Generic interface builder

Abstract
Generic interface adapter builder software generates an interface adapter to tie tools into a centralized manufacturing execution system. As contemplated by embodiments of the present invention, the interface adapter allows a tool in a semiconductor manufacturing assembly to communicate with other hardware and software in the centralized manufacturing execution system in accordance with a standard protocol and be operable from a common view graphical user interface. The generic interface builder software uses a classification of the type library and desired parameters for a particular tool to generate the interface adapter that maps the interface methods of the tool to the interface of the manufacturing execution system and handles long running service request support. In one aspect of the invention, the tool to be integrated into the manufacturing assembly may be a material control system. As contemplated by embodiments of the present invention, the material control system uses COM-based interface methods, and may optionally include a COM-based protocol converter, and may expose its interface methods via a type library.
Description




FIELD OF THE INVENTION




The present invention relates generally to manufacturing automation and specifically to software for automation of semiconductor manufacturing.




BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION




Semiconductor manufacturing is an increasingly complex, multi-step process that is subject to strict manufacturing requirements (e.g., tight manufacturing tolerances) and schedules. This manufacturing is typically carried out in large fabrication facilities, often costing billions of dollars to construct. These facilities typically incorporate dozens of tools (including software, devices and various systems) involved in the various stages of the manufacturing process.




Semiconductor chips that are manufactured from the facilities mentioned above are formed through a serial photolithography process that may require hundreds of steps to form a finished chip. Every step in the process must be closely monitored, materials carefully regulated, and timing carefully controlled. Due to the high cost of building a fabrication facility, maximizing the efficiency of these facilities is particularly important. The sequencing of steps, scheduling of materials, and other process parameters vary with the particular chip being manufactured. Automation is critical to running a semiconductor fabrication facility effectively, and manufacturing automation software, such as Consilium, Inc.'s FAB


300


® manufacturing execution system (in its various versions), enables integrated management of the entire process. (Consilium, of Mountain View, Calif., is a company of Applied Materials, Inc., of Santa Clara, Calif.). An important aspect in facilitating this efficiency is the integration of the various tools in the fabrication facility to establish a smooth manufacturing assembly. Due in part to the various factors indicated above, integration is a significant challenge.




It may be desirable that a manufacturing execution system (MES) allow managers to control the entire manufacturing process, including various aspects such as tool management, materials management, data management, scheduling, etc., in a centralized manner. In many cases it is preferable that an MES allow the entire manufacturing operation to be run from a single software user interface; however, existing systems often incorporate a variety of interfaces. The tools that are used in a fabrication facility may come from a variety of manufacturers and incorporate a variety of interfaces, communication protocols, etc.




Due to the lack of standardization across tools, incorporating the tools into an MES to allow the software to deliver process instructions and receive production data may require complex, individual programming for each tool. Typically, to link each tool into the MES, a semiconductor manufacturer must create a customized software interface between the tools and the MES. To do this, the systems integrator must be familiar with the source code of the MES. Also, even when a standard protocol is used, each tool must be individually tied in to the system essentially manually. For example, a facility may select one of several material control systems commercially available from different vendors as a component of its manufacturing assembly. Each material control system may have its own set of commands and communication protocols. A systems integrator at the fabrication facility will write special software to allow the selected material control system to function in the fabrication facility's manufacturing environment (i.e., to tie it in with the MES). The requirements of the software will depend on the specific material control system selected. Moreover, due to the lack of standardization, each new component should be carefully tested before being released into the system. Particularly given the number of tools typically involved, tying the tools in this way is an expensive, time-consuming process. The resulting system is unwieldy and inconsistent and diminishes the ability of the MES to provide a single, controllable definition of the manufacturing process and to maximize the active production time of the facility.




Consequently, there is a need for “plug-and-play” operability of semiconductor manufacturing tools with respect to an MES, preferably utilizing a common graphical user interface for all components. Accordingly, there is a need for a system that substantially or fully automates and standardizes the process of integrating tools into an MES in a uniform way.




SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION




The present invention addresses the issues mentioned above by providing a system, method and medium for generating an interface adapter to facilitate communication between tools and a centralized manufacturing execution system (MES). As contemplated by embodiments of the present invention, the interface adapter then allows a tool (which can be, e.g., a system performing a function) in a semiconductor manufacturing assembly to communicate with other hardware and software in the centralized MES in accordance with a standard protocol and to be operable from a common view graphical user interface (or common set of interfaces). In one aspect of the invention (and environments used therewith), the interface adapter handles asynchronous calls or long-running service requests to the material control system, while passing through synchronous calls. In an exemplary embodiment, the interface adapter functions as a Microsoft® Transaction Server (MTS) component on an MTS server.




By way of example, embodiments of the present invention will be explained herein with regard to a material control system as the exemplary tool being integrated into the manufacturing assembly. The material control system uses, in various embodiments, COM-based interface methods (optionally including a COM-based protocol converter), exposing its interface methods via a type library. In generating the interface adapter, the present invention identifies the type library and desired parameters of the material control system, maps the COM-based interface methods of the material control system to the interface of the MES, and, e.g., handles long running service request support.











BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS




For a fuller understanding of the present invention, reference should be made to the following detailed description taken in connection with the accompanying drawings, not drawn to scale, in which the same reference numerals indicate the same or similar parts, wherein:





FIG. 1

is a block diagram of exemplary manufacturing components, as contemplated by embodiments of the present invention.





FIG. 2

is a flow diagram of generating a generic interface adapter, as contemplated by embodiments of the present invention.





FIG. 3

is a block diagram of a MES incorporating a generic interface adapter, wherein a material control system further includes a manufacturing control system protocol converter.





FIG. 4

is a view of an exemplary user interface in accordance with embodiments of the present invention.





FIG. 5

is a block diagram of client request handling of synchronous requests through an interface adapter in accordance with embodiments of the present invention.





FIG. 6

is a block diagram of service handling for asynchronous or long-running service requests through an interface adapter in accordance with embodiments of the present invention.





FIG. 7

is a block diagram of register for notification handling through an interface adapter in accordance with embodiments of the present invention.





FIG. 8

is a block diagram of event notification handling through an interface adapter in accordance with embodiments of the present invention.





FIG. 9

is a block diagram of asynchronous or long running service request handling through an interface adapter in accordance with embodiments of the present invention.





FIG. 10

is a block diagram of a computer processing system used as part and/or in environments of the present invention.











DETAILED DESCRIPTION




In

FIG. 1

, a block diagram of exemplary manufacturing components (including an MES [or portion thereof] and a tool)


100


contemplated for use in environments with (and/or as part of) the present invention is shown. Referring now to

FIG. 1

, manufacturing components


100


include a material control system client


110


, and a generic interface adapter


112


to interface with a material control system (MCS)


114


. In this example, the MCS client


110


and a generic interface adapter


112


are contemplated to be part of the MES, while the MCS is envisioned to be an exemplary tool. Although the tool shown here is MCS


114


, it should be understood that the tool may be any tool, including a system, software or device tied to an MES (or like device). Embodiments of the present invention contemplate that the tool can be any event-based Distributed Common Object Model object.




Continuing the description of the exemplary components


100


, MCS


114


tracks and transfers the movement of materials through the fabrication facility. Generally, the MES manages dispatching of tools to complete jobs in the facility workflow and will use an adapter like adapter


112


to communicate with tools as necessary. For example, to dispatch tools for performing a boron implant in a lot, the MES may go through a series of steps. Initially, an implanter tool (not shown), for example, notifies the MES that it is available and joins the dispatch list as waiting for work. Independently, a lot of materials notifies the MES that it requires a boron implant and joins the dispatch list as waiting for a boron implant. Subsequently, the MCS client


110


portion of the MES determines whether the waiting lot can run on a particular implanter and launches a job once the availability is confirmed. The MCS client


110


calls some of the necessary services to complete the job, including invoking the MCS


114


(to transfer the lot to the implanter) through the generic interface adapter


112


.




Shown in the flow diagram


220


of

FIG. 2

, the generic interface builder


230


generates the generic interface adapter


112


that is used to communicate between the MCS client


110


and the MCS


114


. In step


222


, the generic interface builder


230


reads a file that defines the interface to the MCS


114


, and allows a user to select various parameters and classify methods. Depending on the method and the circumstances involved, a particular handling protocol will be selected for the method, (which the adapter will then ultimately use to allow communications between the MCS client


110


and MCS


114


). An exemplary protocol, which is selected where the method is recognized as one that takes a relatively significant time to complete (e.g., transporting materials from one factory location to another) is a “long running service protocol” (LRSP). Thus, this would be chosen for those methods deemed to require long running service protocol support. In some embodiments contemplated by the present invention, as a default, methods may be assumed to be handled by a “synchronous” protocol if not otherwise identified. In any event, once the protocols for the methods are chosen, the present invention generates and compiles the appropriate program code (steps


224


and


226


) for the generic interface adapter


112


.




Embodiments of the present invention contemplate that the MCS


114


can be a Distributed Common Object Model (DCOM or COM)-based system. The interface to the MCS


114


is envisioned as being defined as a COM type library. The COM type library includes the COM methods that the MCS


114


employs and that can be invoked by an MCS client


110


.




