Literature DB >> 31421625

Conventional vs. model-based measurement of patterned line widths from scanning electron microscopy profiles.

Francesc Salvat-Pujol1, John S Villarrubia2.   

Abstract

Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) is a practical tool to determine the dimensions of nanometer-scale features. Conventional width measurements use arbitrary criteria, e.g., a 50 % threshold crossing, to assign feature boundaries in the measured SEM intensity profile. To estimate the errors associated with such a procedure, we have simulated secondary electron signals from a suite of line shapes consisting of 30 nm tall silicon lines with varying width, sidewall angle, and corner rounding. Four different inelastic scattering models were employed in Monte Carlo simulations of electron transport to compute secondary electron image intensity profiles for each of the shapes. The 4 models were combinations of dielectric function theory with either the single-pole approximation (SPA) or the full Penn algorithm (FPA), and either with or without Auger electron emission. Feature widths were determined either by the conventional threshold method or by the model-based library (MBL) method, which is a fit of the simulated profiles to the reference model (FPA + Auger). On the basis of these comparisons we estimate the error in the measured width of such features by the conventional procedure to be as much as several nanometers. A 1 nm difference in the size of, e.g., a nominally 10 nm transistor gate would substantially alter its electronic properties. Thus, the conventional measurements do not meet the contemporary requirements of the semiconductor industry. In contrast, MBL measurements employing models with varying accuracy differed one from another by less than 1 nm. Thus, a MBL measurement is preferable in the nanoscale domain.
Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Critical dimension (CD); Inelastic scattering; JMONSEL; Low-energy electron transport; Monte Carlo simulation; Nanometer scale dimensional metrology; SEM

Year:  2019        PMID: 31421625      PMCID: PMC6858966          DOI: 10.1016/j.ultramic.2019.112819

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ultramicroscopy        ISSN: 0304-3991            Impact factor:   2.689


  5 in total

1.  Reaction of O2 with subsurface oxygen vacancies on TiO2 anatase (101).

Authors:  Martin Setvín; Ulrich Aschauer; Philipp Scheiber; Ye-Fei Li; Weiyi Hou; Michael Schmid; Annabella Selloni; Ulrike Diebold
Journal:  Science       Date:  2013-08-30       Impact factor: 47.728

2.  Comparisons of Analytical Approaches for Determining Shell Thicknesses of Core-Shell Nanoparticles by X-ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy.

Authors:  C J Powell; W S M Werner; H Kalbe; A G Shard; D G Castner
Journal:  J Phys Chem C Nanomater Interfaces       Date:  2018-01-25       Impact factor: 4.126

3.  Electron mean-free-path calculations using a model dielectric function.

Authors: 
Journal:  Phys Rev B Condens Matter       Date:  1987-01-15

4.  Scanning electron microscope measurement of width and shape of 10nm patterned lines using a JMONSEL-modeled library.

Authors:  J S Villarrubia; A E Vladár; B Ming; R J Kline; D F Sunday; J S Chawla; S List
Journal:  Ultramicroscopy       Date:  2015-02-20       Impact factor: 2.689

5.  Electron beam-based metrology after CMOS.

Authors:  J A Liddle; B D Hoskins; A E Vladár; J S Villarrubia
Journal:  APL Mater       Date:  2018       Impact factor: 5.096

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.