2009
DOI: 10.1117/1.3158356
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Impact of mask three-dimensional effects on resist-model calibration

Abstract: We report on a comparison between a fullphysical resist model that was calibrated to experimental line/space ͑L/S͒ critical dimension ͑CD͒ data under the flat-mask ͑also called "thin-mask" or "Kirchhoff"͒ approximation with the model obtained when using a mask 3-D calculation engine ͑i.e., one that takes into account the masktopography effects͒. Both models were tested by evaluating their prediction of the CDs of a large group of 1-D and 2-D structures. We found a clear correlation between the measured-predict… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
10
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
2
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, for dark field structures (inverted 2 bar and 3 bar features) the 2D-mask model exhibits significantly higher RMSD values (> 8 nm) which is in-line with what has been reported also in [6]. In contrast, the dark field structures of the 3D-mask model achieved consistently lower RMSD values around 1 nm to 4 nm depending on the specific dark field pattern type.…”
Section: Predictability Of Dark Field Structuressupporting
confidence: 91%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…However, for dark field structures (inverted 2 bar and 3 bar features) the 2D-mask model exhibits significantly higher RMSD values (> 8 nm) which is in-line with what has been reported also in [6]. In contrast, the dark field structures of the 3D-mask model achieved consistently lower RMSD values around 1 nm to 4 nm depending on the specific dark field pattern type.…”
Section: Predictability Of Dark Field Structuressupporting
confidence: 91%
“…field patterns, the RMSD values for dark field structures are unacceptably large (8 nm -25 nm) for the 2D-mask resist models that have been calibrated on bright field structures only. In reference [6] we show that this alone cannot account for the discrepancy for the dark-field structures, but that the mask-3D effects play an important role here. Nevertheless, the question as to how much the resist model predictions based on the Kirchhoff mask approximation can be improved by including additionally dark field patterns into the calibration data set is an interesting one and needs to be investigated.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 95%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Defect Critical Resist Profile: Processing at physical limits increases the probability of defects [5]. Increased attention is therefore given to both defect detection and defect classification both in optical rule check (ORC) before mask tapeout as well as during ramp up/pre-production phase to investigate and correct a defect (hot-spot).…”
Section: Defect Critical Resist Profile Applications and Focus Vulnermentioning
confidence: 99%