the recipe.

[0157] The following is a detailed explanation of the process of determining the user's access rights in response to the application instruction in this application.

[0158] In response to the application instruction, dividing a portion of the open range of the recipe;

[0159] If the user initiates a new application instruction again, it is determined whether the user is a paying user;

[0160] If yes, then the access right to the recipe is opened to the user, while the copying, sending and downloading functions of the recipe are restricted;

[0161] If not, the person in charge of the recipe is determined, a request window corresponding to the user is generated, and the request window is sent to the person in charge.

[0162] Specifically, after a user initiates a request, to ensure recipe security, you can consider granting them limited access rights. This requires using the user's identity as a benchmark to protect the recipe from being leaked. You can define the scope of partial access based on the user's basic identity, lab role, project role, and so on. For example, for technical experts outside the lab, the scope of access is limited to basic recipe data, while the core recipe data is not included in the scope of access.

[0163] If the user is not satisfied with the partially open scope or it does not meet their actual needs, they can be given the opportunity to apply for access again and determine whether the user is a paying user. If so, access rights can be opened to them. However, security must also be considered, so while opening access, the copying, sending, and downloading functions can be restricted to avoid complete external disclosure. If the user is not a paying user, the user can be given the opportunity to apply for access from the person in charge of the recipe, who will decide whether to open access. This greatly improves the flexibility of recipe control.

[0164] Furthermore, it is understandable that if a user has a need to access the recipe, then it can be considered that the user has a strong learning tendency. Therefore, during the user's access, learning explanations can be provided to the user. The specific implementation process is as follows:

[0165] During the process of the user accessing the recipe, in response to the user's request for explanation instruction, the user's comprehensive evaluation score is calculated:

[0166] ;

[0167] in, Indicates the comprehensive evaluation score, Indicates the personnel score, represents the historical execution score, represents the information relevance score, 、 and All represent weights;

[0168] Generate a teaching reminder for the user based on the comprehensive evaluation score.

[0169] Specifically, we consider using a scoring method to determine whether a user needs explanation. At the same time, to further ensure the security of the recipe, we also implement certain permission controls on the explanation content. Then, a user can initiate a request for explanation, and then a comprehensive evaluation score is calculated for the user in response to the request. This involves the personnel score, historical execution score, and information relevance score:

[0170] (1) Personnel score. Considering the relevance of the user’s identity to the recipe security, the user’s identity is added to the calculation process.

[0171] For example, based on the first identity score, the second identity score or the identity basic score determined by the above process, one or more scores are selected as the basis of the personnel score. In a specific embodiment, the identity basic score is used as the personnel score. .

[0172] (2) Historical execution score. Considering that the user's historical execution ability is also related to recipe security, the historical execution score is calculated and added to the calculation process of the comprehensive evaluation score.

[0173] For example, based on various evaluation indicators when executing historical recipes in the past, a calculation formula for the historical execution score is formed:

[0174] ;

[0175] in, represents the historical execution score, Indicates the evaluation indicators, Indicates the number of evaluation indicators, Indicates the The execution score of the evaluation indicators, Indicates the The weight of the execution score of each evaluation indicator.

[0176] Evaluation indicators may include the compliance rate of executing historical recipes individually, the compliance rate of participating in executing historical recipes, the total number of historical recipe executions, basic skill assessment scores, etc. Evaluation indicators can be set according to specific application scenarios and actual conditions, and this embodiment does not impose any restrictions on this.

[0177] (3) Information relevance score. Considering that the item currently operated by the user has a corresponding relevance to the recipe, this score is also included in the calculation process, which can also ensure the security of the recipe.

[0178] For example, if a user accesses a recipe to complete or execute other pending experimental projects, the correlation between the pending experimental project and the recipe can be analyzed. The higher the correlation, the stronger the user's confidentiality of the recipe. The user can also analyze whether the pending experimental project is included in the trusted subjects preset by the recipe. If so, the correlation is considered to be strong.

[0179] Optionally, the process of generating a teaching reminder for the user based on the comprehensive evaluation score may specifically include:

[0180] Comparing the comprehensive evaluation score with a preset first standard score and / or a second standard score;

[0181] If the comprehensive evaluation score is not less than the first standard score, generating a complete explanation video based on the recipe for the user to view;

[0182] If the comprehensive evaluation score is not less than the second standard score and less than the first standard score, the historical execution scores are analyzed to obtain an analysis result, and a restricted explanation video is generated based on the analysis result and the recipe for viewing by the user;

[0183] If the comprehensive evaluation score is less than the second standard score, a rejection prompt is generated and sent to the user, and a channel for applying for a lecture is provided for the user.

[0184] Specifically, a first standard score and a second standard score are preset as two evaluation criteria. In one example, the first standard score is 80 points and the second standard score is 60 points, which is not limited in this embodiment.

[0185] If the comprehensive evaluation score is not less than the first standard score, a complete explanation video is generated based on the recipe for the user to learn and watch; if the comprehensive evaluation score is not less than the second standard score and is less than the first standard score, for security reasons, the complete explanation video is not shown to the user, and a corresponding restricted explanation video is generated. For example, certain restrictions are imposed on the complete explanation video, and some core content is hidden. This can meet certain user learning needs while ensuring security. When analyzing historical execution scores, each evaluation indicator can be analyzed separately, or combined with the analysis, and the hidden and open parts can be set based on the recipe; if the comprehensive evaluation score is less than the second standard score, the video explanation is not open to the user, and a corresponding explanation rejection prompt is generated and sent to the user. In an example, the explanation rejection prompt is: "The current request exceeds the authorized explanation range, please return or apply for an explanation." If the user applies for an explanation, the user obtains the corresponding authorization license, achieving flexibility and improving the user's access experience.

