2015
DOI: 10.1117/12.2196800
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Imaging enhancement by reduction of mask topography induced phase aberrations for horizontal 1D spaces under D90Y illumination

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…More precisely, the current Ta-based absorber is at its limit for imaging extendibility. Thinning down below 50nm Ta-based absorber thickness will reduce the amount of absorbed light, reduce the NILS and increase best focus variation through pitch [10,11]. Although the current Ta-based mask has proven benefits from mask technology point, the imaging performance towards next technology nodes can benefit from mask optimization.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…More precisely, the current Ta-based absorber is at its limit for imaging extendibility. Thinning down below 50nm Ta-based absorber thickness will reduce the amount of absorbed light, reduce the NILS and increase best focus variation through pitch [10,11]. Although the current Ta-based mask has proven benefits from mask technology point, the imaging performance towards next technology nodes can benefit from mask optimization.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[1][2][3][4][5] As the 3D structure modulates the EUV reflection phase, focus and pattern shifts are generated. [6][7][8][9] These phase modulations on the mask behave similarly to an aberration. Thus, the development of the EUV microscope that can observe both the intensity and phase images is strongly required to control this aberration.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…4(a), it can be deduced that by further thinning down the current Ta-based material, the M3D effects cannot be fully mitigated, and this is also supported by literature. 16,17 Figure 4(b) shows the two options to manipulate the nearfield to minimize M3D effects. By reducing the absorber thickness and thereby ensuring similar or higher EUV absorption, we will reduce the shadowing effect.…”
Section: Materials Screeningmentioning
confidence: 99%