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.
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.
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:
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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.
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 |
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 |
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. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20130064442 A1 | Mar 2013 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61534104 | Sep 2011 | US |