[0186] Furthermore, in a specific embodiment, users can access recipes on the corresponding semiconductor operation control system, which will incur certain fees, such as project funds, which will include some equipment usage fees, etc., so it is necessary to calculate the fees and form a payment process. The implementation process can be shown as follows.

[0187] The user's access status is monitored in real time. When the user completes accessing the recipe, a project fund accumulation reminder is generated for the user. The calculation formula for the project fund is:

[0188] ;

[0189] in, Indicates project funding, Indicates the access fee for the user to access the recipe. Indicates the basic laboratory equipment usage fee incurred when the user accesses the recipe. Indicates the first step involved in the process of the user accessing the recipe. Other additional fees, Indicates the Other additional fees, The number of other additional fees incurred by the user;

[0190] The aforementioned other additional fees include excess consumables fees, calibration fees, or deduction fees for the destruction of executed recipes.

[0191] Specifically, in addition to the fees incurred for device use, users will also incur access fees for accessing recipes. There may also be other fees, which are considered surcharges. There are many types of surcharges, such as:

[0192] (1) Excess consumables fees refer to the fact that in a semiconductor manufacturing scenario, when a user uses semiconductor laboratory equipment, a certain amount of consumables will be generated accordingly. However, if the user's equipment is used for too long or the number of experiments is too many, then compared with the pre-set standard consumables range, excess semiconductor materials will be used. Therefore, the consumables fees corresponding to the excess semiconductor materials need to be paid by the user.

[0193] (2) Calibration fees. In the field of semiconductor manufacturing, calibration refers to the process of measuring, adjusting, and verifying the performance parameters of equipment or systems to ensure that their output results meet standards or expected values. This step is crucial to ensuring the accuracy, consistency, and reliability of semiconductor manufacturing, testing, and R&D. This includes process equipment calibration. For example, in wafer manufacturing, etching machines, photolithography machines, thin film deposition equipment, etc. need to be calibrated regularly to ensure the accuracy of process parameters (i.e., recipes); there is also calibration of detection and measurement equipment, calibration of test equipment, etc. Therefore, the calibration process will incur corresponding calibration fees.

[0194] Since the calibration of lithography machines involves many parameters, is complex, time-consuming, and expensive, the following uses the calibration of lithography machines as an example to list some calibration scenarios:

[0195] ① During the calibration process, no samples are required. Only buttons on the lithography machine are clicked or some fixed operating steps are performed. For example, for parameters such as illumination uniformity, the lithography machine itself can illuminate and detect parameters by itself. This type of calibration has the lowest time cost and consumables cost, and the calibration frequency is generally once a week.

[0196] ② During the calibration process, ultra-flat wafers are required. For example, for the platform flatness parameters, 5 to 10 very flat wafers are required for calibration, and the frequency is once a month. The 5 to 10 ultra-flat wafers can be reused, but there is a risk of deformation or contamination if used frequently.

[0197] ③ The calibration process requires direct calibration using a pre-made golden wafer (golden wafer / standard wafer). Calibration of parameters such as directional accuracy and magnification orthogonality error is performed monthly. This golden wafer is equivalent to a pre-made standard sample, having undergone a series of processes including coating, photolithography, development, cleaning, etching, wet processing, and measurement. The best one or two golden wafers are selected from dozens of golden wafers and can be reused over a long period of time.

[0198] ④ During the calibration process, the golden wafer needs to be calibrated through the steps of coating, exposure, and development. For example, overlay accuracy is a parameter with high requirements, and the frequency is once a month. It is also the most time-consuming and has the most processes. After use, the golden wafer needs to be cleaned, and a mask is also needed. However, the mask is reusable and easily contaminated.

[0199] It is understandable that as the lithography machine is used, various calibrated parameters will drift due to changes in time, environment, temperature and humidity. For example, the standard value of its overlay accuracy is 25nm, but after a few hours or after several users have used it, it may become 45nm or 75nm.

[0200] Therefore, considering the above calibration types and influencing factors, it is necessary to calculate the corresponding calibration fee for the user and specific laboratory equipment, including the following situations:

[0201] 1) Considering that different users may have different calibration requirements for the lithography machine, for example, some users have higher requirements for overlay accuracy, so these users are more inclined to recalibrate before accessing the recipe or before executing their own projects. At the same time, this also increases the originally specified calibration frequency.

[0202] In this case, a calibration fee is generally required. However, there is an exception, such as if the lab equipment is currently undergoing routine calibration. In this case, the user is not required to pay the calibration fee. This is because lab equipment undergoes routine calibration, so the calibration fee is only incurred when demanding users request additional calibration, such as during a visit or before executing their own project / recipe. In this case, the user will be required to pay the calibration fee.

[0203] 2) After executing their project / recipe, if the user is dissatisfied with the results or the results do not meet their expectations and suspects a problem with the lab equipment, they may request calibration verification. This will require the lab equipment manager to perform additional calibration, incurring a certain calibration fee. If the lab equipment manager completes the calibration and finds no problem with the equipment, the user will be responsible for the calibration fee. If the lab equipment does have a problem, the user will not be responsible for the calibration fee.

