Share Email Print
cover

Proceedings Paper

Feature biasing versus feature-assisted lithography: a comparison of proximity correction methods for 0.5*(lambda/NA) lithography
Author(s): Rainer Pforr; Kurt G. Ronse; Luc Van den Hove; Anthony Yen; Shane R. Palmer; Gene E. Fuller; Oberdan W. Otto
Format Member Price Non-Member Price
PDF $14.40 $18.00
cover GOOD NEWS! Your organization subscribes to the SPIE Digital Library. You may be able to download this paper for free. Check Access

Paper Abstract

The effectiveness of two methods of optical proximity correction based on feature biasing and subresolution assisting features is compared by simulation and experiments. Parameters examined are overlapping focus- exposure windows for dense lines, semi-isolated and isolated lines, and line-end shortening. Binary and phase-shifting masks containing test and real IC design features are proximity corrected either by commercial software (in the case of feature biasing) or by manual correction using optimized size and placement of assisting features. The results indicate that, while both methods are effective in reducing optical proximity effects, the feature-assisted method is more advantageous in many cases.

Paper Details

Date Published: 26 May 1995
PDF: 21 pages
Proc. SPIE 2440, Optical/Laser Microlithography VIII, (26 May 1995); doi: 10.1117/12.209249
Show Author Affiliations
Rainer Pforr, IMEC (Belgium)
Kurt G. Ronse, IMEC (Belgium)
Luc Van den Hove, IMEC (Belgium)
Anthony Yen, Texas Instruments Inc. (United States)
Shane R. Palmer, Texas Instruments Inc. (United States)
Gene E. Fuller, Texas Instruments Inc. (United States)
Oberdan W. Otto, Trans Vector Technologies, Inc. (United States)


Published in SPIE Proceedings Vol. 2440:
Optical/Laser Microlithography VIII
Timothy A. Brunner, Editor(s)

© SPIE. Terms of Use
Back to Top