2012
DOI: 10.1117/12.976855
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Impact of EUV photomask line-edge roughness on wafer prints

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 1 publication
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Crystallinity however, is very likely to impair surface roughness and etch bias. Preferential etching along crystal grains can cause increased absorber line edge roughness (LER) and lead to critical dimension (CD) variations, which will be transferred to wafer [27,28]. Additionally, absorber morphology affects mechanical film stress.…”
Section: Film Morphologymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Crystallinity however, is very likely to impair surface roughness and etch bias. Preferential etching along crystal grains can cause increased absorber line edge roughness (LER) and lead to critical dimension (CD) variations, which will be transferred to wafer [27,28]. Additionally, absorber morphology affects mechanical film stress.…”
Section: Film Morphologymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The correlation length slightly increases with the jog step but it is not impacted by the jog amplitude. The cut-off frequency for a quadrupole source is shown in the equations below [2,6]. Mask LER below fmin should be completely transferred to wafer LER, while the mask LER above fmax should be completely filtered out.…”
Section: Wafer Print and Comparison With Mask Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The wafer line edge roughness (LER) and line width roughness (LWR) are attracting increasing concern as CDs decrease [1][2][3][4]. The wafer LER is not only a resist-driven effect.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As extreme ultraviolet (EUV) lithography [1][2][3][4] continues to move towards high-volume manufacturing (HVM), photomask blank defectivity has remained a persistent obstacle. 5 Recent efforts have limited blank defects greater than 54 nm in size, 6 however much experimental work have shown that smaller defects also requires elimination.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%