[0204] 3) Considering that after calibration, the parameters of the laboratory equipment are relatively stable and accurate within a specified time, other non-critical users who use the laboratory equipment within the specified time (until the next additional calibration or routine calibration by another user) do not need to recalibrate. Therefore, it is not appropriate to let the user who calibrated (the calibration initiator) bear the entire calibration fee. Appropriate reductions can be made, so that the calibration initiator and other non-critical users within the specified time share the calibration fee. However, in this case, there may be other non-critical users who used the equipment within the specified time, but it is also possible that no other users used the equipment within the specified time. Therefore, to be on the safe side, the calibration initiator should bear the entire fee first, and then make a corresponding refund if a shared fee is subsequently allocated.

[0205] Therefore, during this period, each user will directly generate a fixed calibration fee after completing the use, which is divided according to the time:

[0206] ;

[0207] in, Indicates the calibration fee that the user needs to pay. represents the total calibration fee (calibration cost), Indicates the specified time, which can be set to 72 hours or 48 hours. This embodiment does not impose any limitation on this.

[0208] The calculation method of this calibration fee is to require every user within the specified time to pay a fixed calibration fee. After the specified time is over, the accurate and detailed fees will be calculated, and the excess will be refunded or the shortfall will be supplemented.

[0209] The calculation method is:

[0210] ;

[0211] in, It means that after the specified time is over, accurate and detailed cost calculation will be carried out to calculate the calibration cost that each user needs to share within the specified time. express The time interval (in hours) between the time the current user used the laboratory equipment and the time the additional calibration was completed, express The first users, express The total number of users in Indicates the The time interval between the time a user uses the laboratory equipment and the time when the additional calibration is completed.

[0212] After the calculation is completed, each user and Make a comparison and make any additional payments based on the results.

[0213] (3) Deductions for executed recipe destruction. This is to take into account that when a user accesses a recipe, and / or after accessing a recipe, a new recipe execution operation may be triggered. If this new recipe generates a certain contribution, it can be used to deduct a certain amount from the project funds, providing users with a preferential mechanism for project funds. The calculation process of the recipe destruction deduction fee is as follows:

[0214] Real-time monitoring of whether the user triggers a new recipe execution operation during the process of accessing the recipe and / or after completing the access to the recipe;

[0215] If so, identifying the user's execution record and determining each executed recipe from the execution record;

[0216] For each of the executed recipes, determining associated persons corresponding to the executed recipe; each associated person includes the user;

[0217] Generate an executed recipe destruction voting window and send it to each of the associated personnel, so that each of the associated personnel can vote for the first time in the executed recipe destruction voting window and determine the first voting result;

[0218] A destruction strategy is determined based on the first voting result.

[0219] Specifically, the new recipe is different from the recipe in the above process. After the new recipe is executed, the user's execution record is identified. From the execution record, one or more new recipes can be determined. Each new recipe is treated as an executed recipe. For each executed recipe, a destruction voting process is initiated. This ensures the security of the executed recipe and prevents it from being easily obtained by subsequent users.

[0220] It is understandable that if an executed recipe corresponds to multiple people, then these multiple people will participate in the destruction voting process. Therefore, it is necessary to identify the associated people corresponding to the executed recipe. Associated people can be people who participated in the execution of the executed recipe, or they can be R&D personnel who developed the specific content of the executed recipe, or project personnel who participated in the experimental project corresponding to the executed recipe. At the same time, the user is also an associated person.

[0221] For each executed recipe, a corresponding executed recipe destruction voting window is generated and then sent to each associated person. Associated persons can vote in the executed recipe destruction voting window. The voting options include agreeing to destroy and opposing destruction. Figure 4 As shown, users can also add additional conditions when selecting a recipe, such as providing a contribution rating for the executed recipe request. This allows stakeholders to clearly understand the role and value of the executed recipe and carefully consider their choices. This allows stakeholders to consider the execution of the recipe from multiple perspectives, such as confidentiality, which can protect the executed recipe from being leaked, and educational considerations, which can maximize the value of the executed recipe. The first voting result is the first voting choice and additional comments returned by each stakeholder.

[0222] Optionally, the step of determining a destruction strategy based on the first voting result includes:

[0223] Determining whether the first voting result includes at least one voting option with a note requesting a contribution assessment;

[0224] If yes, then the contribution of the executed recipe is evaluated to obtain a contribution score;

[0225] Generate a new executed recipe destruction voting window based on the contribution score, and send it to each of the associated personnel, so that each of the associated personnel can vote for the second time in the new executed recipe destruction voting window and determine the second voting result;

[0226] The destruction strategy is determined based on the second voting result.

[0227] Specifically, if a related person in the first voting result has attached a note requesting a contribution assessment, the contribution assessment is performed on the executed recipe to obtain a contribution score, and then a new executed recipe destruction voting window is generated based on the contribution score, such as Figure 5 As shown, it will be marked: The contribution score of the executed recipe is: xx points. Therefore, related personnel can refer to this contribution score to re-select whether to destroy it. The second voting result is the second voting choice returned by each related personnel.

