Overlay tool comparison for sub-130-nm technologies

Russo, Beth; Bishop, Michael; Benoit, David C.; Silver, Richard M.

doi:10.1117/12.473464

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Overlay measurement = Day + Load (Day) + Error (2) For each design combination, variances were estimated using Method-of-Moments where the data was balanced. Unbalanced data required use of Maximum Likelihood methods to estimate variances.…”

Section: Repeatability Reproducibility and Precisionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This paper is limited to 12 pages so an emphasis will be placed on information to best guide the reader on producing their own best benchmark of optical overlay metrology. For a more comprehensive understanding of the methodologies used in this paper refer to Overlay Metrology Equipment Specification for Sub-130 nm Device Technology, Version 1.0 [1] and Overlay Tool Comparison for sub-130nm Technologies [2].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Benchmarking of current generation overlay systems at the 130-nm technology node

Russo¹,

Bishop²

2003

SPIE Proceedings

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Overlay Metrology Advisory Group (OMAG) is a group comprised of technical experts in the field of optical metrology from International SEMATECH Member Companies, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and suppliers of overlay metrology technology. This council created a specification for overlay benchmarking (Overlay Metrology Equipment Specification for Sub-130 nm Device Technology, Version 1.0) which indicates the critical parameters to be addressed in order to comply with the International Technology Roadmap for Semiconductors (ITRS) for the 130-nm technology node. This paper contains the methodologies and data from the benchmarking study using, a comparative range of repeatability, reproducibility, throughput, tool-induced shift (TIS) variability, and TIS through focus measurements. This paper intends to serve as a reference to the current tools' ability to meet the ITRS Roadmap specifications for the 130-nm technology node.

show abstract

Section: Repeatability Reproducibility and Precisionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Benchmarking of current generation overlay systems at the 130-nm technology node

Russo¹,

Bishop²

2003

SPIE Proceedings

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although accuracy is defined in Semiconductor Equipment and Materials International (SEMI) and International SEMATECH (ISMT) nomenclature, it is only recognized as a qualitative term by the U.S. Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement (GUM) and the ISO equivalent [1][2][3]. The GUM is widely followed and recognized by the international measurement and metrology institutions and is, in fact, ordinarily the required methodology to evaluate measurements and their uncertainties.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Calibration strategies for overlay and registration metrology

Silver¹,

Stocker²,

Attota³

et al. 2003

SPIE Proceedings

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Critical dimensions in current and next generation devices are driving the need for tighter overlay registration tolerances and improved overlay metrology tool accuracy and repeatability. Tool matching, performance evaluation, model-based metrology, and a move towards closed-loop image placement control all increase the importance of improved accuracy and calibration methodology. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is introducing a calibrated overlay wafer standard. A number of calibration requirements must be addressed when using this standard, including identification of the best methods for evaluating measurement bias and uncertainties, proper data acquisition and analysis, and the best calibration strategy.

show abstract

“…8 shows the various designs of overlay targets. The most common pattern has been a square inside a square, called "box-in-box" as shown inFigure 1.8 (a)[21]. Other designs of overlay targets such as frame-in-frame and framein-segmented frame as shown inFigure 1.8 (b) [21] and (c), respectively have also come into use.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Electromagnetic ray tracing model for line structures and characterization of advanced alignment marks in photolithography

Tan¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Line structures are an essential part in integrated circuit (IC) fabrication. In photolithography, the electromagnetic scattering of line structures is one of the main factors that determine the advancement of the technology node. From the perspective of modeling, a theoretical model to physically understand the scattering phenomenon is necessary for a solid foundation in efficient Abstract _____________________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________________ iii ERT model, the electromagnetic field that causes a disturbance in the amplitude profile for the total solution was identified and explained in detail. The accuracy of the ERT model was also verified by comparing with the finite difference time domain (FDTD) solution. For a single polysilicon line structure with width of 1.66 λ (λ is the wavelength) on silicon substrate, the developed ERT model was able to demonstrate amplitude correlation coefficient (ACC) of 0.978 and the maximum amplitude difference, Δ|Ez| of as low as-0.067. The subwavelength line width of 0.4 λ was identified as the limit of the ERT model for the single polysilicon line structure. The study of alignment marks focuses on their performance to meet the stringent overlay requirement for advanced technology node process. The simulation results obtained from rigorous coupled wave analysis (RCWA) demonstrated that by incorporating small periodic structure into the conventional alignment mark, the reflected diffraction efficiency was improved at the respective order. The experimental works were performed for 90 nm and 0.11 µm processes. It is demonstrated that overlay as low as 9 nm was achieved when 5th order mark was used for the 90 nm technology node front-end-of-line (FEOL) process. Narrow marks for backend-end-of-line (BEOL) process also showed compatible results with the lowest overlay of 10 nm. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ v of this work. In addition, the experiments would not be possible without the technical support from ASM Lithography, Mr. Lim Ser Yong and Mr. Alex Chew. To all my peers in Chartered Special Project (SP) group, in particular Clark, Timonthy, Caroline, Jia Mei, Suey Li, Gek Soon and Alan, I thoroughly enjoyed the time that we had spent in the SP room. I think the feeling is mutual. Thank you for making my student days in Chartered a memorable one. I would also like to thank Jone for her generous help to proofread all the chapters in this thesis. Last but not least, I would like to thank my parents for their everlasting and unconditional support throughout my graduate studies. Their caring has motivated me to enjoy every second in my daily life, even during the most difficult times of my research work. Table of Contents _____________________________________________________________________________________________

show abstract

Overlay tool comparison for sub-130-nm technologies

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Benchmarking of current generation overlay systems at the 130-nm technology node

Benchmarking of current generation overlay systems at the 130-nm technology node

Calibration strategies for overlay and registration metrology

Electromagnetic ray tracing model for line structures and characterization of advanced alignment marks in photolithography

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About