Illustrated in

FIG. 3

, it is envisioned that where the MCS interface is not inherently defined as a COM type library, the MCS


114


may incorporate a protocol converter (MPC)


316


that provides the MCS's COM type library. The protocol converter


316


may convert between protocols such as a native TCP/IP interface for MCS


114


and the COM type library interface contemplated, in some embodiments, for communicating with the generic interface adapter


112


. Preferably, the MCS's COM type library is defined in Interface Definition Language, which is defined in the Microsoft® Developers' Documentation Library. Moreover, the MCS


114


is envisioned to be an event-based system that can handle transactions asynchronously, informing the MCS client


110


when a particular task is completed or when an event occurs.




Embodiments of the present invention contemplate that the generic interface builder


230


can also be a COM component, and is invoked through the MES. It is envisioned that the generic interface builder


230


, includes a generic interface builder visual interface


234


, such as exemplary graphical user interface


430


, as shown in FIG.


4


. Referring now to

FIG. 4

, the exemplary graphical user interface


430


depicted therein is shown as providing a prompt


436


to the user to specify the path and file name of the MCS's type library. The generic interface builder


230


reads the type library and displays the MCS's COM methods


438


with input and output parameters


440


to the user. For example, for a method that relates to moving a lot from a source to a destination, the related parameters may include a source machine and a source port, a destination area, a destination machine, and a destination port. The user then selects handling protocols for the methods, such as by specifying which methods will require long-running service support. For these methods, the user defines certain parameters, such as transaction identification numbers that will be used to correlate messages that relate to the same longrunning service requests. The user may also identify certain parameters as keys that the MCS


114


may include in its notification when it completes servicing a method service request. The keys may also be used to correlate messages that relate to the same long-running service requests, in the absence of, or, in addition to, identification numbers. For the previous example, the keys may include the destination area, the destination machine, and the destination port. (The concept of long running service support is also described, later herein.) The user then saves the configuration information that relates to the selected handling protocols, parameters, and keys. Alternatively, the step of identifying different types of methods and defining parameters and keys could be automated. For example, it could be carried out by an expert system or the information could be included in the type library.




The generic interface builder


230


uses the saved configuration information to generate the appropriate software code (e.g., in the form of a Visual Basic project) for the generic interface adapter


112


for the MCS


114


. In the example herein, the generic interface builder


230


generates the adapter


112


to communicate with both the MCS client


110


and the MCS


114


. The adapter


112


is provided with routines for handling the various types of communication in the system. Embodiments of the present invention contemplate that the communication methods of the MCS client


110


are known beforehand and coded into the generic interface builder


230


, to ultimately be coded into the adapter


112


. The COM methods of the MCS


114


, from the COM type library, are modified or wrapped using the configuration information and the communication methods of the MCS client


110


to create a modified type library of COM methods for the MCS


114


that include information needed for interaction with the MCS client


110


. This information typically will relate to long-running service request support. For asynchronous requests, for example, transaction identification numbers may be associated with the corresponding COM methods. The modified type library is incorporated into the adapter


112


. The adapter


112


also has a type library that defines its interface, which incorporates the modified type library of MCS


114


. The type library of the adapter


112


defines the services that are available to the MCS client


110


to run the adapter


112


and to execute MCS


114


actions. The type library of the adapter


112


will be registered via the operating system of the MCS client


110


(which can be, for example, Microsoft Windows NT®) to inform the client


110


of which methods are available. Subsequently (as indicated above), the generic interface builder


230


compiles the generated Visual Basic project


232


to generate the generic interface adapter


112


. Although Visual Basic is mentioned herein, it should be understood that any other suitable language may also be used.




The interface adapter


112


is preferably a Microsoft® Transaction Server (MTS) component. Implementation on a Microsoft® Transaction Server is preferred for robustness and scalability, but any suitable implementation may be used. It is contemplated in some embodiments that the interface methods of the MCS


114


that may be invoked from the MCS client


110


are of these types: synchronous, asynchronous or long-running service protocol requests (LRSP), and register for notification requests.




The generic interface adapter


112


also supports three classes of interface methods outgoing from the MCS


114


to the MCS client


110


: notification/reply, events and alarms. These methods may be associated with a service handling protocol, such as the LRSP. The generic interface adapter


112


itself employs three categories of COM server interface methods: those corresponding to the MCS's type library (which may pass optionally through the MPC as indicated in FIG.


2


), those for invoking its LRSP support on the MTS server, and those for providing notifications to the MCS client


110


(in accordance with the LRSP for a long-running service request or for a register for notification request). Of course it should be understood that the present invention contemplates that any number of other methods, appropriately associated with any number of other types of service handling protocols, can be used.




A synchronous request is one on which the MCS


114


can act immediately or which otherwise does not require any later response or confirmation from the MCS


114


. Accordingly, the MCS client


110


will receive an immediate confirmation, if any, and need not wait for a later reply. Referring now to request processing diagram


550


in

FIG. 5

, in accordance with a synchronous protocol, the adapter


112


passes synchronous requests through to the MCS


114


directly (or through MCS protocol converter


316


) by invoking an MCS method. When appropriate, the MCS


114


returned an immediate result to the adapter


112


, which forwards the result to the MCS client


110


.




An asynchronous request or LRSP request is one which the MCS


114


may take some time to act on or respond to (at least as measured from the perspective of a computer system operating as part of, or in environments of, the present invention or aspects thereof). For example, if the MCS is required to move a lot A from point B to point C, the MCS


114


will not be able to acknowledge completion of the request by providing notification to the MCS client


110


until it is actually performed. When MCS client


110


receives that response at a later time, the MCS client


110


needs to correlate the response to the initial request, for example with an LRSP identification number (LRSPID) or with the keys returned in the notification. In accordance with the LRSP, the interface adapter


112


manages the LRSP request for the MCS client


110


. The interface adapter


112


includes an LRSP COM method in its COM method library


618


for handling these requests. Referring now to request processing diagram


600


in

FIG. 6

, when the interface adapter


112


receives an LRSP request for the MCS


114


, it will pass the request on by invoking the MCS's related COM method and also invokes its own LRSP COM method to monitor the completion of the LRSP request. The LRSP COM method will match the LRSPID or the keys once it receives the reply from the MCS


114


to the initial request. (The reply process is diagrammed in

FIG. 8.

)




A register for notification request is an outstanding request from the MCS client


110


to receive notification of events or alarms invoked by the MCS


114


. Referring now to request processing diagram


700


in

FIG. 7

, the MCS client


110


registers its interest with the interface adapter


112


by providing a notification method and register key. In contemplated embodiments, a register for notification request is handled like a long-running service request in accordance with the LRSP. In accordance with the LRSP, the interface adapter


110


maintains the request by invoking its own LRSP COM method. No request is passed on to the MCS


114


, but the MCS


114


is monitored by the adapter


112


for an event in which the client


110


has expressed interest and which should be reported back to the client


110


using the appropriate notification and publication methods.




Referring now to message processing diagram


800


in

FIG. 8

, when the generic interface adapter


112


receives a reply, event or alarm from the MCS


114


, the adapter


112


receives the information and correlates it with any LRSP requests, including asynchronous requests or register requests, using its LRSP COM method. The LRSP COM method may use an LRSPID or returned keys from the MCS


114


to correlate a notification from the MCS


114


with an outstanding request. The adapter


112


also determines which notification method has been selected by the MCS client


110


and provides the notification to the client


110


. Embodiments of the invention contemplate that if a notification of an event or alarm is received from the MCS


114


for which there is no corresponding LRSP, including those for asynchronous requests and those for register for notification requests, the notification is ignored.




A sample long-running service request handled in accordance with the LRSP is diagrammed in accordance with an embodiment of the invention in request processing diagram


900


in FIG.


9


. In step


902


, the MCS client


110


requests service for a job such as a batch transport job. The client


110


provides values for the corresponding parameters, such as source and destination information, for the request. The adapter


112


receives the request and, in step


904


, invokes its COM method for LRSP support and stores the keys, such as destination information. In step


905


, adapter


112


confirms receipt of the request. In step


906


, the adapter


112


calls the appropriate DCOM method, which optionally is relayed through MPC


316


in step


908


. In steps


907


and


909


, the MPC


316


and the MCS


114


confirm receipt of the request. In step


910


, the MCS


114


executes the method to service the request. In step


912


, the MCS


114


issues a notification including the keys, when the method is completed. The MPC


316


passes the notification on to adapter


112


. In steps


916


and


917


, adapter


112


uses the keys to identify the original job that has been completed and provides a job identification. Subsequently, in step


918


, the adapter


112


passes on the notification that the long-running service is complete, with the job identification. The client MCS


110


can move on to the next step in a business process that follows completion of the MCS service.




Although the generic interface builder


230


and the generic interface adapter


112


have been described herein by reference to an MCS tool


114


, an adapter


112


may be generated for any other type of tool. The tool may be software or hardware or may be a large system incorporating both hardware and software, typically with a software interface, such as the MCS protocol converter


316


. Preferably, the tool will be a COM-based tool and will have its interface defined in Interface Definition Language.




Exemplary components of a computer processing system used as part of the present invention, and/or used in environments or in conjunction therewith are shown with regard to FIG.