[0228] Optionally, the step of determining the destruction strategy based on the second voting result includes:

[0229] Obtain the personnel attributes corresponding to each associated person under the executed recipe;

[0230] The destruction strategy is determined based on the destruction judgment formula. The destruction judgment formula is:

[0231] ;

[0232] in, Indicates the Personnel attributes, Indicates the number of types of personnel attributes corresponding to the executed recipe. Indicates the The attribute weights of various personnel attributes, Indicates the The total number of votes for this type of personnel attribute to be destroyed in the second vote, Indicates the second vote The total number of votes for the personnel attributes, represents the contribution score, represents the contribution coefficient;

[0233] If the destruction judgment formula is established, the destruction strategy is confirmed destruction;

[0234] If the destruction judgment formula is not established, the destruction strategy is to confirm retention.

[0235] Specifically, in order to facilitate statistics and judgment of voting conditions, first obtain the unique personnel attributes corresponding to each associated person under the executed recipe. The personnel attributes can be determined only from the experimental project corresponding to the executed recipe, and the identity of the associated person in the experimental project corresponding to the executed recipe can be determined. The above-mentioned role division for the experimental project can be used. For example, for a certain associated person, the personnel attributes are divided into ordinary executors according to the experimental project.

[0236] Therefore, the types of personnel attributes can be divided into three types, namely project responsible personnel, project executors, project site managers, and project site liaison personnel. Then, the voting results under each type of personnel attribute can be counted to set the above-mentioned destruction judgment formula.

[0237] In summary, if the final destruction policy is confirmed destruction, the executed recipe will be destroyed; if the final destruction policy is confirmed retention, the executed recipe will be retained and included in the calculation process of the executed recipe destruction deduction fee, thereby reducing the user's project funding burden and improving the user's access experience.

[0238] Furthermore, if the destruction strategy is to confirm retention, it can be used for subsequent teaching and research to help cultivate more professional semiconductor talents. Students and researchers can better understand the principles and operations of semiconductor processes by learning actual executed recipes, improve their practical ability and innovative thinking, and reserve talents for the future development of the industry; it can also serve as a medium for cooperation and communication with other laboratories / research institutes, etc., to carry out joint R&D projects based on the executed recipes, jointly overcome technical difficulties, and achieve resource and technology complementarity. This kind of cooperation and communication helps to integrate the advantageous resources within the industry and accelerate the R&D and application of new technologies.

[0239] Furthermore, before the user triggers a new recipe to execute an operation, it is necessary to input parameters on the corresponding laboratory equipment or the semiconductor laboratory operating system. Since the parameters and process correspond to each other, in the current situation, the user (actual operator) needs to remember all the operation steps, including where to click the button, the order of clicking the buttons, other issues that need to be paid attention to, etc. These need to be remembered before the operation can be performed, which is easy to make mistakes or omissions. Therefore, the present application provides a parameter input platform on which the required parameters can be directly entered without remembering all the operation steps or clicking through dozens of complicated steps. RPA directly operates and executes the parameters input by the user according to the set path and order on the back end of the parameter input platform, replacing the user's manual operation. The schematic diagram of the parameter input interface can be shown as follows Figure 6 As shown, efficiency and accuracy are greatly improved, and the probability of errors is reduced. If errors occur, they can also be recorded and exposed through RPA to facilitate subsequent traceability analysis.

[0240] Please refer to Figure 6 , Figure 6 A single-layer exposure experiment parameter configuration interface is displayed, which involves user information, reticle (mask) name, Golden Recipe, and recitle parameter settings. Among them, the user information setting includes User Type (current user type, such as internal user or external user user_external), UserID (login account), and Password (login password); the reticle name device includes Create Reticle (whether to create a new reticle) and Reticle Name (reticle name); the Golden Recipe setting can specify Golden _1st, etc.; the recitle parameter setting includes Reticle Design (whether to modify reticle parameters), parameter 1, parameter 2, parameter 3, parameter 4, parameter 5, parameter 6, and parameter 7. After the setting is completed, it can be saved and run, or canceled.

[0241] In addition, in the field of semiconductor manufacturing, the process of coating, developing and photolithography involves a large number of parameters. Although it seems complicated, some parameters are fixed and only change in special circumstances. Some parameters are set according to the user's samples. This requires users to understand and remember the changes or no changes in these parameters, and then adjust and change them according to their own project conditions. This will be very cumbersome and prone to errors. Therefore, the parameter input platform provided in this application can have additional design options, such as providing certain fixed parameter combinations, recommending parameter combinations to users, etc., so that users have a reference and then fine-tune according to their own situation. It is equivalent to standing on the shoulders of giants, no longer building from scratch, which greatly improves experimental efficiency.

[0242] In a specific scenario, if two different semiconductor devices are linked, such as a coating and developing device and a photolithography machine, the sample is coated in the coating and developing device, and after completion, it is sent to the photolithography machine by a robotic arm for exposure, and then sent back to the coating and developing device. Then, it is necessary to confirm the existence of interconnection signals between the two semiconductor devices. If there is a problem with the interconnection signal, it means that the semiconductor devices are not linked normally and cannot automatically complete the entire manufacturing process. This requires the user to check and confirm the signal status on the homepage of the photolithography machine, such as whether it is sent, received, connected, etc., so the user not only needs to check before manufacturing begins, but also during the manufacturing process, if there is a problem with the sample, such as stagnation at a certain link, it is necessary to check repeatedly between the two semiconductor devices, which is very time-consuming and labor-intensive. Therefore, this application also uses RPA to achieve linkage between semiconductor devices, and RPA regularly checks the presence of signals, whether communication is successful, etc., and can use text input. For example, ask: What state is the check signal in? Then RPA can check and reply by itself; or RPA can regularly patrol to check the signal and immediately alarm if there is a problem; or if there is a problem with the signal, the user cannot continue to use RPA to perform subsequent operations.

