Determining design coordinates for wafer defects

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 9087367
  • Patent Number
    9,087,367
  • Date Filed
    Friday, August 31, 2012
    11 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, July 21, 2015
    8 years ago
Abstract
Methods and systems for determining design coordinates for defects detected on a wafer are provided. One method includes aligning a design for a wafer to defect review tool images for defects detected in multiple swaths on the wafer by an inspection tool, determining a position of each of the defects in design coordinates based on results of the aligning, separately determining a defect position offset for each of the multiple swaths based on the swath in which each of the defects was detected (swath correction factor), the design coordinates for each of the defects, and a position for each of the defects determined by the inspection tool, and determining design coordinates for the other defects detected in the multiple swaths by the inspection tool by applying the appropriate swath correction factor to those defects.
Description
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

1. Field of the Invention


This invention generally relates to methods and systems for determining design coordinates for defects detected on a wafer.


2. Description of the Related Art


The following description and examples are not admitted to be prior art by virtue of their inclusion in this section.


Inspection processes are used at various steps during a semiconductor manufacturing process to detect defects on wafers to promote higher yield in the manufacturing process and thus higher profits. Inspection has always been an important part of fabricating semiconductor devices. However, as the dimensions of semiconductor devices decrease, inspection becomes even more important to the successful manufacture of acceptable semiconductor devices because smaller defects can cause the devices to fail.


Accurately determining the location of a defect on a wafer is important for a number of reasons. In currently used approaches, defect location accuracy is limited due to inspection tool capability such as stage accuracy and run-time alignment. Relative to locations in design, a wafer coordinate system can be manually aligned to a design coordinate system by compensating for differences in offset, scale, and rotation. However, this approach does not address the errors coming from swath-related location errors. As a result, defect location accuracy (DLA) is limited to several times the inspection pixel being used even on advanced inspection tools.


The manual method described above has many disadvantages. For example, DLA is only improved by manually aligning the wafer coordinate system to the design coordinate system. The correction is typically limited to two sites for the whole wafer and therefore it lacks consideration for swath-based error. DLA error includes both inspection tool error and design-to-wafer alignment error, thereby limiting the DLA error to several multiples of inspection pixel size.


Accordingly, it would be advantageous to develop systems and/or methods that do not have one or more of the disadvantages described above.


SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The following description of various embodiments is not to be construed in any way as limiting the subject matter of the appended claims.


One embodiment relates to a computer-implemented method for determining design coordinates for defects detected on a wafer. The method includes aligning a design for a wafer to images generated by a defect review tool for defects detected in multiple swaths by an inspection tool. The defects include two or more defects detected in each of the multiple swaths. In other words, in this method, two or more defects from each of the multiple swaths are aligned to the design. The method also includes determining a position of each of the defects in design coordinates based on results of the aligning step. In addition, the method includes separately determining a defect position offset for each of the multiple swaths based on the swath in which each of the defects was detected (defects that were detected and aligned from that swath), the design coordinates for each of the defects, and a position for each of the defects as determined by the inspection tool (the original wafer position). This produces a correction factor for each swatch. The method further includes determining design coordinates for other defects detected in the multiple swaths by the inspection tool by applying one of the defect position offsets to positions of the other defects determined by the inspection tool depending on the swath in which the other defects were detected (applying the appropriate swatch correction factor to the defect). The aligning step, determining the position, separately determining the swath-relative defect position offsets, and determining the design coordinates are performed by a computer system.


The method described above may be performed as described further herein. In addition, the method described above may include any other step(s) of any other method(s) described herein. Furthermore, the method described above may be performed by any of the systems described herein.


Another embodiment relates to a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing program instructions executable on a computer system for performing a computer-implemented method for determining design coordinates for defects detected on a wafer. The computer-implemented method includes the steps of the method described above. The computer-readable medium may be further configured as described herein. The steps of the computer-implemented method may be performed as described further herein. In addition, the computer-implemented method for which the program instructions are executable may include any other step(s) of any other method(s) described herein.


An additional embodiment relates to a system configured to determine design coordinates for defects detected on a wafer. The system includes a defect review tool configured to generate images for defects detected in multiple swaths scanned on a wafer by an inspection tool. The imaged defects include two or more defects detected in each of the multiple swaths. The system also includes a computer system configured to perform the steps of the method described above. The system may be further configured as described herein.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

Other objects and advantages of the invention will become apparent upon reading the following detailed description and upon reference to the accompanying drawings in which:



FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram illustrating one embodiment of a method for determining design coordinates for defects detected on a wafer;



FIG. 2 is a block diagram illustrating one embodiment of a non-transitory computer-readable medium that includes program instructions executable on a computer system for performing one or more of the computer-implemented methods described herein; and



FIG. 3 is a schematic diagram illustrating a side view of one embodiment of a system configured to determine design coordinates for defects detected on a wafer.





While the invention is susceptible to various modifications and alternative forms, specific embodiments thereof are shown by way of example in the drawings and will herein be described in detail. It should be understood, however, that the drawings and detailed description thereto are not intended to limit the invention to the particular form disclosed, but on the contrary, the intention is to cover all modifications, equivalents and alternatives falling within the spirit and scope of the present invention as defined by the appended claims.


DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

Turning now to the drawings, it is noted that the figures are not drawn to scale. In particular, the scale of some of the elements of the figures is greatly exaggerated to emphasize characteristics of the elements. It is also noted that the figures are not drawn to the same scale. Elements shown in more than one figure that may be similarly configured have been indicated using the same reference numerals.


One embodiment relates to a computer-implemented method for determining design coordinates for defects detected on a wafer. The embodiments described herein integrate several scattered technologies to improve defect locations after inspection. For example, the method includes aligning a design for a wafer to images generated by a defect review tool for defects detected in multiple swaths scanned on the wafer by an inspection tool. Therefore, the embodiments described herein effectively integrate inspection, defect review, and design technologies.


The method may or may not include running a defect inspection. For example, the method may include inspecting the wafer by scanning multiple swaths on the wafer using the inspection tool. Alternatively, information for the defects detected in the multiple swaths may be acquired for use in the methods described herein from a computer-readable storage medium in which the information has been stored by the inspection tool. In either case, the results of the wafer inspection may include an inspection results file. The inspection results file may be sent to the defect review tool so that the defect review tool may perform one or more steps described herein using information about the defects in the inspection results file. In a similar manner, the method may or may not include generating the images using the defect review tool. For example, the method may include imaging the detects on the wafer using the defect review tool. Alternatively, images generated by the defect review tool for the defects may be acquired for use in the methods described herein from a computer-readable storage medium in which the images have been stored by the defect review tool. The multiple swaths may include all or each of the swaths scanned on the wafer. In this manner, the method may include inspection swath-based alignment to improve defect location accuracy (DLA) for each swath.


In one embodiment, the design is provided in a Graphical Data System (GDS) or Open Artwork System Interchange Standard (OASIS) file. In another embodiment, the method includes acquiring the design from an electronic design automation (EDA) tool. In this manner, the method may include using defect review tool images and design layout for accurate alignment. The design or information for the design used in the embodiments described herein may include any other design data known in the art.


In one embodiment, the defect review tool is a scanning electron microscope (SEM). The SEM may include any suitable commercially available SEM defect review tool known in the art such as the eDR7000, which is commercially available from KLA-Tencor, Milpitas, Calif. In this manner, aligning the design to images generated by the defect review tool may include aligning SEM images to the design. Using SEM image-to-design alignment mitigates any inspection tool noise impact on the results produced by the embodiments described herein.


In another embodiment, the inspection tool is an optical (i.e., light-based) inspection tool. In some embodiments, the inspection tool is an electron beam-based inspection tool. The inspection tool may include any suitable commercially available light- or electron beam-based inspection tool known in the art. In addition, the light-based inspection tool may be a bright field (BF) and/or dark field (DF) inspection tool. In this manner, the inspection tool used in the embodiments described herein is not limited to BF, DF, and/or electron beam inspection. In other words, the embodiments described herein are independent of the inspection tool platform.