10


. Referring now to

FIG. 10

, manufacturing components


100


(having at least some of the various aspects, functionality and components described above) are shown to reside in a memory/storage device


1004


. It is also envisioned that these aspects can originate from communications I/O


1008


(discussed below).




Embodiments of the present invention contemplate that the memory/storage device


1004


, itself, could be any number of different types of computer-readable mediums for storing information, including RAM memory, magnetic, electronic, or optical (including holographic) storage, some combination thereof, etc. It should also be understood that, particularly where a tool in communication with adapter


112


(as mentioned above) is an item of hardware (in contrast to, e.g., a software system), then that tool could communicate with the manufacturing components via, e.g., I/O


1008


.




Memory/storage


1004


is shown as being in-communication, via communication link


1010


(e.g., a bus), with one or more processor(s)


1002


. Embodiments of the present invention contemplate that the processor(s)


1002


can be those typically found in the types of computers mentioned below, and/or they can be any number of other types of processor(s).




Still referring

FIG. 10

, a display device


1006


is shown. Also shown is I/O


1008


, which is envisioned to communicate with, e.g., tools and/or with various communications networks such as local area networks, the Internet, etc. Here, I/O


1008


is shown to be in communication with processor(s)


1002


and memory/storage


1004


via communication link


1010


.




The present invention further contemplates that I/O


1008


can serve to receive various transmission schemes such as those relating to telecommunications, cable or other transmission mechanisms, and that at least some of the aspects of manufacturing components


100


can, in whole or part, be a transmission. Thus, for example, at least some aspects of virtual manufacturing components


100


that might otherwise originate from memory/storage


1004


could instead originate from I/O


1008


(e.g., the medium from which aspects of the manufacturing components


100


originate can be a transmission).




It should be understood that the configuration of the various aspects of the present invention depicted by

FIG. 10

is by way of example, and that the present invention contemplates any number of different configurations and/or different components.




With regard to the various specific processors


1002


contemplated for use with the present invention as depicted by

FIG. 10

, one exemplary embodiment includes the use of any of the Pentium line of processors from Intel Corporation of Santa Clara, Calif., and/or a Motorola 68000 series processor such as the 68040 processor from Motorola of Schaumberg, III. Exemplary operating systems include Microsoft NT from Microsoft Corporation, as well as any of the various varieties of Unix or Linux. Of course, it should be understood that any number of different types and combinations of current or future processors and/or operating systems could also be used.




The language used herein is used for purposes of reference and not limitation. While the invention has been particularly shown and described with reference to preferred embodiments, it will be apparent to those skilled in the art that various modifications and alterations can be made in the described embodiments of the present invention without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention.