[0243] Furthermore, different semiconductor devices involve different information. For example, the coating parameters and development parameters are only on the coating and development equipment, and the lithography parameters are on the lithography machine. Every time a sample is made, the three types of parameters, coating, development, and lithography, are recorded separately. There is no correlation in the entire semiconductor laboratory operating system. Only the user knows the matching and correlation, which is not conducive to traceability or process analysis. The operator may also forget it over time. Therefore, each time the user has to use a notebook or computer to record his own experimental data and match these three types of parameters, which is very inconvenient. Therefore, this application uses RPA to input all parameters on the parameter input platform, which is equivalent to inputting these three types of parameters into a unified recipe each time, which is automatically recorded and matched, which greatly facilitates the user's process records and process exploration.

[0244] During the calibration process, whether it is the calibration of the coating and developing equipment or the calibration of the photolithography machine, they are mutually necessary and inseparable. Because a single device cannot calibrate all of itself, the calibration steps and parameters are set and executed separately, which is not conducive to calibration efficiency. Therefore, this application uses RPA to input on the parameter input platform, which can achieve one-click calibration. That is, after setting the calibration recipe and parameters, click one button to automatically display all samples and automatically record all data, which is very convenient and efficient.

[0245] Furthermore, the user's access status, execution status, and so on can be monitored in real time. If a problem occurs in a user's experimental project, the log can be traced back to view various information, infer where the problem occurred, and then correct the experiment. In the field of semiconductor manufacturing, there are many factors that affect the experimental project process, including implicit factors and explicit factors, which can be divided into the following three categories:

[0246] (1) Factory and environmental conditions: For example, semiconductor equipment requires support from a variety of factory facilities, including hundreds of special gases, nitrogen, compressed air, vacuum, cooling water, etc. If there is a supply outage or unstable pressure, it will have an impact on the machine. The machine itself will alarm for such problems.

[0247] (2) Problems with the sample itself: for example, the sample is not flat and cannot absorb the vacuum, or the back of the sample is dirty and blocks the vacuum hole.

[0248] (3) Process problems: These problems may occur in various links, such as imperfect sample pre-process, missing or contaminated photoresist, resulting in the inability to capture the mark (chip mark), etc.

[0249] Then, these factors will be organized and analyzed to form traceable problem analysis standards, so that when problems occur in experimental projects, we can quickly and accurately infer where the problems occur, improve experimental efficiency, and at the same time improve the accuracy of experimental completion.

[0250] and Figure 1 Corresponding to the above method, the embodiment of the present invention further provides a recipe access control device for Figure 1 In the specific implementation of the method, the access control device for recipes provided in the embodiment of the present invention can be used in a computer terminal or various mobile devices, combined with Figure 7 , introduce the access control device of Recipe, such as Figure 7 As shown, the device may include:

[0251] An access request response module 10, configured to calculate a user's identity basic score in response to a user's request to access a recipe with access restrictions;

[0252] A confidentiality score calculation module 20 is used to determine the experimental project corresponding to the recipe and calculate the confidentiality score based on the experimental project and the recipe;

[0253] A user access score calculation module 30 is configured to obtain the user's historical operation data and calculate the user access score for the user accessing the recipe by combining the recipe, the historical operation data, and the identity basic score;

[0254] A judgment module 40 is used to judge whether the user access score is greater than the confidentiality score;

[0255] The permission opening module 50 is configured to open the access rights of the recipe to the user if yes;

[0256] The access restriction module 60 is configured to provide the user with an access application mechanism if no, so that the user can initiate a corresponding application instruction based on the access application mechanism, and determine the user's access rights in response to the application instruction.

[0257] It can be seen from the above technical solution that, on the one hand, this application takes into account various situations such as personnel and experimental projects, all of which are factors that can affect the access control of recipes, so as to implement different permission controls according to different situations. Among them, for the experimental project corresponding to the recipe that the user wants to access, a confidentiality score is calculated taking into account that the experimental project and the recipe itself may have different management requirements; and different user identities may have different access requirements or access rights, so an identity-based score is calculated based on the user identity. At the same time, the user's historical operation status will show the user's own capabilities, etc., so the historical operation data is obtained, and the user access score of the user to the recipe is calculated based on the historical operation data, the recipe and the identity-based score. The user access score can indicate the user's expressiveness based on the recipe, and it is used as As an indicator for judging whether access rights can be opened to the user, the indicator is compared with the confidentiality score to clearly define what kind of access rights are set for the user, thereby fully protecting the recipe from being leaked or exposed. If the user access score is greater than the confidentiality score, it is determined that the user will not threaten the security of the recipe, that is, the access rights are opened to the user; if the user access score is less than the confidentiality score, it is considered that the user may be an unsafe user and access restrictions need to be placed on the user. At the same time, an access application mechanism is provided, which is equivalent to providing users with an opportunity to abandon the traditional "one-size-fits-all" control method and form a flexible and controllable recipe access control method on the basis of ensuring security. The control method of this application that takes into account all-round influencing factors can cover various situations, can achieve fine recipe access control, and ensure the confidentiality and security of the recipe.