The defects include two or more defects detected in each of the multiple swaths. For example, the method may include using two defects per swath to align to design images. In one embodiment, the method includes sampling the defects for which the images are generated by the defect review tool based on the swath in which the defects are detected. For example, sampling the defects may include selecting a relatively small number of defects from each swath in an inspection tot result using swath information that is saved in the inspection results file. In this manner, the method may include inspection swath-based sampling to improve DLA for each swath. The two or more defects also preferably include fewer than all of the defects detected in each of the multiple swaths. The number of defects for which defect review tool images are generated in the embodiments described herein may vary depending on the speed of the defect review tool. For example, with faster defect review tool image generation, the same concept can be extended to include additional defects for even better accuracy and robustness.


in one such embodiment, as shown in FIG. 1, wafer map 10 shows results of an inspection in which multiple swaths 12 were scanned on a wafer by an inspection tool (not shown in FIG. 1), which detected defects 14 on the wafer. The wafer map also shows the locations of dies 16 on the wafer. Only one of the multiple swaths 12 is shown in FIG. 1 for simplicity. In this example, sampling the defects as described above may include sampling two defects per swath from the inspection results file post inspection. More specifically, two defects may be sampled from the swath shown in FIG. 1, then two other defects may be sampled from another of the multiple swaths, and so on. After the defects have been sampled from the swaths on a swath-by-swath basis, images 18 may be generated for the sampled defects using the defect review tool (not shown in FIG. 1) or may be acquired from a computer-readable storage medium in which the images have been stored by the defect review tool. As shown in FIG. 1, images 18 may be relatively high resolution SEM images. The images may be generated by the defect review tool at the locations of the defects as determined by the inspection tool (e.g., at defect locations Xi, Yi). The aligning step may then include aligning images 18 to portions 20 of the design. The portions of the design may be called design “clips” or GDS clips.


In some embodiments, the method includes locating the defects in the images using automatic defect locating (ADL) performed by the defect review tool. For example, once the defects are imaged on the defect review tool, the defects may be located in the images by ADL. ADL may be performed in any suitable manner known in the art.


In one embodiment, the aligning includes image processing. In some embodiments, the image processing may include optimizing SEM images for best edge detection for each layer on the wafer. Such training may be automated. In another embodiment, the aligning step includes overlaying portions of the design with the images. In this manner, the aligning step may include overlaying SEM images with a design layout. For example, as shown in FIG. 1, images 18 may be overlaid with portions 20 of the design, and then the positions of images 18 relative to portions 20 of the design may be altered until features in the images substantially match features in the portions of the design.


The method also includes determining a position of each of the defects in design coordinates based on results of the aligning step. In this manner, the method includes determining defect design coordinates. For example, the defect location determined by ADL in the defect review tool-generated images may be assigned the design coordinates of the corresponding location in the design that overlays the detect after alignment. In this manner, the method may include determining substantially precise locations of the defects in design space with SEM location accuracy.


The method also includes separately determining a defect position offset for each of the multiple swaths (i.e. swatch correction factor) based on the swath in which each of the defects was detected, the design coordinates for each of the defects, and a position for each of the defects determined by the inspection tool. In this manner, the method may include determining a location correction for each of the multiple swaths. For example, the location correction for each of the multiple swaths may be determined based on the alignment to design coordinates.


The method further includes determining design coordinates for other defects detected in the multiple swaths by the inspection tool by applying one of the defect position offsets to positions of the other defects determined by the inspection tool depending on the swath in which the other defects were detected (i.e., applying the appropriate swath correction factor to each of the other defects detected from that swath). In this manner, the method includes applying the offsets to wafer inspection coordinates on a swath-by-swath basis to determine adjusted defect locations (e.g., corrected locations (Xf, Yf)). For example, as described above, two defects may be used to generate a location correction that may then be applied to all other defects in the multiple swaths on a swath-by-swath basis. In addition, the method includes image-based precision DLA. As such, a defect coordinate adjustment may be made from a SEM image to design file alignment. For example, the location corrections for each of the multiple swaths may be applied to all defects in the swaths on a swath-by-swath basis. In this manner, defect locations can be adjusted to improve the accuracy of the defect positions relative to the design.


The corrected defect locations may be sent to an inspection results file. For example, the results may be sent back to the inspection results file for further analysis. The corrected locations (Xf, Yf) can be used to enable new applications as well as to improve context based inspection (CBI) operation. CBI may be performed as described in U.S. Pat. No. 7,676,077 to Kulkarni et al., which is incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein.


Aligning the design, determining the position, separately determining the defect position offset, and determining the design coordinates are performed by a computer system, which may be configured as described further herein.


In one embodiment, the defects and the other defects include all defects detected on the wafer. In other words, the defects used to determine the swath correction factor and the defects to which the appropriate swath correction factor is applied may include all defects on the wafer. In this manner, the design coordinates can be determined for all defects detected on the wafer. For example, as shown in FIG. 1, corrected locations (Xf, Xy) may be determined for all defects 22 in dies 24 on a wafer in addition to all other defects in all other dies on the wafer.


In some embodiments, aligning the design, determining the position, separately determining the defect position offset, and determining the design coordinates produce design coordinates for the other defects that are accurate to within one pixel of the inspection tool. For example, the embodiments described herein provide 1-pixel DIA through SEM image-based analysis and cross-platform integration. In particular, the embodiments provide +/−1 inspection pixel coordinate accuracy for all defects in a wafer inspection result by sampling a relatively small subset of the defects on a SEM review tool. In this manner, the embodiments described herein overcome the multiple pixels accuracy limitation of inspection tools by aligning to design and revising defect position within defect review tool location accuracy (e.g., ADL accuracy) for the sampled defects. Such improvements enable new applications that would further the use of inspection and review tools. In addition, the defect locations from inspection can be improved as described herein without further improvement in the inspection tool performance. No other technology currently available can achieve this coordinate accuracy.


In another embodiment, aligning the design, determining the position, separately determining the defect position offset, and determining the design coordinates produce design coordinates for the other defects with an accuracy approximately equal to the accuracy of the defect review tool for determining the location of the defects within the images. For example, the defect locations from inspection can be altered as described herein to achieve DLA coordinate accuracy within the margin of the defect review tool location error (e.g., within about 6 nm for the eDR7000 system). In particular, the stage jitter for each swath is about one half of a pixel. Advanced Bright-Field tool today may be about 10 nm. Therefore, the embodiments described herein may provide about 6 nm accuracy for sampled defects and about 10 nm for other defects. No other technology currently available can achieve this level of coordinate accuracy.


The embodiments described herein may also include using defect review tool and design based alignment to feedback into an inspection results file for new use case development. For example, in one embodiment, the method includes selecting a bitmap pixel (aka defective pixel) in inspection results produced by the inspection tool for the wafer based on the design coordinates determined for one of the defects or the other defects and altering a process used to inspect the wafer based on the selected (defective) pixel. In this manner, the method may include the use of improved DLA to identify a single pixel that is impacted by a defect for inspection optimization. Such embodiments may be used for inspection sensitivity optimization for certain defects. For example, the method may result in the detection of previously undetected “gap” defects on the wafer. In addition, the method may include adjusting the offset for each defect using the defect review tool images. The method may also include applying corrected defect coordinates to determine the bitmap or defective pixel on which to base the inspection optimization.


In addition, the embodiments may include performing sub-pixel analysis to understand defect-to-defect behavior based on different defect types. The embodiments described herein may also be used for setting up CBI, some examples of which are described in the above-referenced patent to Kulkarni. For example, the methods described herein may include performing a hot scan on the wafer to detect more defects on the wafer. The design coordinates determined for the defects as described herein may then be used to identify hot spots in the design. For example, the design coordinates of defects that are the same as or near critical features in the design may be identified as hot spots in the design. Based on the identified hot spots, a CBI process can be set up for other wafers on which the design will be printed. For example, the CBI process can be set up such that the hot spots are inspected with higher sensitivity than non-hot spots on the wafer.