Claims
  • 1. A computer-based method for generating a generic interface adapter to facilitate communication between a manufacturing execution system and a tool in a manufacturing facility, comprising the steps of:(1) reading a method type library from the tool, wherein said method-type library contains one or more methods relating to the tool; (2) selecting a protocol to be associated with at least one of said one or more methods, wherein at least one protocol is a long-running service protocol for supporting long-running service protocol requests; (3) generating an interface adapter for managing communication between the manufacturing execution system and the tool, including the managing of long-running service protocol requests; and (4) associating one or more identifiers with said at least one method, said at least one method being associated with a long-running service protocol, wherein said one or more identifiers are for use by the interface adapter in managing communication between the manufacturing execution system and the tool.
  • 2. The method of claim 1, wherein said step of associating one or more identifiers includes defining a transaction identification number for said at least one method.
  • 3. The method of claim 1, wherein said at least one method is associated with one or more parameters, said step of associating one or more identifiers including selecting at least one of said one or more parameters as a key for said at least one method.
  • 4. The method of claim 1, wherein said step of generating an interface adapter includes the step of defining an adapter method by modifying at least one of said one or more methods to wrap the method with information relating to the selected protocol and the associated one or more identifiers.
  • 5. The method of claim 1, further including the step of providing a graphical user interface to allow a user to perform said step of selecting a protocol.
  • 6. The method of claim 5, wherein said graphical user interface is provided through a graphical user interface of the manufacturing execution system.
  • 7. The method of claim 1, further including the step of providing a protocol converter for the tool, wherein said protocol converter facilitates said step of reading a method type library by translating said method type library into a desired format.
  • 8. The method of claim 1, wherein the generated interface adapter has one or more interface methods for communicating with the manufacturing execution system and the tool, further including the step of registering at least one of said one or more interface methods for use by the manufacturing execution system.
  • 9. The method of claim 1, wherein said step of generating an interface adapter includes generating a long-running service protocol support function.
  • 10. The method of claim 1, wherein at least one protocol is a synchronous protocol.
  • 11. The method of claim 1, wherein the method type library is a Distributed Common Object Model type library.
  • 12. The method of claim 1, wherein the tool is an event-based tool.
  • 13. The method of claim 1, wherein the tool is a material control system.
  • 14. A generic interface adapter builder program on a computer-readable medium for generating a generic interface adapter to facilitate communication between a manufacturing execution system and a tool in a manufacturing facility, the program comprising:a module for reading a method type library from the tool, wherein said method type library contains one or more methods relating to the tool; a module for selection of a protocol to be associated with at least one of said one or more methods, wherein at least one protocol is a long-running service protocol for supporting long-running service protocol requests; and a module for generating code for an interface adapter for managing communication between the manufacturing execution system and the tool, including the managing of long-running service protocol requests, wherein said module for selection of a protocol further allows for association of one or more identifiers with at least one of said one or more methods, wherein said one or more identifiers is for use by the interface adapter in managing communication between the manufacturing execution system and the tool.
  • 15. The program of claim 14, wherein said module for generating code includes one or more routines for generating a method type library for the interface adapter.
  • 16. A method according to claim 14, wherein said association of one or more identifiers includes a definition of a transaction identification number for at least one of said one or more methods.
  • 17. A method according to claim 14, wherein at least one of said one or more methods is associated with one or more parameters, wherein said association of one or more identifiers includes a selection of at least one of said one or more parameters as a key for at least one of said one or more methods.
  • 18. The program of claim 14, further including a graphical user interface, wherein the graphical user interface allows a user to access said module for selection of a protocol.
  • 19. The program of claim 14, wherein said module for generating code includes one or more routines for modifying at least one of said one or more methods to wrap the method with information relating to the selected protocol and associated one or more identifiers.
  • 20. The program of claim 14, further including a protocol converter for the tool, wherein said protocol converter enables said module for reading a method type library by translating said method type library into a desired format.
  • 21. The program of claim 14, wherein the module for generating code includes information relating to one or more communication methods of the manufacturing execution system.
  • 22. The program of claim 14, wherein the program is a Distributed Common Object Model component.
  • 23. A manufacturing execution system for running a manufacturing facility, the manufacturing facility including one or more tools, comprising:a client component of the manufacturing execution system for managing the use of at least one of said one or more tools, the client component having communication with the tool, the communication including requesting services from the tool and receiving notifications regarding the tool, the communication including long-running service requests from the client component; a generic interface adapter builder for generating an adapter interface for managing communication between the client component and the tool, the generic interface adapter builder incorporating support for long-running service protocol requests into said interface adapter; and a module, in data communication with the generic interface adapter builder, for associating one or more identifiers with at least one method of at least one of said long-running service protocol requests, wherein said one or more identifiers are for use by said interface adapter in managing communication between the client component of the manufacturing execution system and the at least one of said one or more tools.
  • 24. The system of claim 23, further comprising a graphical user interface for managing the manufacturing execution system, the graphical user interface providing access to the generic interface adapter builder.
  • 25. The system of claim 23, the communication further including synchronous requests from the client component, the interface adapter supporting synchronous requests.
  • 26. The system of claim 23, the communication further including register for notification requests from the client component, the interface adapter supporting register for notification requests.
  • 27. The system of claim 23, wherein the generic interface adapter builder is a Distributed Common Object Model component.
  • 28. A computer-based method for generating an interface adapter to facilitate communication between a manufacturing execution system and a tool in a manufacturing facility, comprising the steps of:reading a method type library from the tool, wherein said method-type library contains one or more methods relating to the tool; selecting a protocol to be associated with at least one method of said one or more methods, wherein at lest one protocol is a long-running service protocol for supporting long-running service protocol requests; and associating one or more identifiers with said at least one method, said at least one method being associated with a long-running service protocol, wherein said one or more identifiers are for use by an interface adapter in managing communication between the manufacturing execution system and the tool.
  • 29. The method of claim 28, wherein said step of associating one or more identifiers includes defining a transaction identification number for said at least one method.
  • 30. The method of claim 28, wherein said at least one method is associated with one or more parameters, said step of associating one or more identifiers including selecting at lest one of said one or more parameters as a key for said at least one method.