[0258] On the other hand, while ensuring the security of recipes, this application can also achieve efficient recipe sharing, allowing others (such as engineers and scientists from different companies or research institutions) to conduct research and development based on each other, helping to avoid duplication of work. For example, for a recipe that has been successfully executed, the user's access rights are opened based on the method provided by this application, so that the user can access and learn the recipe, which can help users improve their work and study efficiency, further promote rapid iteration and innovation of technology, and enhance the technical level of the entire semiconductor industry.

[0259] On the other hand, the permission control method commonly used in the existing technology is usually based on the RBAC (Role-Based Access Control) model, combined with ABE (Attribute-Based Encryption) and MFA (Multi-Factor Authentication). However, this method cannot effectively solve the problems of information sharing and technical confidentiality, and requires high confidentiality quality of the personnel themselves, which will also affect control efficiency. The present application is based on the applicant's pioneering semiconductor laboratory operation control system. On its advanced semiconductor equipment, when using robotic process automation (RPA) to assist in equipment operation, considering the simultaneous existence of on-campus, industry-university projects, basic teaching, and equipment training work, in order to better realize recipe management, the recipe access control method of the present application is proposed, which can balance different user identities and experimental projects, better utilize system resources and ensure confidentiality management in an environment where industry and teaching are parallel. While balancing project management, it promotes recipe sharing to improve the level of recipe use, execution and permission control.

[0260] Furthermore, the embodiment of the present application provides a recipe access control device. Optionally, Figure 8 The hardware structure diagram of the access control device of Recipe is shown. Figure 8 The hardware structure of the access control device of Recipe may include: at least one processor 01 , at least one communication interface 02 , at least one memory 03 and at least one communication bus 04 .

[0261] In the embodiment of the present application, the number of the processor 01 , the communication interface 02 , the memory 03 , and the communication bus 04 is at least one, and the processor 01 , the communication interface 02 , and the memory 03 communicate with each other through the communication bus 04 .

[0262] The processor 01 may be a central processing unit (CPU), or an application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC), or one or more integrated circuits configured to implement the embodiments of the present invention.

[0263] The memory 03 may include a high-speed RAM memory, and may also include a non-volatile memory (non-volatile memory), for example, at least one disk memory.

[0264] The memory stores a program, and the processor can call the program stored in the memory. The program is used to execute the following recipe access control method, including:

[0265] In response to a user-initiated request to access a recipe with access restrictions, calculating the user's identity basic score;

[0266] Determine the experimental project corresponding to the recipe, and calculate the confidentiality score based on the experimental project and the recipe;

[0267] Obtain the user's historical operation data, and calculate a user access score for the user accessing the recipe by combining the recipe, the historical operation data, and the identity base score;

[0268] Determining whether the user access score is greater than the confidentiality score;

[0269] If yes, then grant the user access to the recipe;

[0270] If not, an access application mechanism is provided to the user, so that the user can initiate a corresponding application instruction based on the access application mechanism, so as to determine the user's access rights in response to the application instruction.

[0271] Optionally, the detailed functions and extended functions of the program may refer to the description of the access control method of Recipe in the method embodiment.

[0272] An embodiment of the present application further provides a storage medium that can store a program suitable for execution by a processor. When the program is executed, the device where the storage medium is located is controlled to execute the following recipe access control method, including:

[0273] In response to a user-initiated request to access a recipe with access restrictions, calculating the user's identity basic score;

[0274] Determine the experimental project corresponding to the recipe, and calculate the confidentiality score based on the experimental project and the recipe;

[0275] Obtain the user's historical operation data, and calculate a user access score for the user accessing the recipe by combining the recipe, the historical operation data, and the identity base score;

[0276] Determining whether the user access score is greater than the confidentiality score;

[0277] If yes, then grant the user access to the recipe;

[0278] If not, an access application mechanism is provided to the user, so that the user can initiate a corresponding application instruction based on the access application mechanism, so as to determine the user's access rights in response to the application instruction.

[0279] Specifically, the storage medium may be a computer-readable storage medium, and the computer-readable storage medium may be an electronic memory such as a flash memory, an EEPROM (Electrically Erasable Programmable Read-Only Memory), an EPROM, a hard disk or a ROM.

[0280] Optionally, the detailed functions and extended functions of the program may refer to the description of the access control method of Recipe in the method embodiment.

[0281] In addition, the functional modules in the various embodiments of the present disclosure can be integrated together to form an independent part, or each module can exist separately, or two or more modules can be integrated to form an independent part. If the function is implemented in the form of a software functional module and sold or used as an independent product, it can be stored in a computer-readable storage medium. Based on this understanding, the technical solution of the present disclosure is essentially or the part that contributes to the prior art or the part of the technical solution can be embodied in the form of a software product, which is stored in a storage medium and includes a number of instructions for a computer device (which can be a personal computer, a live broadcast device, or a network device, etc.) to perform all or part of the steps of the methods of the various embodiments of the present disclosure.