There are also a number of other potential applications of the approaches described herein possibly with further improvements in inspection. For example, the results of the methods described herein may be used for inline bitmapping (for DRAM, FLASH, and SRAM) to localize the defect to a particular memory cell. The results of the methods may also be used for sampling based on schematic overlay with defect (e.g., if a defect overlaps with a metal interconnect specified in the design, that defect may be sampled). In addition, the results of the methods described herein may be used for binning defects by single via or double via, for N/P transistor separation, for yield prediction for future layers (e.g., particle on contact), and for binning defects by short or broken line or on or in between lines.


The embodiments described herein have a number of advantages over currently used methods for determining defect locations. For example, previously used approaches apply a wafer level offset for design-to-wafer alignment. Using the previous approach, DLA is limited to manually aligning to design and inspection system error. In addition, an alternative approach would be to align relatively high resolution optical patch images of the defects generated by the inspection tool during inspection of the wafer to a design layout for real-time alignment. However, this approach requires reliable patch images and also requires a new image matching algorithm. In contrast, defect review tool images such as SEM images generally have much better pattern fidelity compared to optical images. As such, by aligning the defect review tool images to design using image processing, accurate alignment of defect-to-design can be achieved and therefore overall DLA is improved.


Each of the embodiments of the method described above may include any other step(s) of any other method(s) described herein. Furthermore, each of the embodiments of the method described above may be performed by any of the systems described herein.


All of the methods described herein may include storing results of one or more steps of the method embodiments in a computer-readable storage medium. The results may include any of the results described herein and may be stored in any manner known in the art. The storage medium may include any storage medium described herein or any other suitable storage medium known in the art. After the results have been stored, the results can be accessed in the storage medium and used by any of the method or system embodiments described herein, formatted for display to a user, used by another software module, method, or system, etc.


An additional embodiment relates to a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing program instructions executable on a computer system for performing a computer-implemented method for determining design coordinates for defects detected on a wafer. One such embodiment is shown in FIG. 2. In particular, as shown in FIG. 2, computer-readable medium 50 includes program instructions 52 executable on computer system 54. The computer-implemented method includes the steps of the method described above. The computer-implemented method for which the program instructions are executable may include any other step(s) described herein.


Program instructions 52 implementing methods such as those described herein may be stored on computer-readable medium 50. The computer-readable medium may be a storage medium such as a magnetic or optical disk, or a magnetic tape or any other suitable non-transitory computer-readable medium known in the art.


The program instructions may be implemented in any of various ways, including procedure-based techniques, component-based techniques, and/or object-oriented techniques, among others. For example, the program instructions may be implemented using ActiveX controls, C++ objects, JavaBeans, Microsoft Foundation Classes (“MFC”), or other technologies or methodologies, as desired.


The computer system may take various forms, including a personal computer system, image computer, mainframe computer system, workstation, network appliance, Internet appliance, or other device. In general, the term “computer system” may be broadly defined to encompass any device having one or more processors, which executes instructions from a memory medium. The computer system may also include any suitable processor known in the art such as a parallel processor. In addition, the computer system may include a computer platform with high speed processing and software, either as a standalone or a networked tool.


An additional embodiment relates to a system configured to determine design coordinates for defects detected on a wafer. One embodiment of such a system is shown in FIG. 3. The system includes defect review tool 80 configured to generate images for defects detected in multiple swaths scanned on a wafer by inspection tool 82. The defects include two or more defects detected in each of the multiple swaths, Defect review tool 80 and inspection tool 82 may be further configured as described herein. As shown in FIG. 3, the defect review toot and the inspection tool may be coupled in some manner such that the inspection toot can send information about the defects to the defect review tool. For example, the inspection tool and the defect review tool may be coupled by a transmission medium (not shown), which may include wired and/or wireless portions, across which the inspection tool can send information to the defect review tool. Alternatively, the inspection tool may be effectively coupled to the defect review tool by a computer-readable storage medium (not shown in FIG. 3) such as a fab database in which the inspection tool can store information for the defects and from which the defect review tool can retrieve the defect information.


The system also includes computer system 84 configured for aligning a design for the wafer to the images, which may be performed as described herein. The computer system is also configured for determining a position of each of the defects in design coordinates based on results of the aligning step, which may be performed as described further herein. In addition, the computer system is configured for separately determining a defect position offset for each of the multiple swaths based on the swath in which each of the defects was detected, the design coordinates for each of the defects, and a position for each of the defects determined by the inspection tool, which may be performed as described herein. The computer system is further configured for determining design coordinates for other defects detected in the multiple swaths by the inspection tool by applying one of the defect position offsets to positions of the other defects determined by the inspection tool depending on the swath in which the other defects were detected (applying the appropriate swath correction factor to those defects), which may be performed as described further herein.


The computer system may be coupled to the defect review toot and the inspection tool in a manner such as that described above such that the computer system can send and receive information to and from the defect review tool and the inspection tool. The computer system may also be coupled to other tools in a similar manner such as an EDA tool from which the design may be acquired by the computer system for use in the embodiments described herein. The computer system and the system may be configured to perform any other step(s) described herein and may be further configured as described herein.


Further modifications and alternative embodiments of various aspects of the invention will be apparent to those skilled in the art in view of this description. For example, methods and systems for determining design coordinates for defects detected on a wafer are provided. Accordingly, this description is to be construed as illustrative only and is for the purpose of teaching those skilled in the art the general manner of carrying out the invention. It is to be understood that the forms of the invention shown and described herein are to be taken as the presently preferred embodiments. Elements and materials may be substituted for those illustrated and described herein, parts and processes may be reversed, and certain features of the invention may be utilized independently, all as would be apparent to one skilled in the art after having the benefit of this description of the invention. Changes may be made in the elements described herein without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention as described in the following claims.

