Share Email Print
cover

Proceedings Paper

Automatic Defect Detection: Instrument Comparison And Application
Author(s): R. C. Bracken; S. A. Rizvi; A. E. Reeves
Format Member Price Non-Member Price
PDF $14.40 $18.00

Paper Abstract

Two commercially available automatic mask inspection machines, the KLA and the NJS, were compared for sensitivity to both clear and opaque defects. The sensitivity comparison showed the KLA 100 at 2 units to be similar to the NJS 2MD1 at 60X. The KLA 100 at 1 unit is similar to the NJS 5MD23 at 1.5μm. At each sensitivity range, roughly comparable percentages of false calls were encountered for each machine. The matter of false calls (on false reports of a defect at a location) is not clear-cut. Machine adjustment with regard to light balance, focus and registration of the machine to the mask are extremely significant in this regard. Additionally, as design rules shrink, the presence of features on polygons that are near the size of the defect being sought create severe problems with regard to false calls. The correlation of visual sampling results to automatic inspection results showed two things: (1) individual plate sample results correlate poorly to the plate quality as it is determined by automatic inspection, (2) the average quality of the plates produced in a week shows a correlation of the automatic and the visual results that is much better than that of the individual plates. The mathematics of sampling has been examined. It has been folind that the visual quality vs. automatic inspection results can be constructed from models which predict the experimentally observed pattern.

Paper Details

Date Published: 28 July 1981
PDF: 16 pages
Proc. SPIE 0275, Semiconductor Microlithography VI, (28 July 1981); doi: 10.1117/12.931877
Show Author Affiliations
R. C. Bracken, Mostek Corporation (United States)
S. A. Rizvi, Mostek Corporation (United States)
A. E. Reeves, Mostek Corporation (United States)


Published in SPIE Proceedings Vol. 0275:
Semiconductor Microlithography VI
James W. Dey, Editor(s)

© SPIE. Terms of Use
Back to Top