
Proceedings Paper
Validating optical proximity correction with models, masks, and wafersFormat | Member Price | Non-Member Price |
---|---|---|
$17.00 | $21.00 |
Paper Abstract
Complex Optical Proximity Correction (OPC) must be deployed to meet advanced lithography requirements. The OPC
models are used to convert input design shapes into mask data that often deviate significantly from both the initial design
and the final wafer image in resist. The process includes selective shape biasing, applying pattern-specific corrections,
and, possibly, modeling the effect at multiple exposure conditions. It is important to verify the results of the OPC model
and this is done by invoking OPC verification programs. The verification models identify points of failure to specific
criteria. Failure can be defined as the simulated resist dimension below which a feature will not survive additional
processing. Since these models are built for use in OPC verification, they may only be well-calibrated at feature sizes
near target. This can introduce uncertainties in the failure predictions. This paper will explore options for validating the
OPC verification models and methods. While wafer prints are an obvious source of feedback on the simulated results,
there are also options at mask level. In this paper, we study the effect of programmed defects at wafer level, mask level
and through OPC verification method. For each test case, five points in the process window space are chosen to provide
comparison data between OPC verification measurements, mask-level intensity contour measurements - e.g. Aerial
Image Microscope System (AIMS), and wafer measurement of patterned photoresist. The results permit correlation to
measurable metrics and provide an improved understanding of OPC verification validity.
Paper Details
Date Published: 16 November 2007
PDF: 9 pages
Proc. SPIE 6730, Photomask Technology 2007, 67302Q (16 November 2007); doi: 10.1117/12.746685
Published in SPIE Proceedings Vol. 6730:
Photomask Technology 2007
Robert J. Naber; Hiroichi Kawahira, Editor(s)
PDF: 9 pages
Proc. SPIE 6730, Photomask Technology 2007, 67302Q (16 November 2007); doi: 10.1117/12.746685
Show Author Affiliations
Sajan Marokkey, Infineon Technologies AG (United States)
Edward W. Conrad, IBM System and Technology Group (United States)
Emily E. Gallagher, IBM System and Technology Group (United States)
Edward W. Conrad, IBM System and Technology Group (United States)
Emily E. Gallagher, IBM System and Technology Group (United States)
Hidehiro Ikeda, Toppan Electronics, Inc. (United States)
James A. Bruce, IBM System and Technology Group (United States)
Mark Lawliss, IBM System and Technology Group (United States)
James A. Bruce, IBM System and Technology Group (United States)
Mark Lawliss, IBM System and Technology Group (United States)
Published in SPIE Proceedings Vol. 6730:
Photomask Technology 2007
Robert J. Naber; Hiroichi Kawahira, Editor(s)
© SPIE. Terms of Use