Claims
  • 1. A computer-implemented method for determining design coordinates for defects detected on a wafer, comprising: aligning a design for a wafer to images generated by a defect review tool at locations of defects on the wafer, wherein the defects are detected in multiple swaths scanned on the wafer by a wafer inspection tool prior to said aligning and prior to generation of the images by the defect review tool, wherein the locations of the defects at which the defect review tool generates the images are determined by the wafer inspection tool, wherein the defects comprises two or more first defects detected in a first of the multiple swaths and two or more second defects detected in a second of the multiple swaths, and wherein said aligning comprises overlaying portions of the design with the images generated by the defect review tool at the locations of the defects on the wafer;determining a position of each of the defects in design coordinates based on results of said aligning;separately determining at least a first defect position offset for the first of the multiple swaths, based on the design coordinates for each of the first defects and a position for each of the first defects determined by the wafer inspection tool, and a second defect position offset for the second of the multiple swaths, based on the design coordinates for each of the second defects and a position for each of the second defects determined by wafer inspection tool; anddetermining design coordinates for other defects detected in the multiple swaths by the wafer inspection tool by applying the first defect position offset to positions of the other defects determined by the wafer inspection tool that were detected in the first of the multiple swaths and applying the second defect position offset to positions of the other defects determined by the wafer inspection tool that were detected in the second of the multiple swaths, wherein said aligning, determining the position, separately determining at least the first and second defect position offsets, and determining the design coordinates are performed by a computer system.
  • 2. The method of claim 1, wherein the defects and the other defects comprise all defects detected on the wafer.
  • 3. The method of claim 1, wherein said aligning, determining the position, separately determining at least the first and second defect position offsets, and determining the design coordinates produce design coordinates for the other defects that are accurate to within one pixel size of a pixel used by the wafer inspection tool when inspecting the wafer.
  • 4. The method of claim 1, wherein said aligning, determining the position, separately determining at least the first and second defect position offsets, and determining the design coordinates produce design coordinates for the other defects that have an accuracy approximately equal to an accuracy of the defect review tool for determining a location of the defects within the images.
  • 5. The method of claim 1, wherein the design is provided in a Graphical Data System (GDS) or Open Artwork System Interchange Standard (OASIS) file.
  • 6. The method of claim 1, further comprising acquiring the design from an electronic design automation (EDA) tool.
  • 7. The method of claim 1, wherein the defect review tool is a scanning electron microscope.
  • 8. The method of claim 1, wherein the wafer inspection tool is an optical inspection tool.
  • 9. The method of claim 1, wherein the wafer inspection tool is an electron beam-based inspection tool.
  • 10. The method of claim 1, further comprising sampling the defects for which the images are generated by the defect review tool based on the swath in which the defects are detected.
  • 11. The method of claim 1, further comprising locating the defects in the images using automatic defect locating performed by the defect review tool.
  • 12. The method of claim 1, wherein said aligning further comprises image processing.
  • 13. The method of claim 1, further comprising selecting a bitmap pixel in inspection results produced by the wafer inspection tool for the wafer based on the design coordinates determined for one of the defects or the other defects and altering a process used to inspect the wafer based on the selected pixel.
  • 14. A non-transitory computer-readable medium, storing program instructions executable on a computer system for performing a computer-implemented method for determining design coordinates for defects detected on a wafer, wherein the computer-implemented method comprises: aligning a design for a wafer to images generated by a defect review tool at locations of defects on the wafer, wherein the defects are detected in multiple swaths scanned on the wafer by a wafer inspection tool prior to said aligning and prior to generation of the images by the defect review tool, wherein the locations of the defects at which the defect review tool generates the images are determined by the wafer inspection tool, wherein the defects comprise two or more first defects detected in a first of the multiple swaths and two or more second defects detected in a second of the multiple swaths, and wherein said aligning comprises overlaying portions of the design with the images generated by the defect review tool at the locations of the defects on the wafer;determining a position of each of the defects in design coordinates based on results of said aligning;separately determining at least a first defect position offset for the first of the multiple swaths, based on the design coordinates for each of the first defects and a position for each of the first defects determined by the wafer inspection tool, and a second defect position offset for the second of the multiple swaths, based on the design coordinates for each of the second defects and a position for each of the second defects determined by the wafer inspection tool; anddetermining design coordinates for other defects detected in the multiple swaths by the wafer inspection tool by applying the first defect position offsets to positions of the other defects determined by the wafer inspection tool that were detected in the first of the multiple swaths and applying the second defect position offset to positions of the other defects determined by the wafer inspection tool that were detected in the second of the multiple swaths.
  • 15. A system configured to determine design coordinates for defects detected on a wafer, comprising: a defect review tool configured to generate images at locations of defects on the wafer, wherein the defects are detected in multiple swaths scanned on the wafer by a wafer inspection tool, wherein the locations of the defects at which the defect review tool generates the images are determined by the wafer inspection tool, and wherein the defects comprise two or more first defects detected in a first of the multiple swaths and two or more second defects detected in a second of the multiple swaths; anda computer system configured for: aligning a design for the wafer to the images, wherein the defects are detected by the wafer inspection tool prior to said aligning and prior to generation of the images by the defect review tool;determining a position of each of the defects in design coordinates based on results of said aligning;separately determining at least a first defect position offset for the first of the multiple swaths, based on the design coordinates for each of the first defects and a position for each of the first defects determined by the wafer inspection tool, and a second defect position offset for the second of the multiple swaths, based on the design coordinates for each of the second defects and a position for each of the second defects determined by the wafer inspection tool; anddetermining design coordinates for other defects detected in the multiple swaths by the wafer inspection tool by applying the first defect position offsets to positions of the other defects determined by the wafer inspection tool that were detected in the first of multiple swaths and applying the second defect position offset to positions of the other defects determined by the wafer inspection tool that were detected in the second of the multiple swaths.
  • 16. The system of claim 15, wherein the defects and the other defects comprise all defects detected on the wafer.
  • 17. The system of claim 15, wherein said aligning, determining the position, separately determining at least the first and second defect position offsets, and determining the design coordinates produce design coordinates for the other defects that are accurate to within one pixel size of a pixel used by the wafer inspection tool when inspecting the wafer.
  • 18. The system of claim 15, wherein said aligning, determining the position, separately determining at least the first and second defect position offsets, and determining the design coordinates produce design coordinates for the other defects that have an accuracy approximately equal to an accuracy of the defect review tool for determining a location of the defects within the images.
  • 19. The system of claim 15, wherein the design is provided in a Graphical Data System (GDS) or Open Artwork System Interchange Standard (OASIS) file.
  • 20. The system of claim 15, wherein the computer system is further configured for acquiring the design from an electronic design automation (EDA) tool.
  • 21. The system of claim 15, wherein the defect review tool is a scanning electron microscope.
  • 22. The system of claim 15, wherein the wafer inspection tool is an optical inspection tool.
  • 23. The system of claim 15, wherein the wafer inspection tool is an electron beam-based inspection tool.
  • 24. The system of claim 15, wherein the computer system is further configured for sampling the defects for which the images are generated by the defect review tool based on the swath in which the defects are detected.
  • 25. The system of claim 15, wherein the detect review tool is further configured to locate the defects in the images using automatic defect locating.
  • 26. The system of claim 15, wherein said aligning further comprises image processing.
  • 27. The system of claim 15, wherein the computer system is further configured for selecting a bitmap pixel in inspection results produced by the wafer inspection tool for the wafer based on the design coordinates determined for one of the defects or the other defects and altering a process used to inspect the wafer based on the selected pixel.
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application claims priority to U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/534,104 entitled “1-Pixel Defect Location Accuracy (DLA) Through SEM Image Based Analysis and Cross Platform Integration,” filed Sep. 13, 2011, which is incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein.