[0282] Finally, it should be noted that, in this document, relational terms such as first and second, etc., are used only to distinguish one entity or operation from another entity or operation, and do not necessarily require or imply any actual relationship or order between these entities or operations. Moreover, the terms "comprises," "comprising," or any other variations thereof are intended to cover non-exclusive inclusion, such that a process, method, article, or device comprising a series of elements includes not only those elements, but also other elements not explicitly listed, or elements inherent to such process, method, article, or device. In the absence of further limitations, an element defined by the phrase "comprising a ..." does not exclude the presence of additional identical elements in the process, method, article, or device comprising the element.

[0283] The various embodiments in this specification are described in a progressive manner, and each embodiment focuses on the differences from other embodiments. The same or similar parts between the various embodiments can be referenced to each other.

[0284] The above description of the disclosed embodiments is intended to enable one skilled in the art to implement or use the present application. Various modifications to these embodiments will be readily apparent to one skilled in the art, and the general principles defined herein may be implemented in other embodiments without departing from the spirit or scope of the present application. Therefore, the present application is not limited to the embodiments shown herein, but is intended to conform to the widest scope consistent with the principles and novel features disclosed herein.

Claims

1. A recipe access control method, characterized in that: include: In response to a user-initiated request to access a recipe with access restrictions, calculating the user's identity basic score; Determine the experimental project corresponding to the recipe, and calculate the confidentiality score based on the experimental project and the recipe; Obtain the user's historical operation data, and calculate a user access score for the user accessing the recipe by combining the recipe, the historical operation data, and the identity base score; Determining whether the user access score is greater than the confidentiality score; If yes, then grant the user access to the recipe; If not, providing the user with an access application mechanism, so that the user can initiate a corresponding application instruction based on the access application mechanism, so as to determine the user's access rights in response to the application instruction; The process of calculating the user's identity basic score includes: obtaining the user's basic identity, matching the first identity score corresponding to the basic identity from a pre-established basic score table; obtaining the laboratory where the experimental project is located; calculating the user's second identity score based on the laboratory and the experimental project; summing the first identity score and the second identity score to obtain the identity basic score; the calculation formula for the second identity score is: , Indicates the user's second identity score, Indicates the first laboratory and / or experimental project to which the user belongs. kind of roles, Indicates the number of roles the user belongs to. Indicates the user's The role value of the role, Indicates the user's The weight of the role.

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that The calculating of the confidentiality score according to the experimental project and the recipe includes: Acquire the project type of the experimental project, and determine the project basic score of the experimental project based on the project type; Calculate the sensitivity score and uniqueness score of the recipe; The basic score, sensitivity score and uniqueness score of the project are added together to obtain the confidentiality score.

3. The method according to claim 2, characterized in that The calculation formula for the sensitivity score of the recipe is: ； in, Represents the sensitivity score, Indicates the recipe's A sensitive factor, Indicates the number of sensitive factors, Indicates the recipe's The sensitive sub-value of each sensitive factor, Indicates the The weight of the sensitive factors.

4. The method according to claim 2, characterized in that The formula for calculating the uniqueness score of the recipe is: ； in, represents the uniqueness score, Indicates the recipe's A unique factor, Indicates the number of unique factors, Indicates the recipe's The uniqueness value of each uniqueness factor, Indicates the The weight of the uniqueness factor.

5. The method according to claim 1, wherein The calculating the user access score for the user accessing the recipe by combining the recipe, historical operation data, and the identity basic score includes: Calculating the user's historical execution evaluation score and special recipe contribution score based on the historical operation data; Obtaining the user's trust index, and calculating the recipe public score based on the trust index; The identity basic score, historical execution evaluation score, special recipe contribution score and recipe public score are summed up to obtain the user access score.

6. The method according to claim 5, characterized in that Calculating the user's historical execution evaluation score based on the historical operation data includes: Extracting the total number of times the user's historical recipes were executed and the execution result of each execution of the historical recipes from the historical operation data; Calculate the execution failure probability based on the total number of historical recipe executions and execution results; Comparing the total number of executions of the historical recipe with a preset evaluation reference number to determine a first evaluation score; Comparing the execution failure probability with a preset evaluation reference probability to determine a second evaluation score; respectively setting evaluation coefficients corresponding to the first evaluation score and the second evaluation score; The first evaluation score and the second evaluation score are weighted and summed according to the evaluation coefficient to obtain a historical execution evaluation score.

7. The method according to claim 5, characterized in that The calculation formula for the special recipe contribution score is: ； in, Indicates the contribution score of a special recipe. Indicates the total number of times the user has participated in executing a special recipe. Indicates the user's first Contributing factors, represents the number of contributing factors, Indicates the The contribution sub-score of each contributing factor, Indicates the The weight of the contributing factors, 、 Both represent coefficients.

8. The method according to claim 5, characterized in that Calculating the recipe public score according to the trust indicator includes: Obtaining the user name of the user and the laboratory where the experimental project is located, and using the user name, laboratory, and experimental project as trust indicators; Determine whether the user name, experimental project, or laboratory is included in each trusted subject preset in the recipe to determine the number of included subjects; Determining a first trust score based on the number of inclusions; Determine whether the recipe is marked as publicly available data; If so, the first preset value is used as the second trust score; The first trust score and the second trust score are added together to obtain the recipe public score.

9. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that Determining the user's access rights in response to the application instruction includes: In response to the application instruction, dividing a portion of the open range of the recipe; If the user initiates a new application instruction again, it is determined whether the user is a paying user; If so, the user is given access to the recipe, while the copy, send, and download functions of the recipe are restricted; If not, the person in charge of the recipe is determined, a request window corresponding to the user is generated, and the request window is sent to the person in charge.