  • 31. A generic interface adapter builder program on a computer-readable medium for generating a generic adapter to facilitate communication between a manufacturing execution system and a tool in a manufacturing facility, the program comprising:a module for reading a method type library from the tool, wherein said method type library contains one or more methods relating to the tool; and a module for selection of a protocol to be associated with at least one of said one or more method, wherein at least one protocol is a long-running service protocol for supporting long-running service protocol requests, wherein said module for selection of a protocol further allows for association of one or more identifiers with at least one method of said one or more methods, and wherein said at least one method is associated with a long-running service protocol, wherein said one or more identifiers is for use by an interface adapter in managing communication between the manufacturing execution system and the tool.
  • 32. The program according to claim 31, wherein said association of one or more identifiers includes a definition of a transaction identification number for said at least one method.
  • 33. The program according to claim 31, wherein said at least one method is associated with one or more parameters, wherein said association of one or more identifiers includes a selection of at least one of said one or more parameters as a key for said at least one method.
US Referenced Citations (234)
Number Name Date Kind
3205485 Noltingk Sep 1965 A
3229198 Libby Jan 1966 A
3767900 Chao et al. Oct 1973 A
3920965 Sohrwardy Nov 1975 A
4000458 Miller et al. Dec 1976 A
4302721 Urbanek et al. Nov 1981 A
4368510 Anderson Jan 1983 A
4616308 Morshedi et al. Oct 1986 A
4663703 Axelby et al. May 1987 A
4698766 Entwistle et al. Oct 1987 A
4750141 Judell et al. Jun 1988 A
4757259 Charpentier Jul 1988 A
4796194 Atherton Jan 1989 A
4938600 Into Jul 1990 A
4967381 Lane et al. Oct 1990 A
5089970 Lee et al. Feb 1992 A
5108570 Wang Apr 1992 A
5208765 Turnbull May 1993 A
5220517 Sierk et al. Jun 1993 A
5226118 Baker et al. Jul 1993 A
5231585 Kobayashi et al. Jul 1993 A
5236868 Nulman Aug 1993 A
5260868 Gupta et al. Nov 1993 A
5270222 Moslehi Dec 1993 A
5283141 Yoon et al. Feb 1994 A
5295242 Mashruwala et al. Mar 1994 A
5309221 Fischer et al. May 1994 A
5329463 Sierk et al. Jul 1994 A
5338630 Yoon et al. Aug 1994 A
5347446 Iino et al. Sep 1994 A
5367624 Cooper Nov 1994 A
5375064 Bollinger Dec 1994 A
5398336 Tantry et al. Mar 1995 A
5402367 Sullivan et al. Mar 1995 A
5408405 Mozumder et al. Apr 1995 A
5410473 Kaneko et al. Apr 1995 A
5420796 Weling et al. May 1995 A
5469361 Moyne Nov 1995 A
5485082 Wisspeintner et al. Jan 1996 A
5490097 Swenson et al. Feb 1996 A
5495417 Fuduka et al. Feb 1996 A
5497316 Sierk et al. Mar 1996 A
5497381 O'Donogline et al. Mar 1996 A
5503707 Maung et al. Apr 1996 A
5508947 Sierk et al. Apr 1996 A
5511005 Abbe et al. Apr 1996 A
5519605 Cawlfield May 1996 A
5525808 Irie et al. Jun 1996 A
5526293 Mozumder et al. Jun 1996 A
5541510 Danielson Jul 1996 A
5546312 Mozumder et al. Aug 1996 A
5553195 Meijer Sep 1996 A
5586039 Hirsch et al. Dec 1996 A
5599423 Parker et al. Feb 1997 A
5602492 Cresswell et al. Feb 1997 A
5603707 Trombetta et al. Feb 1997 A
5617023 Skalski Apr 1997 A
5627083 Tounai May 1997 A
5629216 Wijaranakula et al. May 1997 A
5642296 Saxena Jun 1997 A
5646870 Krivokapic et al. Jul 1997 A
5649169 Berezin et al. Jul 1997 A
5654903 Reitman et al. Aug 1997 A
5655951 Meikle et al. Aug 1997 A
5657254 Sierk et al. Aug 1997 A
5661669 Mozumder et al. Aug 1997 A
5663797 Sandhu Sep 1997 A
5664987 Renteln Sep 1997 A
5665199 Sahota et al. Sep 1997 A
5666297 Britt et al. Sep 1997 A
5667424 Pan Sep 1997 A
5674787 Zhao et al. Oct 1997 A
5694325 Fukuda et al. Dec 1997 A
5698989 Nulman Dec 1997 A
5719495 Moslehi Feb 1998 A
5719796 Chen Feb 1998 A
5735055 Hochbein et al. Apr 1998 A
5740429 Wang et al. Apr 1998 A
5751582 Saxena et al. May 1998 A
5754297 Nulman May 1998 A
5761064 La et al. Jun 1998 A
5764543 Kennedy Jun 1998 A
5777901 Berezin et al. Jul 1998 A
5787021 Samaha Jul 1998 A
5787269 Hyodo Jul 1998 A
5808303 Schlagheck et al. Sep 1998 A
5812407 Sato et al. Sep 1998 A
5823854 Chen Oct 1998 A
5825913 Rostami et al. Oct 1998 A
5828778 Hagi et al. Oct 1998 A
5832224 Fehskens et al. Nov 1998 A
5838595 Sullivan et al. Nov 1998 A
5844554 Geller et al. Dec 1998 A
5857258 Penzes et al. Jan 1999 A
5859964 Wang et al. Jan 1999 A
5859975 Brewer et al. Jan 1999 A
5863807 Jang et al. Jan 1999 A
5870306 Harada Feb 1999 A
5883437 Naruyama et al. Mar 1999 A
5889991 Consolatti et al. Mar 1999 A
5901313 Wolf et al. May 1999 A
5903455 Sharpe, Jr. et al. May 1999 A
5910011 Cruse Jun 1999 A
5910846 Sandhu Jun 1999 A
5916016 Bothra Jun 1999 A
5923553 Yi Jul 1999 A
5930138 Lin et al. Jul 1999 A
5940300 Ozaki Aug 1999 A
5943237 Van Boxem Aug 1999 A
5960185 Nguyen Sep 1999 A
5960214 Sharpe, Jr. et al. Sep 1999 A
5961369 Bartels et al. Oct 1999 A
5963881 Kahn et al. Oct 1999 A
5978751 Pence et al. Nov 1999 A
5982920 Tobin, Jr. et al. Nov 1999 A
6002989 Shiba et al. Dec 1999 A
6017771 Yang et al. Jan 2000 A
6036349 Gombar Mar 2000 A
6041270 Steffan et al. Mar 2000 A
6054379 Yau et al. Apr 2000 A
6064759 Buckley et al. May 2000 A
6072313 Li et al. Jun 2000 A
6078845 Friedman Jun 2000 A
6094688 Mellen-Garnett et al. Jul 2000 A
6097887 Hardikar et al. Aug 2000 A
6108092 Sandhu Aug 2000 A
6112130 Fukuda et al. Aug 2000 A
6127263 Parikh Oct 2000 A
6128016 Coelho et al. Oct 2000 A
6136163 Cheung et al. Oct 2000 A
6141660 Bach et al. Oct 2000 A
6143646 Wetzel Nov 2000 A
6148099 Lee et al. Nov 2000 A
6148239 Funk et al. Nov 2000 A
6148246 Kawazome Nov 2000 A
6159075 Zhang Dec 2000 A
6159644 Satoh et al. Dec 2000 A
6161054 Rosenthal et al. Dec 2000 A
6169931 Runnels Jan 2001 B1
6172756 Chalmers et al. Jan 2001 B1
6173240 Sepulveda et al. Jan 2001 B1
6175777 Kim Jan 2001 B1
6178390 Jun Jan 2001 B1
6183345 Kamono et al. Feb 2001 B1
6185324 Ishihara et al. Feb 2001 B1
6191864 Sandhu Feb 2001 B1
6192291 Kwon Feb 2001 B1
6197604 Miller et al. Mar 2001 B1
6204165 Ghoshal Mar 2001 B1
6210983 Atchison et al. Apr 2001 B1
6211094 Jun et al. Apr 2001 B1
6214734 Bothra et al. Apr 2001 B1
6217412 Campbell et al. Apr 2001 B1
6219711 Chari Apr 2001 B1
6222936 Phan et al. Apr 2001 B1
6226792 Goiffon et al. May 2001 B1
6230069 Campbell et al. May 2001 B1
6236903 Kim et al. May 2001 B1
6240330 Kurtzberg et al. May 2001 B1
6240331 Yun May 2001 B1
6246972 Klimasauskas Jun 2001 B1
6248602 Bode et al. Jun 2001 B1
6249712 Boiquaye Jun 2001 B1
6252412 Talbot et al. Jun 2001 B1
6253366 Mutschler, III Jun 2001 B1
6263255 Tan et al. Jul 2001 B1
6276989 Campbell et al. Aug 2001 B1
6278899 Piche et al. Aug 2001 B1
6280289 Wiswesser et al. Aug 2001 B1
6284622 Campbell et al. Sep 2001 B1
6287879 Gonzales et al. Sep 2001 B1
6290572 Hofmann Sep 2001 B1
6292708 Allen et al. Sep 2001 B1
6298274 Inoue Oct 2001 B1
6298470 Breiner et al. Oct 2001 B1
6303395 Nulman Oct 2001 B1
6304999 Toprac et al. Oct 2001 B1
6307628 Lu et al. Oct 2001 B1
6314379 Hu et al. Nov 2001 B1
6320655 Matsushita et al. Nov 2001 B1
6324481 Atchison et al. Nov 2001 B1
6334807 Lebel et al. Jan 2002 B1
6336841 Chang Jan 2002 B1
6340602 Johnson et al. Jan 2002 B1
6345288 Reed et al. Feb 2002 B1
6345315 Mishra Feb 2002 B1
6360133 Campbell et al. Mar 2002 B1
6360184 Jacquez Mar 2002 B1
6366934 Cheng et al. Apr 2002 B1
6368879 Toprac Apr 2002 B1
6368883 Bode et al. Apr 2002 B1
6368884 Goodwin et al. Apr 2002 B1
6379980 Toprac Apr 2002 B1
6388253 Su May 2002 B1
6389491 Jacobson et al. May 2002 B1
6395152 Wang May 2002 B1
6397114 Eryurek et al. May 2002 B1
6405096 Toprac et al. Jun 2002 B1
6405144 Toprac et al. Jun 2002 B1
6438438 Takagi et al. Aug 2002 B1
6440295 Wang Aug 2002 B1
6455937 Cunningham Sep 2002 B1
6470230 Toprac et al. Oct 2002 B1
6479902 Lopatin et al. Nov 2002 B1
6479990 Mednikov et al. Nov 2002 B2
6482660 Conchieri et al. Nov 2002 B2
6503839 Gonzales et al. Jan 2003 B2
6517413 Hu et al. Feb 2003 B1
6567717 Krivokapic et al. May 2003 B2
20010001755 Sandhu et al. May 2001 A1
20010003084 Finarov Jun 2001 A1
20010030366 Nakano et al. Oct 2001 A1
20010039462 Mendez et al. Nov 2001 A1
20010040997 Tsap et al. Nov 2001 A1
20010042690 Talieh Nov 2001 A1
20020032499 Wilson et al. Mar 2002 A1
20020058460 Lee et al. May 2002 A1
20020070126 Sato et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020081951 Boyd Jun 2002 A1
20020089676 Pecen et al. Jul 2002 A1
20020102853 Li et al. Aug 2002 A1
20020107599 Boyd et al. Aug 2002 A1
20020107604 Riley et al. Aug 2002 A1
20020113039 Mok et al. Aug 2002 A1
20020127950 Hirose et al. Sep 2002 A1
20020128805 Goldman et al. Sep 2002 A1
20020149359 Cronzen et al. Oct 2002 A1
20020185658 Inoue et al. Dec 2002 A1
20020193902 Shanmugasundram et al. Dec 2002 A1
20020197745 Shanmugasundram et al. Dec 2002 A1
20020197934 Paik Dec 2002 A1
20020199082 Shanmugasundram et al. Dec 2002 A1
20030020909 Adams et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030020928 Ritzdorf et al. Jan 2003 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (75)
Number Date Country
2050247 Aug 1991 CA
2165847 Aug 1991 CA
2194855 Aug 1991 CA
0 621 522 Oct 1994 EP
0 747 795 Dec 1996 EP
0877308 Nov 1998 EP
0 881 040 Dec 1998 EP
0 895 145 Feb 1999 EP
0 910 123 Apr 1999 EP