US Referenced Citations (440)
Number Name Date Kind
3495269 Mutschler et al. Feb 1970 A
3496352 Jugle Feb 1970 A
3909602 Micka Sep 1975 A
4015203 Verkuil Mar 1977 A
4247203 Levy et al. Jan 1981 A
4347001 Levy et al. Aug 1982 A
4378159 Galbraith Mar 1983 A
4448532 Joseph et al. May 1984 A
4475122 Green Oct 1984 A
4532650 Wihl et al. Jul 1985 A
4555798 Broadbent, Jr. et al. Nov 1985 A
4578810 MacFarlane et al. Mar 1986 A
4579455 Levy et al. Apr 1986 A
4595289 Feldman et al. Jun 1986 A
4599558 Castellano, Jr. et al. Jul 1986 A
4633504 Wihl Dec 1986 A
4641353 Kobayashi Feb 1987 A
4641967 Pecen Feb 1987 A
4734721 Boyer et al. Mar 1988 A
4748327 Shinozaki et al. May 1988 A
4758094 Wihl et al. Jul 1988 A
4766324 Saadat et al. Aug 1988 A
4799175 Sano et al. Jan 1989 A
4805123 Specht et al. Feb 1989 A
4812756 Curtis et al. Mar 1989 A
4814829 Kosugi et al. Mar 1989 A
4817123 Sones et al. Mar 1989 A
4845558 Tsai et al. Jul 1989 A
4877326 Chadwick et al. Oct 1989 A
4926489 Danielson et al. May 1990 A
4928313 Leonard et al. May 1990 A
5046109 Fujimori et al. Sep 1991 A
5124927 Hopewell et al. Jun 1992 A
5189481 Jann et al. Feb 1993 A
5355212 Wells et al. Oct 1994 A
5444480 Sumita Aug 1995 A
5453844 George et al. Sep 1995 A
5481624 Kamon Jan 1996 A
5485091 Verkuil Jan 1996 A
5497381 O'Donoghue et al. Mar 1996 A
5528153 Taylor et al. Jun 1996 A
5544256 Brecher et al. Aug 1996 A
5563702 Emery et al. Oct 1996 A
5572598 Wihl et al. Nov 1996 A
5578821 Meisberger et al. Nov 1996 A
5594247 Verkuil et al. Jan 1997 A
5608538 Edgar et al. Mar 1997 A
5619548 Koppel Apr 1997 A
5621519 Frost et al. Apr 1997 A
5644223 Verkuil Jul 1997 A
5650731 Fung et al. Jul 1997 A
5661408 Kamieniecki et al. Aug 1997 A
5689614 Gronet et al. Nov 1997 A
5694478 Braier et al. Dec 1997 A
5696835 Hennessey et al. Dec 1997 A
5703969 Hennessey et al. Dec 1997 A
5737072 Emery et al. Apr 1998 A
5742658 Tiffin et al. Apr 1998 A
5754678 Hawthorne et al. May 1998 A
5767691 Verkuil Jun 1998 A
5767693 Verkuil Jun 1998 A
5771317 Edgar Jun 1998 A
5773989 Edelman et al. Jun 1998 A
5774179 Chevrette et al. Jun 1998 A
5795685 Liebmann et al. Aug 1998 A
5822218 Moosa et al. Oct 1998 A
5831865 Berezin et al. Nov 1998 A
5834941 Verkuil Nov 1998 A
5852232 Samsavar et al. Dec 1998 A
5866806 Samsavar et al. Feb 1999 A
5874733 Silver et al. Feb 1999 A
5884242 Meier et al. Mar 1999 A
5889593 Bareket Mar 1999 A
5917332 Chen et al. Jun 1999 A
5932377 Ferguson et al. Aug 1999 A
5940458 Suk Aug 1999 A
5948972 Samsavar et al. Sep 1999 A
5955661 Samsavar et al. Sep 1999 A
5965306 Mansfield et al. Oct 1999 A
5978501 Badger et al. Nov 1999 A
5980187 Verhovsky Nov 1999 A
5986263 Hiroi et al. Nov 1999 A
5991699 Kulkarni et al. Nov 1999 A
5999003 Steffan et al. Dec 1999 A
6011404 Ma et al. Jan 2000 A
6014461 Hennessey et al. Jan 2000 A
6040911 Nozaki et al. Mar 2000 A
6040912 Zika et al. Mar 2000 A
6052478 Wihl et al. Apr 2000 A
6060709 Verkuil et al. May 2000 A
6072320 Verkuil Jun 2000 A
6076465 Vacca et al. Jun 2000 A
6078738 Garza et al. Jun 2000 A
6091257 Verkuil et al. Jul 2000 A
6091846 Lin et al. Jul 2000 A
6097196 Verkuil et al. Aug 2000 A
6097887 Hardikar et al. Aug 2000 A
6104206 Verkuil Aug 2000 A
6104835 Han Aug 2000 A
6117598 Imai Sep 2000 A
6121783 Horner et al. Sep 2000 A
6122017 Taubman Sep 2000 A
6122046 Almogy Sep 2000 A
6137570 Chuang et al. Oct 2000 A
6141038 Young et al. Oct 2000 A
6146627 Muller et al. Nov 2000 A
6171737 Phan et al. Jan 2001 B1
6175645 Elyasaf et al. Jan 2001 B1
6184929 Noda et al. Feb 2001 B1
6184976 Park et al. Feb 2001 B1
6191605 Miller et al. Feb 2001 B1
6201999 Jevtic Mar 2001 B1
6202029 Verkuil et al. Mar 2001 B1
6205239 Lin et al. Mar 2001 B1
6215551 Nikoonahad et al. Apr 2001 B1
6224638 Jevtic et al. May 2001 B1
6233719 Hardikar et al. May 2001 B1
6246787 Hennessey et al. Jun 2001 B1
6248485 Cuthbert Jun 2001 B1
6248486 Dirksen et al. Jun 2001 B1
6259960 Inokuchi Jul 2001 B1
6266437 Eichel et al. Jul 2001 B1
6267005 Samsavar et al. Jul 2001 B1
6268093 Kenan et al. Jul 2001 B1
6272236 Pierrat et al. Aug 2001 B1
6282309 Emery Aug 2001 B1
6292582 Lin et al. Sep 2001 B1
6295374 Robinson et al. Sep 2001 B1
6324298 O'Dell et al. Nov 2001 B1
6344640 Rhoads Feb 2002 B1
6363166 Wihl et al. Mar 2002 B1
6366687 Aloni et al. Apr 2002 B1
6373975 Bula et al. Apr 2002 B1
6388747 Nara et al. May 2002 B2
6393602 Atchison et al. May 2002 B1
6407373 Dotan Jun 2002 B1
6415421 Anderson et al. Jul 2002 B2
6445199 Satya et al. Sep 2002 B1
6451690 Matsumoto et al. Sep 2002 B1
6459520 Takayama Oct 2002 B1
6466314 Lehman Oct 2002 B1
6466315 Karpol et al. Oct 2002 B1
6470489 Chang et al. Oct 2002 B1
6483938 Hennessey et al. Nov 2002 B1
6513151 Erhardt et al. Jan 2003 B1
6526164 Mansfield et al. Feb 2003 B1
6529621 Glasser et al. Mar 2003 B1
6535628 Smargiassi et al. Mar 2003 B2
6539106 Gallarda et al. Mar 2003 B1
6569691 Jastrzebski et al. May 2003 B1
6581193 McGhee et al. Jun 2003 B1
6593748 Halliyal et al. Jul 2003 B1
6597193 Lagowski et al. Jul 2003 B2
6602728 Liebmann et al. Aug 2003 B1
6608681 Tanaka et al. Aug 2003 B2
6614520 Bareket et al. Sep 2003 B1
6631511 Haffner et al. Oct 2003 B2
6636301 Kvamme et al. Oct 2003 B1
6642066 Halliyal et al. Nov 2003 B1
6658640 Weed Dec 2003 B2
6665065 Phan et al. Dec 2003 B1
6670082 Liu et al. Dec 2003 B2
6680621 Savtchouk Jan 2004 B2
6691052 Maurer Feb 2004 B1
6701004 Shykind et al. Mar 2004 B1
6718526 Eldredge et al. Apr 2004 B1
6721695 Chen et al. Apr 2004 B1
6734696 Horner et al. May 2004 B2
6738954 Allen et al. May 2004 B1
6748103 Glasser et al. Jun 2004 B2
6751519 Satya et al. Jun 2004 B1
6753954 Chen Jun 2004 B2
6757645 Chang et al. Jun 2004 B2
6759655 Nara et al. Jul 2004 B2
6771806 Satya et al. Aug 2004 B1
6775818 Taravade et al. Aug 2004 B2
6777147 Fonseca et al. Aug 2004 B1
6777676 Wang et al. Aug 2004 B1
6778695 Schellenberg et al. Aug 2004 B1
6779159 Yokoyama et al. Aug 2004 B2
6784446 Phan et al. Aug 2004 B1
6788400 Chen Sep 2004 B2
6789032 Barbour et al. Sep 2004 B2
6803554 Ye et al. Oct 2004 B2
6806456 Ye et al. Oct 2004 B1
6807503 Ye et al. Oct 2004 B2
6813572 Satya et al. Nov 2004 B2
6820028 Ye et al. Nov 2004 B2
6828542 Ye et al. Dec 2004 B2
6842225 Irie Jan 2005 B1
6859746 Stirton Feb 2005 B1
6879403 Freifeld Apr 2005 B2
6879924 Ye et al. Apr 2005 B2
6882745 Brankner et al. Apr 2005 B2
6884984 Ye et al. Apr 2005 B2
6886153 Bevis Apr 2005 B1
6892156 Ye et al. May 2005 B2
6902855 Peterson et al. Jun 2005 B2
6906305 Pease et al. Jun 2005 B2
6918101 Satya et al. Jul 2005 B1
6919957 Nikoonahad et al. Jul 2005 B2
6937753 O'Dell et al. Aug 2005 B1
6948141 Satya et al. Sep 2005 B1
6959255 Ye et al. Oct 2005 B2
6966047 Glasser Nov 2005 B1
6969837 Ye et al. Nov 2005 B2
6969864 Ye et al. Nov 2005 B2