10. The method according to any one of claims 1 to 9, characterized in that Also includes: During the process of the user accessing the recipe, in response to the user's request for explanation instruction, the user's comprehensive evaluation score is calculated: ； in, Indicates the comprehensive evaluation score, Indicates the personnel score, represents the historical execution score, represents the information relevance score, 、 and All represent weights; Generate a teaching reminder for the user based on the comprehensive evaluation score.

11. The method according to claim 10, characterized in that Generating a teaching reminder for the user according to the comprehensive evaluation score includes: Comparing the comprehensive evaluation score with a preset first standard score and / or a second standard score; If the comprehensive evaluation score is not less than the first standard score, generating a complete explanation video based on the recipe for the user to view; If the comprehensive evaluation score is not less than the second standard score and less than the first standard score, the historical execution scores are analyzed to obtain an analysis result, and a restricted explanation video is generated based on the analysis result and the recipe for viewing by the user; If the comprehensive evaluation score is less than the second standard score, a rejection prompt is generated and sent to the user, and a channel for applying for a lecture is provided for the user.

12. The method according to any one of claims 1 to 9, characterized in that Also includes: The user's access status is monitored in real time. When the user completes accessing the recipe, a project fund accumulation reminder is generated for the user. The calculation formula for the project fund is: ； in, Indicates project funding, Indicates the access fee for the user to access the recipe. Indicates the basic laboratory equipment usage fee incurred when the user accesses the recipe. Indicates the first step involved in the process of the user accessing the recipe. Other additional fees, Indicates the Other additional fees, The number of other additional fees incurred by the user; The aforementioned other additional fees include excess consumables fees, calibration fees, or deduction fees for the destruction of executed recipes.

13. The method according to claim 12, characterized in that The calculation process of the executed recipe destruction deduction fee includes: Real-time monitoring of whether the user triggers a new recipe execution operation during the process of accessing the recipe and / or after completing the access to the recipe; If so, identifying the user's execution record and determining each executed recipe from the execution record; For each of the executed recipes, determining associated persons corresponding to the executed recipe; each associated person includes the user; Generate an executed recipe destruction voting window and send it to each of the associated personnel, so that each of the associated personnel can vote for the first time in the executed recipe destruction voting window and determine the first voting result; A destruction strategy is determined based on the first voting result.

14. The method according to claim 13, characterized in that Determining the destruction strategy based on the first voting result includes: Determining whether the first voting result includes at least one voting option with a note requesting a contribution assessment; If yes, then the contribution of the executed recipe is evaluated to obtain a contribution score; Generate a new executed recipe destruction voting window based on the contribution score, and send it to each of the associated personnel, so that each of the associated personnel can vote for the second time in the new executed recipe destruction voting window and determine the second voting result; The destruction strategy is determined based on the second voting result.

15. The method according to claim 14, characterized in that Determining the destruction strategy according to the second voting result includes: Obtain the personnel attributes corresponding to each associated person under the executed recipe; The destruction strategy is determined based on the destruction judgment formula. The destruction judgment formula is: ； in, Indicates the Personnel attributes, Indicates the number of types of personnel attributes corresponding to the executed recipe. Indicates the The attribute weights of various personnel attributes, Indicates the The total number of votes for this type of personnel attribute to be destroyed in the second vote, Indicates the second vote The total number of votes for the personnel attributes, represents the contribution score, represents the contribution coefficient; If the destruction judgment formula is established, the destruction strategy is confirmed destruction; If the destruction judgment formula is not established, the destruction strategy is to confirm retention.

16. A recipe access control device, characterized in that: include: An access request response module, configured to calculate a user's identity basic score in response to a user's request to access a recipe with access restrictions; A confidentiality score calculation module, configured to determine the experimental project corresponding to the recipe and calculate the confidentiality score based on the experimental project and the recipe; A user access score calculation module, configured to obtain the user's historical operation data and calculate the user access score for the user accessing the recipe by combining the recipe, the historical operation data, and the identity basic score; A judgment module, configured to judge whether the user access score is greater than the confidentiality score; a permission opening module, configured to open access rights of the recipe to the user if yes; an access restriction module, configured to, if not, provide the user with an access application mechanism, so that the user can initiate a corresponding application instruction based on the access application mechanism, and determine the user's access rights in response to the application instruction; The access request response module is further configured to obtain the user's basic identity, match a first identity score corresponding to the basic identity from a pre-established basic score table, obtain the laboratory where the experimental project is located, calculate the user's second identity score based on the laboratory and the experimental project, and sum the first identity score and the second identity score to obtain the identity base score. The calculation formula for the second identity score is: , Indicates the user's second identity score, Indicates the first laboratory and / or experimental project to which the user belongs. kind of roles, Indicates the number of roles the user belongs to. Indicates the user's The role value of the role, Indicates the user's The weight of the role.

17. A recipe access control device, characterized in that: including memory and processor; The memory is used to store programs; The processor is configured to execute the program to implement the steps of the recipe access control method according to any one of claims 1 to 15.

18. A storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, characterized in that: When the computer program is executed by a processor, each step of the recipe access control method according to any one of claims 1 to 15 is implemented.

Images