Detailed Information

Cited 0 time in webofscience Cited 0 time in scopus
Metadata Downloads

ArF photoresist parameter optimization for mask error enhancement factor reduction

Authors
Lee, Chang HoHan, SeokPark, Kyung SilYoon, SangwoongKang, Hye YoungOh, Hyun WookLee, Ji EunKim, Young HoKim, Tae SungOh, Hye-Keun
Issue Date
Apr-2005
Publisher
SPIE
Keywords
ArF; Mask Uniformity; MEEF; Optical Parameter; Photoresist; Solid-C; Sub-80 nm device
Citation
Proceedings of SPIE - The International Society for Optical Engineering, v.5853, no. PART II, pp 749 - 756
Pages
8
Indexed
SCIE
SCOPUS
Journal Title
Proceedings of SPIE - The International Society for Optical Engineering
Volume
5853
Number
PART II
Start Page
749
End Page
756
URI
https://scholarworks.bwise.kr/erica/handle/2021.sw.erica/46499
DOI
10.1117/12.617210
ISSN
0277-786X
Abstract
MEEF (Mask Error Enhancement Factor) is the most representative index which CD (Critical Dimension) variation in wafer is amplified by real specific mask CD variation. Already, as it was announced through other papers, MEEF is increased by small k1 or pattern pitch.[1] Illumination system, just like lens aberration or stage defocus affects directly MEEF value, but the leveling or species of substrate and the resist performance are also deeply related to MEEF value. Actually, when the engineers set up the photo process of shrink structure in current device makers, they established minimum shot uniformity target such as MEEF value within wafer uniformity and wafer to wafer uniformity, besides UDOF (Usable Depth of Focus) or EL (Exposure Latitude) margin. We examined MEEF reduction by checking the difference in resist parameters and tried to correlate the results between experiment and simulation. Solid-C was used for simulation tool. The target node was dense L/S (Line/Space) of sub-80 nm and we fix the same illumination conditions. We calculated MEEF values by comparing to original mask uniformity through the optical parameters of each resist type. NILS (Normalized Image Log Slope) shows us some points of the saturation value with pupil mesh points[2] and the aberration was not considered. We used four different type resists and changed resist optical properties (i.e. n, k refractive index; A, B, and C Dill exposure parameters). It was very difficult to measure the kinetic phenomenon, so we choose Fickian model in PEB (Post Exposure Bake) and Weiss model in development.[2] In this paper, we tried to suggest another direction of photoresist improvement by comparing the resist parameters to MEEF value of different pitches.
Files in This Item
Go to Link
Appears in
Collections
COLLEGE OF SCIENCE AND CONVERGENCE TECHNOLOGY > DEPARTMENT OF APPLIED PHYSICS > 1. Journal Articles

qrcode

Items in ScholarWorks are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Altmetrics

Total Views & Downloads

BROWSE