6983060 Martinent-Catalot et al. Jan 2006 B1
6988045 Purdy Jan 2006 B2
6990385 Smith et al. Jan 2006 B1
7003755 Pang et al. Feb 2006 B2
7003758 Ye et al. Feb 2006 B2
7012438 Miller et al. Mar 2006 B1
7026615 Takane et al. Apr 2006 B2
7027143 Stokowski et al. Apr 2006 B1
7030966 Hansen Apr 2006 B2
7030997 Neureuther et al. Apr 2006 B2
7053355 Ye et al. May 2006 B2
7061625 Hwang et al. Jun 2006 B1
7071833 Nagano et al. Jul 2006 B2
7103484 Shi et al. Sep 2006 B1
7106895 Goldberg et al. Sep 2006 B1
7107517 Suzuki et al. Sep 2006 B1
7107571 Chang et al. Sep 2006 B2
7111277 Ye et al. Sep 2006 B2
7114143 Hanson et al. Sep 2006 B2
7114145 Ye et al. Sep 2006 B2
7117477 Ye et al. Oct 2006 B2
7117478 Ye et al. Oct 2006 B2
7120285 Spence Oct 2006 B1
7120895 Ye et al. Oct 2006 B2
7123356 Stokowski et al. Oct 2006 B1
7124386 Smith et al. Oct 2006 B2
7133548 Kenan et al. Nov 2006 B2
7135344 Nehmadi et al. Nov 2006 B2
7136143 Smith Nov 2006 B2
7152215 Smith et al. Dec 2006 B2
7162071 Hung et al. Jan 2007 B2
7170593 Honda et al. Jan 2007 B2
7171334 Gassner Jan 2007 B2
7174520 White et al. Feb 2007 B2
7194709 Brankner Mar 2007 B2
7207017 Tabery et al. Apr 2007 B1
7231628 Pack et al. Jun 2007 B2
7236847 Marella Jun 2007 B2
7271891 Xiong et al. Sep 2007 B1
7379175 Stokowski et al. May 2008 B1
7383156 Matsusita et al. Jun 2008 B2
7386839 Golender et al. Jun 2008 B1
7388979 Sakai et al. Jun 2008 B2
7418124 Peterson et al. Aug 2008 B2
7424145 Horie et al. Sep 2008 B2
7440093 Xiong et al. Oct 2008 B1
7570796 Zafar et al. Aug 2009 B2
7676077 Kulkarni et al. Mar 2010 B2
7683319 Makino et al. Mar 2010 B2
7738093 Alles et al. Jun 2010 B2
7739064 Ryker et al. Jun 2010 B1
7752584 Yang Jul 2010 B2
7760929 Orbon et al. Jul 2010 B2
7877722 Duffy et al. Jan 2011 B2
7890917 Young et al. Feb 2011 B1
7904845 Fouquet et al. Mar 2011 B2
7968859 Young et al. Jun 2011 B2
8073240 Fischer et al. Dec 2011 B2
8112241 Xiong Feb 2012 B2
8126255 Bhaskar et al. Feb 2012 B2
20010017694 Oomori et al. Aug 2001 A1
20010019625 Kenan et al. Sep 2001 A1
20010022858 Komiya et al. Sep 2001 A1
20010043735 Smargiassi et al. Nov 2001 A1
20020010560 Balachandran Jan 2002 A1
20020019729 Chang et al. Feb 2002 A1
20020026626 Randall et al. Feb 2002 A1
20020033449 Nakasuji et al. Mar 2002 A1
20020035461 Chang et al. Mar 2002 A1
20020035641 Kurose et al. Mar 2002 A1
20020035717 Matsuoka Mar 2002 A1
20020054291 Tsai et al. May 2002 A1
20020088951 Chen Jul 2002 A1
20020090746 Xu et al. Jul 2002 A1
20020134936 Matsui et al. Sep 2002 A1
20020144230 Rittman Oct 2002 A1
20020145734 Watkins et al. Oct 2002 A1
20020164065 Cai et al. Nov 2002 A1
20020168099 Noy Nov 2002 A1
20020176096 Sentoku et al. Nov 2002 A1
20020181756 Shibuya et al. Dec 2002 A1
20020186878 Hoon et al. Dec 2002 A1
20020192578 Tanaka et al. Dec 2002 A1
20030004699 Choi et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030014146 Fujii et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030017664 Pnueli et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030022401 Hamamatsu et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030033046 Yoshitake et al. Feb 2003 A1
20030048458 Mieher et al. Mar 2003 A1
20030048939 Lehman Mar 2003 A1
20030057971 Nishiyama et al. Mar 2003 A1
20030076989 Maayah et al. Apr 2003 A1
20030086081 Lehman May 2003 A1
20030094572 Matsui et al. May 2003 A1
20030098805 Bizjak et al. May 2003 A1
20030128870 Pease et al. Jul 2003 A1
20030138138 Vacca et al. Jul 2003 A1
20030138978 Tanaka et al. Jul 2003 A1
20030169916 Hayashi et al. Sep 2003 A1
20030173516 Takane et al. Sep 2003 A1
20030192015 Liu Oct 2003 A1
20030207475 Nakasuji et al. Nov 2003 A1
20030223639 Shlain et al. Dec 2003 A1
20030226951 Ye et al. Dec 2003 A1
20030227620 Yokoyama et al. Dec 2003 A1
20030228714 Smith et al. Dec 2003 A1
20030229410 Smith et al. Dec 2003 A1
20030229412 White et al. Dec 2003 A1
20030229868 White et al. Dec 2003 A1
20030229875 Smith et al. Dec 2003 A1
20030229880 White et al. Dec 2003 A1
20030229881 White et al. Dec 2003 A1
20030237064 White et al. Dec 2003 A1
20040030430 Matsuoka Feb 2004 A1
20040032908 Hagai et al. Feb 2004 A1
20040049722 Matsushita Mar 2004 A1
20040052411 Qian et al. Mar 2004 A1
20040057611 Lee et al. Mar 2004 A1
20040066506 Elichai et al. Apr 2004 A1
20040091142 Peterson et al. May 2004 A1
20040094762 Hess et al. May 2004 A1
20040098216 Ye et al. May 2004 A1
20040102934 Chang May 2004 A1
20040107412 Pack et al. Jun 2004 A1
20040119036 Ye et al. Jun 2004 A1
20040120569 Hung et al. Jun 2004 A1
20040133369 Pack et al. Jul 2004 A1
20040147121 Nakagaki et al. Jul 2004 A1
20040174506 Smith Sep 2004 A1
20040179738 Dai et al. Sep 2004 A1
20040199885 Lu et al. Oct 2004 A1
20040223639 Sato et al. Nov 2004 A1
20040228515 Okabe et al. Nov 2004 A1
20040234120 Honda et al. Nov 2004 A1
20040243320 Chang et al. Dec 2004 A1
20040246476 Bevis et al. Dec 2004 A1
20040254752 Wisniewski et al. Dec 2004 A1
20050004774 Volk et al. Jan 2005 A1
20050008218 O'Dell et al. Jan 2005 A1
20050010890 Nehmadi et al. Jan 2005 A1
20050013474 Sim Jan 2005 A1
20050062962 Fairley et al. Mar 2005 A1
20050069217 Mukherjee Mar 2005 A1
20050117796 Matsui et al. Jun 2005 A1
20050132306 Smith et al. Jun 2005 A1
20050141764 Tohyama et al. Jun 2005 A1
20050166174 Ye et al. Jul 2005 A1
20050184252 Ogawa et al. Aug 2005 A1
20050190957 Cai et al. Sep 2005 A1
20050198602 Brankner et al. Sep 2005 A1
20060000964 Ye et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060036979 Zurbrick et al. Feb 2006 A1
20060038986 Honda et al. Feb 2006 A1
20060048089 Schwarzband Mar 2006 A1
20060051682 Hess et al. Mar 2006 A1
20060062445 Verma et al. Mar 2006 A1
20060066339 Rajski et al. Mar 2006 A1
20060082763 Teh et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060159333 Ishikawa Jul 2006 A1
20060161452 Hess Jul 2006 A1
20060193506 Dorphan et al. Aug 2006 A1
20060193507 Sali et al. Aug 2006 A1
20060236294 Saidin et al. Oct 2006 A1
20060236297 Melvin, III et al. Oct 2006 A1
20060239536 Shibuya et al. Oct 2006 A1
20060265145 Huet et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060266243 Percin et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060269120 Nehmadi et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060273242 Hunsche et al. Dec 2006 A1
20060273266 Preil et al. Dec 2006 A1
20060277520 Gennari Dec 2006 A1
20060291714 Wu et al. Dec 2006 A1
20060292463 Best et al. Dec 2006 A1
20070002322 Borodovsky et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070011628 Ouali et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070013901 Kim et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070019171 Smith Jan 2007 A1
20070019856 Furman et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070031745 Ye et al. Feb 2007 A1