0 932 194 Jul 1999 EP
1 066 925 Jan 2001 EP
1 067 757 Jan 2001 EP
1 071 128 Jan 2001 EP
1 092 505 Apr 2001 EP
1072967 Nov 2001 EP
1 182 526 Feb 2002 EP
2 347 885 Sep 2000 GB
61-66104 Apr 1986 JP
61-171147 Aug 1986 JP
HEI 1-283934 Nov 1989 JP
3-202710 Sep 1991 JP
05-151231 Jun 1993 JP
05-216896 Aug 1993 JP
05-266029 Oct 1993 JP
06-110894 Apr 1994 JP
06-176994 Jun 1994 JP
6-184434 Jul 1994 JP
06-252236 Sep 1994 JP
06-260380 Sep 1994 JP
8-23166 Jan 1996 JP
8-50161 Feb 1996 JP
HEI 8-149583 Jun 1996 JP
8-304023 Nov 1996 JP
HEI 9-34535 Feb 1997 JP
9-246547 Sep 1997 JP
10-34522 Feb 1998 JP
10-173029 Jun 1998 JP
HEI 11-67853 Mar 1999 JP
11-126816 May 1999 JP
11-135601 May 1999 JP
2000183001 Jun 2000 JP
2001-76982 Mar 2001 JP
2001-284299 Oct 2001 JP
2001-305108 Oct 2001 JP
20029030 Jan 2002 JP
WO 02074491 Sep 2002 JP
2002-343754 Nov 2002 JP
434103 May 2001 TW
436383 May 2001 TW
455938 Sep 2001 TW
455976 Sep 2001 TW
WO 9534866 Dec 1995 WO
WO 9805066 Feb 1998 WO
0 869 652 Oct 1998 WO
WO 9845090 Oct 1998 WO
WO 9909371 Feb 1999 WO
WO 9925520 May 1999 WO
WO 9959200 Nov 1999 WO
WO 0000874 Jan 2000 WO
WO 0005759 Feb 2000 WO
WO 0035063 Jun 2000 WO
WO 0054325 Sep 2000 WO
WO 0079355 Dec 2000 WO
WO 0115865 Mar 2001 WO
WO 0118623 Mar 2001 WO
WO 0125865 Apr 2001 WO
WO 0133277 May 2001 WO
WO 0133501 May 2001 WO
WO 0152055 Jul 2001 WO
WO 0152319 Jul 2001 WO
WO 0157823 Aug 2001 WO
WO 0217150 Feb 2002 WO
WO 0231613 Apr 2002 WO
WO 0231613 Apr 2002 WO
WO 0233737 Apr 2002 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (135)
Entry
Dishon, G., D. Eylon, M. Finarov, and A. Shulman. “Dielectric CMP Advanced Process Control Based on Integrated Monitoring.” Ltd. Rehoveth, Israel: Nova Measuring Instruments.
Runyan, W. R., and K. E. Bean. 1990. “Semiconductor Integrated Circuit Processing Technology.” p. 48. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
Zorich, Robert. 1991. Handbook of Quality Integrated Circuit Manufacturing. pp. 464-498 San Diego, California: Academic Press, Inc.
Rampalli, Prasad, Arakere Ramesh, and Nimish Shah. 1991. CEPT—A Computer-Aided Manufacturing Application for Managing Equipment Reliability and Availability in the Semiconductor Industry. New York, New York: IEEE.
Moyne, James R., Nauman Chaudhry, and Roland Telfeyan. 1995. “Adaptive Extensions to a Multi-Branch Run-to-Run Controller for Plasma Etching.” Journal of Vacuum Science and Technology. Ann Arbor, Michigan: University of Michigan Display Technology Manufacturing Center.
Moyne, James, Roland Telfeyan, Arnon Hurwitz, and John Taylor. Aug. 1995. “A Process-Independent Run-to-Run Controller and Its Application to Chemical-Mechanical Planarization.” SEMI/IEEE Advanced Semiconductor Manufacturing Conference and Workshop. Ann Arbor, Michigan: The University of Michigan, Electrical Engineering & Computer Science Center for Display Technology & Manufacturing.
Dishon, G., M. Finarov, R. Kipper, J. W. Curry, T. Schraub, D. Trojan, 4th Stambaugh, Y. Li and J. Ben-Jacob. Feb. 1996. “On-Line Integrated Metrology for CMP Processing.” Santa Clara, California: VMIC Speciality Conferences, 1st International CMP Planarization Conference.
SEMI. [1986] 1996. “Standard for Definition and Measurement of Equipment Reliability, Availability, and Maintainability (RAM).” SEMI E10-96.
Van Zant, Peter. 1997. Microchip Fabrication: A Practical Guide to Semiconductor Processing. Third Edition, pp. 472-478. New York, New York: McGraw-Hill.
Campbell, W. Jarrett, and Anthony J. Toprac. Feb. 11-12, 1998. “Run-to-Run Control in Microelectronics Manufacturing.” Advanced Micro Devises, TWMCC.
Consilium. Aug. 1998. Quality Management Component: QMC™ and QMC-Link™ Overview. Mountain View, California: Consilium, Inc.
Consilium. 1998. FAB300™. Mountain View, California: Consilium, Inc.
Khan, Kareemullah, Victor Solakhain, Anthony Ricci, Tier Gu, and James Moyne. 1998. “Run-to-Run Control of ITO Deposition Process.” Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Moyne, James and John Curry. Jun. 1998. “A Fully Automated Chemical-Mechanical Planarization Process.” .
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/363,966, Arackaparambil et al. filed Jul. 29, 1999.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/469,227, Somekh et al. filed Dec. 22, 1999.
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/619,044, Yuan filed Jul. 19, 2000.
SEMI. Jul. 1998. New Standard: Provisional Specification for CIM Framework Domain Architecture. Mountain View, California: SEMI Standards. SEMI Draft Doc. 2817.
Consilium. Jul. 1999. “Increasing Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE) in Fab Manufacturing by Implementing Consilium's Next-Generation Manufacturing Execution System—MES II.” Semiconductor Fabtech Edition 10.
Consilium Corporate Brochure. Oct. 1999. www.consilium.com.
Consilium. Jan. 1999. “FAB300™: Consilium's Next Generation MES Solution of Software and Services which Control and Automate Real-Time FAB Operations.” www.consilium.com/products/fab300_page.htm#FAB300 Introduction.
Consilium. Nov. 1999. FAB300™ Update.
SEMI. 2000. “Provisional Specification for CIM Framework Scheduling Component.” San Jose, California. SEMI E105-1000.
Hu, Albert, Kevin Nguyen, Steve Wong, Xiuhua Zhang, Emanuel Sachs, and Peter Renteln. 1993. “Concurrent Deployment of Run by Run Controller Using SCC Framework.” IEEE/SEMI International Semiconductor Manufacturing Science Symposium. pp. 126-132.
Hu, Albert, He Du, Steve Wong, Peter Renteln, and Emmanuel Sachs. 1994. “Application of Run by Run Controller to the Chemical-Mechanical Planarization Process.” IEEE/CPMT International Electronics Manufacturing Technology Symposium. pp. 371-378.
Smith, Taber, Duane Boning, James Moyne, Arnon Hurwitz, and John Curry. Jun. 1996. “Compensating for CMP Pad Wear Using Run by Run Feedback Control.” Proceedings of the Thirteenth International VLSI Multilevel Interconnection Conference. pp. 437-439.
Suzuki, Junichi and Yoshikazu Yamamoto. 1998. “Toward the Interoperable Software Design Models: Quartet of UML, XML, DOM and CORBA.” Proceedings IEEE International Software Engineering Standards Symposium. pp. 1-10.
Klein, Bruce. Jun. 1999. “Application Development: XML Makes Object Models More Useful.” Informationweek. pp. 1A-6A.
Chemali, Chadi E1, James Moyne, Kareemullah Khan, Rock Nadeau, Paul Smith, John Colt, Jonathan Chapple-Sokol, and Tarun Parikh. Jul. /Aug. 2000. “Multizone Uniformity Control of a Chemical Mechanical Polishing Process Utilizing a Pre-and Postmeasurement Strategy.” J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A, vol. 18(4). pp. 1287-1296. American Vacuum Society.
Jensen, Alan, Peter Renteln, Stephen Jew, Chris Raeder, and Patrick Cheung. Jun. 2001. “Empirical-Based Modeling for Control of CMP Removal Uniformity.” Solid State Technology, vol. 44, No. 6, pp. 101-102,104,106. Cowan Publ. Corp.: Washington, D.C.
Sarfaty, Moshe, Arulkumar Shanmugasundram, Alexander Schwarm, Joseph Paik, Jimin Zhang, Rong Pan, Martin J. Seamons, Howard Li, Raymond Hung, and Suketu Parikh. Apr./May 2002. “Advance Process Control Solutions for Semiconductor Manufacturing.” IEEE/SEMI Advanced Semiconductor Manufacturing Conference. pp. 101-106.
Oct. 4, 2002. International Search Report from PCT/US01/22833.
Oct. 23, 2002. International Search Report from PCT/US01/27406.
Nov. 7, 2002. International Search Report from PCT/US02/19061.
Nov. 11, 2002. International Search Report from PCT/US02/19117.
Nov. 12, 2002. International Search Report from PCT/US02/19063.
Communication Pursuant to Article 96(2) EPC for European Patent Application No. 00 115 577.9. Jul. 23, 2002.
Williams, Randy, Dadi Gudmundsson, Kevin Monahan, Raman Nurani, Meryl Stoller and J. George Shanthikumar. Oct. 1999. “Optimized Sample Planning for Wafer Defect Inspection,” Semiconductor Manufacturing Conference Proceedings, 1999 IEEE International Symposium on Santa Clara, CA. Piscataway, NJ pp. 43-46.
Jul. 23, 2003. Invitation to Pay Additional Fees and Communication Relating to the Results of the Partial International Search for PCT/US02/19116.
Aug. 1, 2003. Written Opinion for PCT/US01/27406.
Aug. 20, 2003. Written Opinion for PCT/US01/22833.
Oct. 15, 2002. International Search Report prepared by the European Patent Office for PCT/US02/19062.
Levine, Martin D. 1985. Vision in Man and Machine. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc. pp. ix-xii, 1-58.
Pilu, Maurizio. Sep 2001. “Undoing Page Curl Distortion Using Applicable Surfaces.” IEEE International Conference on Image Processing. Thessalonica, Greece.
May 23, 2003. Written Opinion for PCT/US01/24910.
Zhou, Zhen-Hong and Rafael Reif. Aug. 1995. “Epi-Film Thickness Measurements Using Emission Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy—Part II: Real-Time in Situ Process Monitoring and Control.” IEEE Transactions on Semiconductor Manufacturing, vol. 8, No. 3.
Telfeyan, Roland, James Moyne, Nauman Chaudhry, James Pugmire, Scott Shellman, Duane Boning, William Moyne, Arnon Hurwitz, and John Taylor. Oct. 1995. “A Multi-Level Approach to the Control of a Chemical-Mechanical Planarization Process.” Minneapolis, Minnesota: 42nd National Symposium of the American Vacuum Society.