20070032896 Ye et al. Feb 2007 A1
20070035322 Kang et al. Feb 2007 A1
20070035712 Gassner et al. Feb 2007 A1
20070035728 Kekare et al. Feb 2007 A1
20070052963 Orbon et al. Mar 2007 A1
20070064995 Oaki et al. Mar 2007 A1
20070133860 Lin et al. Jun 2007 A1
20070156379 Kulkarni et al. Jul 2007 A1
20070230770 Kulkarni et al. Oct 2007 A1
20070248257 Bruce et al. Oct 2007 A1
20070280527 Almogy et al. Dec 2007 A1
20070288219 Zafar et al. Dec 2007 A1
20080013083 Kirk et al. Jan 2008 A1
20080015802 Urano et al. Jan 2008 A1
20080016481 Matsuoka et al. Jan 2008 A1
20080049994 Rognin et al. Feb 2008 A1
20080058977 Honda Mar 2008 A1
20080072207 Verma et al. Mar 2008 A1
20080081385 Marella et al. Apr 2008 A1
20080163140 Fouquet et al. Jul 2008 A1
20080167829 Park et al. Jul 2008 A1
20080250384 Duffy et al. Oct 2008 A1
20080295047 Nehmadi et al. Nov 2008 A1
20080295048 Nehmadi et al. Nov 2008 A1
20080304056 Alles et al. Dec 2008 A1
20090024967 Su et al. Jan 2009 A1
20090037134 Kulkarni et al. Feb 2009 A1
20090041332 Bhaskar et al. Feb 2009 A1
20090043527 Park et al. Feb 2009 A1
20090055783 Florence et al. Feb 2009 A1
20090067703 Lin et al. Mar 2009 A1
20090080759 Bhaskar et al. Mar 2009 A1
20090210183 Rajski et al. Aug 2009 A1
20090257645 Chen et al. Oct 2009 A1
20090284733 Wallingford et al. Nov 2009 A1
20090290782 Regensburger Nov 2009 A1
20090323052 Silberstein et al. Dec 2009 A1
20100119144 Kulkarni et al. May 2010 A1
20100142800 Pak et al. Jun 2010 A1
20100146338 Schalick et al. Jun 2010 A1
20100150429 Jau et al. Jun 2010 A1
20100226562 Wu et al. Sep 2010 A1
20110013825 Shibuya et al. Jan 2011 A1
20110052040 Kuan Mar 2011 A1
20110129142 Takahashi et al. Jun 2011 A1
20110184662 Badger et al. Jul 2011 A1
20110251713 Teshima et al. Oct 2011 A1
20110276935 Fouquet et al. Nov 2011 A1
20110311126 Sakai et al. Dec 2011 A1
20120308112 Hu et al. Dec 2012 A1
20120319246 Tan et al. Dec 2012 A1
20130009989 Chen et al. Jan 2013 A1
20130027196 Yankun et al. Jan 2013 A1
20130336575 Dalla-Torre et al. Dec 2013 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (53)
Number Date Country
1339140 Mar 2002 CN
1398348 Feb 2003 CN
1646896 Jul 2005 CN
0032197 Jul 1981 EP
0370322 May 1990 EP
1061358 Dec 2000 EP
1061571 Dec 2000 EP
1065567 Jan 2001 EP
1066925 Jan 2001 EP
1069609 Jan 2001 EP
1093017 Apr 2001 EP
1329771 Jul 2003 EP
1480034 Nov 2004 EP
1696270 Aug 2006 EP
7-159337 Jun 1995 JP
2002071575 Mar 2002 JP
2002-365235 Dec 2002 JP
2003-215060 Jul 2003 JP
2004-045066 Feb 2004 JP
2005-283326 Oct 2005 JP
2007-234798 Sep 2007 JP
2009-122046 Jun 2009 JP
2010-256242 Nov 2010 JP
2012-225768 Nov 2012 JP
10-2001-0007394 Jan 2001 KR
10-2001-0037026 May 2001 KR
10-2001-0101697 Nov 2001 KR
1020030055848 Jul 2003 KR
10-2005-0092053 Sep 2005 KR
10-2006-0075691 Jul 2006 KR
10-2006-0124514 Dec 2006 KR
10-0696276 Mar 2007 KR
10-2010-0061018 Jun 2010 KR
10-2012-0068128 Jun 2012 KR
9857358 Dec 1998 WO
9922310 May 1999 WO
9925004 May 1999 WO
9959200 May 1999 WO
9938002 Jul 1999 WO
9941434 Aug 1999 WO
0003234 Jan 2000 WO
0036525 Jun 2000 WO
0055799 Sep 2000 WO
0068884 Nov 2000 WO
0070332 Nov 2000 WO
0109566 Feb 2001 WO
0140145 Jun 2001 WO
03104921 Dec 2003 WO
2004027684 Apr 2004 WO
2006012388 Feb 2006 WO
2006063268 Jun 2006 WO
2009152046 Sep 2009 WO
2010093733 Aug 2010 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (71)
Entry
Budd et al., “A New Mask Evaluation Tool, the Microlithography Simulation Microscope Aerial Image Measurement System,” SPIE vol. 2197, 1994, pp. 530-540.
Cai et al., “Enhanced Dispositioning of Reticle Defects Using the Virtual Stepper With Automated Defect Severity Scoring,” Proceedings of the SPIE, vol. 4409, Jan. 2001, pp. 467-478.
Comizzoli, “Uses of Corona Discharges in the Semiconductor Industry,” J. Electrochem. Soc., 1987, pp. 424-429.
Contactless Electrical Equivalent Oxide Thickness Measurement, IBM Technical Disclosure Bulletin, vol. 29, No. 10, 1987, pp. 4622-4623.
Contactless Photovoltage vs. Bias Method for Determining Flat-Band Voltage, IBM Technical Disclosure Bulletin, vol. 32, vol. 9A, 1990, pp. 14-17.
Cosway et al., “Manufacturing Implementation of Corona Oxide Silicon (COS) Systems for Diffusion Furnace Contamination Monitoring,” 1997 IEEE/SEMI Advanced Semiconductor Manufacturing Conference, pp. 98-102.
Diebold et al., “Characterization and production metrology of thin transistor gate oxide films,” Materials Science in Semiconductor Processing 2, 1999, pp. 103-147.
Dirksen et al., “Impact of high order aberrations on the performance of the aberration monitor,” Proc. of SPIE vol. 4000, Mar. 2000, pp. 9-17.
Dirksen et al., “Novel aberration monitor for optical lithography,” Proc. of SPIE vol. 3679, Jul. 1999, pp. 77-86.
Garcia et al., “New Die to Database Inspection Algorithm for Inspection of 90-nm Node Reticles,” Proceedings of SPIE, vol. 5130, 2003, pp. 364-374.
Granik et al., “Sub-resolution process windows and yield estimation technique based on detailed full-chip CD simulation,” Mentor Graphics, Sep. 2000, 5 pages.
Hess et al., “A Novel Approach: High Resolution Inspection with Wafer Plane Defect Detection,” Proceedings of SPIE—International Society for Optical Engineering; Photomask and Next-Generation Lithography Mask Technology 2008, vol. 7028, 2008.
Huang et al., “Process Window Impact of Progressive Mask Defects, Its Inspection and Disposition Techniques (go/no-go criteria) via a Lithographic Detector,” Proceedings of SPIE—The International Society for Optical Engineering; 25th Annual Bacus Symposium on Photomask Technology 2005, vol. 5992, No. 1, 2005, p. 6.
Hung et al., Metrology Study of Sub 20 Angstrom oxynitride by Corona-Oxide-Silicon (COS) and Conventional C-V Approaches, 2002, Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc., vol. 716, pp. 119-124.
International Search Report for PCT/US2003/021907 mailed Jun. 7, 2004.
International Search Report for PCT/US2004/040733 mailed Dec. 23, 2005.
International Search Report for PCT/US2006/061112 mailed Sep. 25, 2008.
International Search Report for PCT/US2006/061113 mailed Jul. 16, 2008.
International Search Report for PCT/US2008/050397 mailed Jul. 11, 2008.
International Search Report for PCT/US2008/062873 mailed Aug. 12, 2008.
International Search Report for PCT/US2008/062875 mailed Sep. 10, 2008.
International Search Report for PCT/US2008/063008 mailed Aug. 18, 2008.
International Search Report for PCT/US2008/066328 mailed Oct. 1, 2009.
International Search Report for PCT/US2008/070647 mailed Dec. 16, 2008.
International Search Report for PCT/US2008/072636 mailed Jan. 29, 2009.
International Search Report for PCT/US2008/073706 mailed Jan. 29, 2009.