Chang, E., B. Stine, T. Maung, R. Divecha, D. Boning, J. Chung, K. Chang, G. Ray, D. Bradbury, O. S. Nakagawa, S. Oh, and D. Bartelink. Dec. 1995. “Using a Statistical Metrology Framework to Identify Systematic and Random Sources of Die-and Wafer-level ILD Thickness Variation in CMP Processes.” Washington, D.C.: International Electron Devices Meeting.
Smith, Taber, Duane Boning, James Moyne, Arnon Hurwitz, and John Curry. Jun. 1996. “Compensating for CMP Pad Wear Using Run by Run Feedback Control.” Santa Clara, California: VLSI Multilevel Interconnect Conference.
Boning, Duane, William Moyne, Taber Smith, James Moyne, Roland Telfeyan, Arnon Hurwitz, Scott Shellman, and John Taylor. Oct. 1996. “Run by Run Control of Chemical-Mechanical Polishing.” IEEE Trans. CPMT (C), vol. 19, No. 4, pp. 307-314.
Edgar, Thomas F., Stephanie W. Butler, Jarrett Campbell, Carlos Pfeiffer, Chris Bode, Sung Bo Hwang, and K.S. Balakrishnan. May 1998. “Automatic Control in Microelectronics Manufacturing: Practices, Challenges, and Possibilities.” Automatica, vol. 36, pp. 1567-1603, 2000.
Chemali, Chadi El, James Moyne, Kareemullah Khan, Rock Nadeau, Paul Smith, John Colt, Jonathan Chapple-Sokol, and Tarun Parikh. Nov. 1998. “Multizone Uniformity Control of a CMP Process Utilizing a Pre and Post-Measurement Strategy.” Seattle, Washington: SEMETECH Symposium.
Moyne, James. Oct. 1999. “Advancements in CMP Process Automation and Control.” Hawaii: (Invited paper and presentation to) Third International Symposium on Chemical Mechanical Polishing in IC Device Manufacturing: 196th Meeting of the Electrochemical Society.
Lee, Brian, Duane S. Boning, Winthrop Baylies, Noel Poduje, Pat Hester, Yong Xia, John Valley, Chris Koliopoulos, Dale Hetherington, HongJiang Sun, and Michael Lacy. Apr. 2001. “Wafer Nanotopography Effects on CMP: Experimental Validation of Modeling Methods.” San Francisco, California: Materials Research Society Spring Meeting.
NovaScan 2020. Feb. 2002. “Superior Integrated Process Control for Emerging CMP High-End Applications.”
International Search Report from PCT/US01/24910, completed Jul. 9, 2002.
Ostanin, Yu Ya. Oct. 1981. “Optimization of Thickness Inspection of Electrically Conductive Single-Layer Coatings with Laid-on Eddy-Current Transducers (Abstract),” Defektoskopiya, vol. 17, No. 10, pp. 45-52, Moscow, USSR.
Feb. 1984. “Substrate Screening Process,” IBM Technical Disclosure Bulletin, pp. 4824-4825.
Hermann, D. 1988. “Temperature Errors and Ways of Elimination for Contactless Measurement of Shaft Vibrations (Abstract),” Technisches Messen®, vol. 55, No. 1, pp. 27-30. West Germany.
Lin, Kuang-Kno and Costos J. Spanos. Nov. 1990. “Statistical Equipment Modeling for VLSI Manufacturing: An Application for LPCVD,” IEEE Transactions on Semiconductor Manufacturing, v. 3, n. 4, ppp. 216-229.
Chang, Norman H. and Cosias J. Spanos. Feb. 1991. “Continuous Equipment Diagnosis Using Evidence Integration: An LPCVD Application.” IEEE Transactions on Semiconductor Manufacturing, v. 3, n. 4, pp. 216-229.
Larrabee, G.B. May 1991. “The intelligent Microelectronics Factory of the Future (Abstract),” IEEE/SEMI International Semiconductor Manufacturing Science Symposium, pp. 30-34, Burlingame, CA.
Burk, Peter A. Jun. 1991. “Semi-Emperical Modelling of SiO2 Chemical-Mechanical Polishing Planarization.” VMIC Conference, 1991 IEEE, pp. 379-384. IEEE.
May 1992. “Laser Ablation Endpoint Detector,” IBM Technical Disclosure Bulletin, pp. 333-334.
Spanos, Costas J., Hsi-Fang Guo, Alan Miller, and Joanne Levine-Parrill. Nov. 1992. “Real-Time Statistical Process Control Using Tool Data.” IEEE Transactions on Semiconductor Manufacturing, v. 5, n. 4, pp. 308-318.
Feb. 1993, “Electroless Plating Scheme to Hermetically Seal Copper Features” IBM Technical Disclosure Bulletin, pp. 405-406.
Scarr, J.M. and J. K. Zelisse. Apr. 1993. “New Topology for Thickness Monitoring Eddy Current Sensors (Abtract).” Proceedings of the 36th Annual Technical Conference, Dallas, Texas.
Matsuyama, Akira and Jesse Niou. 1993. “A State-of-the-Art Automation System of an ASIC Wafer Fab in Japan.” IEEE/SEMI International Semiconductor Manufacturing Science Symposium, pp. 42-47.
Yeh, C. Eugene, John C. Cheng and Kwan Wong. 1993. “Implementation Challenge of a Feedback Control System for Wafer Fabrication,” IEEE/CHMT International Electronics Manufacturing Technology Symposium, pp. 438-442.
Kurtzberg, Jerome M. and Menachem Levanoni. Jan. 1994. “ABC: A Better Control for Manufacturing,” IBM Journal of Research and Development, v. 38, n. 1, pp. 11-30.
Mozunder, Pornendu K. and Gabriel G. Barns. Feb. 1994. “Statistical Feedback Control of a Plasma Etch Process.” IEEE Transactions on Semiconductor Manufacturing, v. 7, n. 1, pp. 1-11.
Muller-Heinzerling, Thomas, Ulrich Neu. Hans Georg Nurnberg and Wolfgang May. Mar. 1994. “Recipe-Controlled Operation of Batch Processes with Batch X.” ATP Automatisierungstechnische Praxis, vol. 36, No. 3, pp. 43-51.
Stoddard, K;P. Crouch M. Kozicki, and K. Tsakalis. Jun.-Jul. 1994.“Application of Feedforward and Adaptive Feedback Control to Semiconductor Device Manufacturing (Abstract).” Proceedings of 1994 American Control Conference-ACC ′94, vol. 1, pp. 892-896. Baltimore, Maryland.
Schaper, C.D., M.M. Moslehi, K.C. Saraswat, and T. Kailath. Nov. 1994. “Modeling, Identification, and Control of Rapid Thermal Processing Systems (Abstract),” Journal of the Electrochemical Society, vol. 141, no. 11, pp. 3200-3209.
Tao, K.M., R.L. Kosut, M. Ekblad, and G. Aral, Dec. 1994, “Feedforward Learning Applied to RTP of Semiconductor Wafers (Abstract),” Proceedings of the 33rd IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, vol. 1, pp. 67-72. Lake Buens Vista, Florida.
Hu, Albert, He Du, Steve Wong, Peter Ranteln, and Emmanuel Sachs. 1994. “Application of Run by Run Controller to the Chemical-Mechanical Planarization Process.” IEEE/CPMT International Electronics Manufacturing Technology Symposium, pp. 371-378.
Spanos, C.J., S. Leang, S.-Y. Ma, J. Thomson, B. Bombay, and X. Niu, May 1995. “A Multistep Supervisory Controller for Photolithographic Operations (Abstract),” Proceedings of the Symposium on Process Control, Diagnostics, and Modeling in Semiconductor Manufacturing, pp. 3-17.
Leang, Sovarong, Sheng-Yi Ma, John Thomson, Bart John Bombay, and Costas J. Spanos. May 1996. “A Control System for Photolithographic Sequences,” IEEE Transactions on Semiconductor Manufacturing, vol. 9, No. 2.
Boning, Duano S., William P. Moyne, Taber H. Smith, James Moyne, Ronald Telfeyan, Arnon Hurwitz, Scott Shellman, and John Taylor. Oct. 1996. “Run by Run Control of Chemical-Mechanical Polishing,” IEEE Transactions on Components, Packaging, and Manufacturing Technology-Part C, vol. 19, No. 4, pp. 307-314.
Zho, Ning, J.R. Moyne, T. Smith D. Boning, E. Del Castillo, Yeh Jinn-Yi, and Hurwitz. Nov. 1996. “A Comparative Analysis of Run-to-Run Control Algorithms in Semiconductor Manufacturing Industry (Abstract).” IEEE/SEMI 1996 Advanced Semiconductor Manufacturing Conferences Workshop, pp. 375-381.
Yasuda, M., T. Osaka, and M. Ikeda. Dec. 1996. “Feedforward Control of a Vibration Isolation System for Disturbance Suppression (Abstract),”Proceeding of the 35th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, vol. 2, pp. 1229-1233, Kobe, Japan.
Fan, Jr-Min, Ruey-Shan Guo, Shi-Chung Chang, and Kian-Huei Lee. 1996. “Abnormal Tred Detection of Sequence-Disordered Data Using EWMA Method,” IEEE/CPMT International Electronics Manufacturing Technology Symposiumpp. 355-363.
Smith, Taber and Duane Boning. 1996. “A Self-Turning EWMA Controller Utilizing Artificial Neural Network Functions Approximation Techniques,” IEEE/CPMT International Electronics Manufacturing Technology Symposium, pp. 355-363.
Guo, Ruey-Shan, Li-Shia Huang, Argon Chen, and Jin-Jung Chen. Oct. 1997. “A Cost-Effective Methodology for a Run-by-Run EWMA Controller.” 6th International Symposium on Semiconductor Manufacturing, pp. 61-64.
Mullins, J.A., W.J. Campbell, and A.D. Stock. Oct. 1997. “An Evaluation of Model Predictive Control in Run-to-Run EWMA Processing in Semiconductor Manufacturing (Abstract).” Proceedings of the SPIE-The International Society for Optical Engineering Conference, vol. 3213, pp. 182-189.
Reitman, E.A., D.J. Friedman, and E.R. Lory, Nov. 1997, “Pre-Production Results Demonstrating Multiple-System Models for Yield Analysis (Abstract),” IEEE Transactions on Semiconductor Manufacturing,vol. 10, No. 4, pp. 469-481.
Durham, Jim and Myriam Roussal. 1997. “A Statistical Method for Correlating In-Line Defectivity to Probe Yield.” IEEE/SEMI Advanced Semiconductor Manufacturing Conference, pp. 76-77.
Shindo, Wataru, Eric H. Wang, Ram Akella, and Andrzej J. Strojwas. 1997. “Excursion Detection and Source Isolation in Defect Inspection and Classification.” 2nd International Workshop on Statistical Metrology, pp. 90-93.
Jul. 1998, “Active Controller: Utilizing Active Databases for Implementing Multistep Control of Semiconductor Manufacturing (Abstract),” IEEE Transactions on Components, Packaging and Manufacturing Technology-Part C, vol. 21, No. 3, pp. 217-224.
Fang, S.J., A. Barda, T. Janecko, W. Little, D. Oufley, G. Hempel, S. Joshi, B. Morrison, G.B. Shinn, and M. Birang, 1998. “Control of Dielectric Chemical Mechanical Polishing (CMP) Using and Interferometry Based Endpoint Sensor,” International Proceedings of the IEEE Interconnect Technology Conference, pp. 76-78.
Ouma, Dennis, Duane Boning, James Chung, Greg Shinn, Leif Olsen, and John Clark. 1998, “An Integrated Characterization and Modeling Methodology for CMP Dielectric Planarization.” Proceedings of the IEEE 1998 International Interconnect Technology Conference, pp. 67-69.
Boning, Duane S., Jerry Stefani, and Stephanie W. Butler. Feb. 1999. “Statistical Methods for Semiconductor Manufacturing.” Encyclopedia of Electrical Engineering, I.G. Webster, Ed.
McIntosh, John. Mar. 1999. “Using CD-SEM Metrology in the Manufacture of Semiconductors (Abstract).” JOM, vol. 51, No. 3, pp. 38-39.
Pan, J. Troy, Ping Li, Kapila Wijkoon, Stan Tsai, and Fritz, Radaker, May 1999. “Copper CMP Integration and Time Dependent Pattern Effect,” IEEE 1990 International Interconnect Technology Conference, pp. 164-166.
Mecki, P.H. and K. Umemoto. Aug. 1999. “Achieving Fast Motions in Semiconductor Manufacturing Machinery (Abstract),” Proceedings of the 1999 IEEE International Conference on Control Applications, vol. 1, pp. 725-729. Kohaka Coast, HI.
Khan, K., C. El Chemali, J. Moyne, J. Chapple-Sokol, R. Nadeau P. Smith, C., and T. Parikh. Oct. 1999. “Yield Improvement at the Contact Process Through Run-to Run Control (Abstract),” 24th IEEE/CPMT Electronics Manufacturing Technology Symposium, pp. 258-263
Ruegregger, Steven, Aaron Wagner, James S. Freudenberg, and Dennis S, Grimard. Nov. 1999. “Feedforward Control for Reduced Run-to-Run Verification in Microelectronics Manufacturing,” IEEE Transactions on Semiconductor Manufacturing, vol. 12, No. 4.
Nov. 1999, “How to Use EWMA to Achieve SPC and EPC Control.” International Symposium on NDT Contribution to the Infrastructure Safety Systems, Tores, Brazil. <http://www.odt.net/abstract/ndtiss99/data/35.htm>.
Edgar, T.F., W.J. Campbell, and C. Bode, Dec. 1999. “Model-Based Control in Microelectronics Manufacturing,” Proceedings of the 38th IEEE Conference on Division and Control, Phoenix, Arizona, vol. 4, pp. 4185-4191.
Mecki, P.H. and K. Umamoto. Apr. 2000. “Achieving Fast Motions by Using Shaped Reference Inputs [Semiconductor Manufacturing Machine] (Abstract),” NEC Research and Development, vol. 41, No. 2, pp. 232-237.
Oechsner, R.T. Tschaftiary, S. Sommer, L. Pfitzner, H. Rystel, H. Gerath, C. Baier and M. Hafner. Sep. 2000, “Feed-forward Control for Lithography/Etch Sequence (Abstract),” Proceedings of the SPIE-The International Society for Optical Engineering Conference, vol. 4182, pp. 31-39.
Chaung, Robin. Oct. 18, 2000. “Copper Interconnect Technology,” AVS/CMP User Group Meeting, Santa Clara, CA.
Edgar, Thomas F., Stephanie W. Butler, W. Jarrett Campbell, Carlos Pfeiffer, Christopher Bode, Sung Bo Hwang, K.S. Balakrishman, and J. Hahn. Nov. 2000, “Automatic Control in Microelectronics Manufacturing: Practices, Challenges, and Possibilites (Abstract).” Automatica v. 36, n. 11.
Khan, S., M. Musavi, and H. Reason. Nov. 2000. “Critical Dimension Control in Semiconductor Manufacturing (Abstract),” ANNIE 2000, Smart Engineering Systems Design Conference, pp. 995-1000. St. Louis, Missouri.
ACM Research Inc, 2000, “Advanced Copper Metallization for 0.13 to 0.05 μm & Beyond.” <http://acmrc.com/press/ACM-ECP-brochure-pdf>.
Ravid, Avi, Avner Sharom, Amit Weingarten, Vladimir Machavariani, and David Scheiner. 2000. “Copper CMP Planarity Control Using ITM.” IEEE/SEMI Advanced Semiconductor Manufacturing Conference, pp. 437-443.
Chen, Argon and Ruey-Shan Guo. Feb. 2001. “Age-Based Double EWMA Controller and Its Application to CMP Processes,” IEEE Transactions on Semiconductor Manufacturing, vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 11-19.
Tobin, K.W., T.P. Karnowaki, L.F. Arrowood, and F. Lakhani, Apr. 2001 “Field Test Results of an Automated Image Retrieval System (Abstract).” Advanced Semiconductor Manufacturing Conference, 2001 IEEE/SEMI, Munich, Germany.
Tan, K.K, H.F. Dou, and K.Z. Tang. May-Jun. 2001. “Precision Motion Control System for Ultra-Precision Semiconductor and Electronics Components Manufacturing (Abstract),” 51st Electronic Components and Technology Conference 2001. Proceedings, pp. 1372-1379. Orlando, Florida.
Heuberger, U. Sep. 2001. “Coating Thickness Measurement with Dual-Function Eddy-Current & Magnetic Inductance Instrument (Abstract).” Galvantechnik, vol. 92, No. 9, pp. 2354-2366+IV..
Wang, LiRen and Hefin Rowlands. 2001. “A Novel NN-Puzzy-SPC Feedback Control System.” 8th IEEE International Conference on Emerging Technologies and Factory Automation, pp. 417-423.
Moyne, J., V. Solakhiau, A. Yershov, M. Anderson, and D. Mockler-Hebert. Apr.-May 2002. “Development and Deployment of a Multi-Component Advanced Process Control System for an Epitaxy Tool (Abstract).” 2002 IEEE Advanced Semiconductor Manufacturing Conference and Workshop, pp. 125-130.
Sarfaty, M., A. Shanmugasundram, A. Schwarm, J. Paik, Jimin Zhang, Rong Pan, M.J. Seamons, H. Li, R. Hung, and S. Parikh. Apr.-May 2002. “Advance Process Control Solutions for Semiconductor Manufacturing (Abstract).” 13th Annual IEEE/SEMI Advanced Semiconductor Manufacturing Conference. Advancing the Science and Technology of Semiconductor Manufacturing ASMC 2002, pp. 101-106. Boston, MA.
Campbell, W.J., S.K. Firth. A.J. Toprac, and T.F. Edgar. May 2002. “A Comparison of Run-to-Run Control Algorithms (Abstract).” Proceedings of 2002 American Control Conference, vol. 3, pp. 2150-2155.
Good, Richard and S. Joe Qin. May 2002. “Stability Analysis of Double EWMA. Run-to-Run Control with Metrology Delay,” IEEE/CPMT International Electronics Manufacturing Technology Symposium, pp. 355-363.
Smith, Stewart, Anthony J. Walton, Alan W.S. Ross, Georg K. H. Bodammer, and J.T.M. Stevenson. May 2002. “Evaluation of Sheet Resistance and Electrical Linewidth Measurement Technique for Copper Damascene Interconnect.” IEEE Transactions on Semiconductor Manufacturing, vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 285-287.
Itabashi, Takeyuki, Hiroshi Nakano, and Harvo Akahoshi. Jun. 2002. “Electroless Deposited CoWB for Copper Diffusion Barrier Metal.” IEEE International Interconnect Technology Conference, pp. 285-287.
ACM Research, Inc. 2002. “ACM Ultra ECP® System: Electro-Copper Plating (ECP) Deposition.” www.acmrc.com/ecp.html.
Applied Materials, Inc. 2002. “Applied Materials: Information for Everyone: Copper Electrochemical Plating.” www.appliedmaterials.com/products/copper_electrochemical_plating.html.
KLA-Tencor Corporation. 2002, “KLA Tencor; Press Release: KLA-Tencor Introduces First Production-Worthy Copper CMP In-Situ Film Thickness and End-point Control System: Multi-Million Dollar Order Shipped to Major CMP Tool Manufacturer.” www.kia-tencor.com/news_events/press_releases/press_releases2001/984086002.html.
Takahashi, Shingo, Kaori Tai, Hijzu Ohtorii, Naoki Komai, Yuji Sagawa, Hiroshi Horikoshi, Zenya Yasuda, Hiroshi Yamada, Masao Ishiharam and Takeshi Nogami. 2002. “Fragile Porous Low-k/Copper Integration by Using Electro-Chemical Polishing,” 2002 Symposium on VLSI Technology Digest of Technical Papers, pp. 32-33.
Cunningham, James A. 2003. “Using Electrochemistry to Improve Copper Interconnects.” <http://www.-e-insite.net/semiconductor/indexasp?layoutarticle&articleideCA47465>.
Mar. 25, 2003. International Search Report for PCT/US02/24859 prepared by the European Patent Office.
Adams, Bret W., Bogdan Swedek, Rajesv Bajaj, Fritz Redeker, Manush Birang, and Gregory Amico. “Full-Wafer Endpoint Detection Improves Process Control in Copper CMP.” Semiconductor Fabtech -12th Edition. Applied Materials, Inc., Santa Clara, CA.
Berman, Mike, Thomas Bibby, and Alan Smith, “Review of In Situ & In-limo Desection for CMP Applications.” Semiconductor Fabtech, 8th Edition, pp. 267-274.
“Semiconductor Manufacturing: As Overview.” <http://users.ecc.gatech.edu/-graxyloverview.html>.
Feb. 1984. “Method and Apparatus of in Situ Measurement and Overlay Error Analysis for Correcting Step and Repeat Lithographic Cameras.” IBM Technical Disclosure Bulletin, pp. 4855-4859.
Oct. 1984. “Method to Characterize the Stability of a Step and Repeat Lithographic System.” IBM Technical Disclosure Bulletin, pp. 2857-2860.
Schmid, Hans Albrecht. 1995. “Creating the Architecture of a Manufacturing Framework by Design Patterns.” Austin, Texas: OOPSLA.
Baliga, John. Jul. 1999. “Advanced Process Control: Soon to be a Must.” Cahners Semiconductor International. www.semiconductor.net/semiconductor/issues/issues/1999/jul99/docs/feature1.asp.
Jul. 5, 2001. “Motorola and Advanced Micro Devices Buy ObjectSpace Catalyst Advanced Process Control Product for Five Wafer Fabs.” Semiconductor FABTECH. www.semiconductorfabtech.com/industry.news/9907/20.07.shtml.
Oct. 15, 2001. Search Report prepared by the Austrian Patent Office for Singapore Patent Application No. 200004286-1.
Johnson, Bob. Jun. 10, 2002. “Advanced Process Control Key to Moore's Law.” Gartner, Inc.
Jul. 29, 2002. International Search Report prepared by the European Patent Office for PCT/US01/27407.
Sonderman, Thomas. 2002. “APC as a Competitive Manufacturing Technology: AMD's Vision for 300mm.” AEC/APC.