Karklin et al., “Automatic Defect Severity Scoring for 193 nm Reticle Defect Inspection,” Proceedings of SPIE—The International Society for Optical Engineering, 2001, vol. 4346, No. 2, pp. 898-906.
Lo et al., “Identifying Process Window Marginalities of Reticle Designs for 0.15/0.13 μm Technologies,” Proceedings of SPIE vol. 5130, 2003, pp. 829-837.
Lorusso et al. “Advanced DFM Applns. Using design-based metrology on CDSEM,” SPIE vol. 6152, Mar. 27, 2006.
Lu et al., “Application of Simulation Based Defect Printability Analysis for Mask Qualification Control,” Proceedings of SPIE, vol. 5038, 2003, pp. 33-40.
Mack, “Lithographic Simulation: A Review,” Proceedings of SPIE vol. 4440, 2001, pp. 59-72.
Martino et al., “Application of the Aerial Image Measurement System (AIMS(TM)) to the Analysis of Binary Mask Imaging and Resolution Enhancement Techniques,” SPIE vol. 2197, 1994, pp. 573-584.
Miller, “A New Approach for Measuring Oxide Thickness,” Semiconductor International, Jul. 1995, pp. 147-148.
Nagpal et al., “Wafer Plane Inspection for Advanced Reticle Defects,” Proceedings of SPIE—The International Society for Optical Engineering; Photomask and Next-Generation Lithography Mask Technology. vol. 7028, 2008.
Numerical Recipes in C. the Art of Scientific Computing, 2nd Ed., © Cambridge University Press 1988, 1992, p. 683.
O'Gorman et al., “Subpixel Registration Using a Concentric Ring Fiducial,” Proceedings of the International Conference on Pattern Recognition, vol. ii, Jun. 16, 1990, pp. 249-253.
Otsu, “A Threshold Selection Method from Gray-Level Histograms,” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, vol. SMC-9, No. 1, Jan. 1979, pp. 62-66.
Pang et al., “Simulation-based Defect Printability Analysis on Alternating Phase Shifting Masks for 193 nm Lithography,” Proceedings of SPIE, vol. 4889, 2002, pp. 947-954.
Pettibone et al., “Wafer Printability Simulation Accuracy Based on UV Optical Inspection Images of Reticle Defects,” Proceedings of SPIE—The International Society for Optical Engineering 1999 Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers, vol. 3677, No. II, 1999, pp. 711-720.
Huang et al., “Using Design Based Binning to Improve Defect Excursion Control for 45nm Production,” IEEE, International Symposium on Semiconductor Manufacturing, Oct. 2007, pp. 1-3.
Phan et al., “Comparison of Binary Mask Defect Printability Analysis Using Virtual Stepper System and Aerial Image Microscope System,” Proceedings of SPIE—The International Society for Optical Engineering 1999 Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers, vol. 3873, 1999, pp. 681-692.
Sahouria et al., “Full-chip Process Simulation for Silicon DRC,” Mentor Graphics, Mar. 2000, 6 pages.
Sato et al., “Defect Criticality Index (DCI): A new methodology to significantly improve DOI sampling rate in a 45nm production environment,” Metrology, Inspection, and Process Control for Microlithography XXII, Proc. of SPIE vol. 6922, 692213 (2008), pp. 1-9.
Schroder et al., Corona-Oxide-Semiconductor Device Characterization, 1998, Solid-State Electronics, vol. 42, No. 4, pp. 505-512.
Schroder, “Surface voltage and surface photovoltage: history, theory and applications,” Measurement Science and Technology, vol. 12, 2001, pp. R16-R31.
Schroder, Contactless Surface Charge Semiconductor Characterization, Apr. 2002, Materials Science and Engineering B, vol. 91-92, pp. 196-228.
Schurz et al., “Simulation Study of Reticle Enhancement Technology Applications for 157 nm Lithography,” SPIE vol. 4562, 2002, pp. 902-913.
Svidenko et al. “Dynamic Defect-Limited Yield Prediction by Criticality Factor,” ISSM Paper: YE-O-157, 2007.
Tang et al., “Analyzing Volume Diagnosis Results with Statistical Learning for Yield Improvement” 12th IEEE European Test Symposium, Freiburg 2007, IEEE European, May 20-24, 2007, pp. 145-150.
Verkuil et al., “A Contactless Alternative to MOS Charge Measurements by Means of a Corona-Oxide-Semiconductor (COS) Technique,” Electrochem. Soc. Extended Abstracts, 1988, vol. 88-1, No. 169, pp. 261-262.
Verkuil, “Rapid Contactless Method for Measuring Fixed Oxide Charge Associated with Silicon Processing,” IBM Technical Disclosure Bulletin, vol. 24, No. 6, 1981, pp. 3048-3053.
Volk et al. “Investigation of Reticle Defect Formation at DUV Lithography,” 2002, BACUS Symposium on Photomask Technology.
Volk et al. “Investigation of Reticle Defect Formation at DUV Lithography,” 2003, IEEE/SEMI Advanced Manufacturing Conference, pp. 29-35.
Volk et al., “Investigation of Smart Inspection of Critical Layer Reticles using Additional Designer Data to Determine Defect Significance,” Proceedings of SPIE vol. 5256, 2003, pp. 489-499.
Weinberg, “Tunneling of Electrons from Si into Thermally Grown SiO2,” Solid-State Electronics, 1977, vol. 20, pp. 11-18.
Weinzierl et al., “Non-Contact Corona-Based Process Control Measurements: Where We've Been, Where We're Headed,” Electrochemical Society Proceedings, Oct. 1999, vol. 99-16, pp. 342-350.
Yan et al., “Printability of Pellicle Defects in DUV 0.5 um Lithography,” SPIE vol. 1604, 1991, pp. 106-117.
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT/US2012/054904 mailed Mar. 26, 2013.
U.S. Appl. No. 60/681,095, filed May 13, 2005 by Nehmadi et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 60/684,360, filed May 24, 2005 by Nehmadi et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/778,752, filed Feb. 13, 2004 by Preil et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 10/793,599, filed Mar. 4, 2004 by Howard et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 11/139,151, filed Feb. 10, 2005 by Volk.
U.S. Appl. No. 11/154,310, filed Feb. 10, 2005 by Verma et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/394,752, filed Feb. 27, 2009 by Xiong et al.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/403,905, filed Mar. 13, 2009 by Xiong.
Allan et al., “Critical Area Extraction for Soft Fault Estimation,” IEEE Transactions on Semiconductor Manufacturing, vol. 11, No. 1, Feb. 1998.
Barty et al., “Aerial Image Microscopes for the inspection of defects in EUV masks,” Proceedings of SPIE, vol. 4889, 2002, pp. 1073-1084.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/652,377, filed Oct. 15, 2012 by Wu et al.
Guo et al., “License Plate Localization and Character Segmentation with Feedback Self-Learning and Hybrid Binarization Techniques,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 57, No. 3, May 2008, pp. 1417-1424.
Liu, “Robust Image Segmentation Using Local Median,” Proceedings of the 3rd Canadian Conference on Computer and Robot Vision (CRV'06) 0-7695-2542-3/06, 2006 IEEE, 7 pages total.
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20130064442 A1 Mar 2013 US
Provisional Applications (1)
Number Date Country
61534104 Sep 2011 US