Method, system, and medium for handling misrepresentative metrology data within an advanced process control system

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 6999836
  • Patent Number
    6,999,836
  • Date Filed
    Friday, August 1, 2003
    21 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, February 14, 2006
    18 years ago
Abstract
A system, method and medium of controlling a semiconductor manufacturing tool using a feedback control mechanism. The feedback control mechanism includes features for receiving data points relating to an output of the tool. The data points include a current data point and at least one previous data point. The feedback control mechanism also includes features for determining whether the current data point is an erroneous outlier by comparing the current data point to a statistical representation of the at least one previous data point, and based on whether the at least one previous data point is an outlier. The feedback control mechanism further includes features for disregarding the current data point in calculating a feedback value of the feedback control mechanism if the current data point is determined as an erroneous outlier.
Description
FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present invention relates to improved feedback controllers designed for manufacturing semiconductor devices. In particular, the feedback controllers of the present invention include features to detect erroneous data points and to prevent those data points from affecting the operation of the feedback controllers.


BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

There is a constant drive within the semiconductor industry to increase the quality, reliability and throughput of integrated circuit devices, e.g., microprocessors, memory devices, and the like, while lowering the costs of manufacturing such devices. This drive is, in part, fueled by consumer demands for faster, higher quality computers and electronic devices at lower prices. These demands have resulted in continual improvements in the manufacturing of semiconductor devices.


In manufacturing semiconductor devices, it is a well-known practice to use feedback controllers to ensure high quality and low cost. An example of a feedback controller system 100, shown in FIG. 1, includes a tool 103 and a feedback controller 107 coupled each other. The tool 103 can be one or any combination of semiconductor-manufacturing tools such as a chemical mechanical planarization (CMP) tool, a depositor, an etcher, etc. In particular, the tool 103 receives wafers as input 101 and processes them according to a set of control parameters 109, e.g., recipes received from the controller 107. The processed wafers are referred to as outputs 105. Examples of processes are depositing a new layer of film, etching a layer, etc.


Once the tool 103 processes a wafer, one or more metrology stations, not shown in FIG. 1, make measurements on the processed wafer. The measurements are communicated to the controller 107. The controller 107 then compares the measurements to predicted values calculated previously. Based on the comparison, the controller 107 makes adjustments to the control parameters 109. For example, if the thickness of a newly deposited layer is outside of a desired range when the measurement is compared with the predicted value, the controller 107 adjusts one or more of the control parameters 109, e.g., the amount of gas flow, the length of processing time, etc., to deposit a thinner film on the next wafer. The tool 103 then receives another wafer and processes the wafer using the adjusted control parameters.


The performance of the feedback controller depends on, in part, receiving accurate measurements from the metrology stations. When inaccurate or erroneous measurements are received, the feedback controller needs to identify such measurements and have a mechanism to prevent such measurements from affecting the operation. In conventional feedback controllers, no robust mechanism was provided to address erroneous measurements. When erroneous measurements are entered repeatedly to the controller 107, they cause increased defects, low yields, or both in devices formed on processed wafers.


SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

Embodiments of the present invention advantageously identify erroneous measurements and prevent the erroneous measurements from being input to a feedback controller. In particular, embodiments of the present invention provide a system, method and medium for initially identifying erroneous data points and preventing them from affecting the operation of the feedback controller. Embodiments of the present invention include features for receiving data points relating to an output of the tool. The data points include a current data point and at least one previous data point. The at least one previous data point is received before the current data point. Embodiments of the present invention also include features for determining whether the current data point is an erroneous outlier by comparing the current data point to a statistical representation of the at least one previous data point, and based on whether the at least one previous data point was also an outlier. Embodiments of the present invention further include features for disregarding the current data point in calculating a feedback value of the feedback control mechanism if the current data point is determined as an erroneous outlier.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The detailed description of the present application showing various distinctive features may be best understood when the detailed description is read in reference to the appended drawing in which:



FIG. 1 is a block diagram illustrating a conventional feedback control system;



FIG. 2 is a graph illustrating an example outlier data point;



FIG. 3 is a graph illustrating an example step change;



FIG. 4 is a block diagram illustrating a feedback controller that includes an optimizer and an estimator according to embodiments of the present invention;



FIG. 5 is a flow chart illustrating high level features of the estimator according to embodiments of the present invention;



FIG. 6 is a flow chart illustrating features of the estimator with respect to determining an outlier according to embodiments of the present invention;



FIG. 7 is a flow chart illustrating features of the estimator with respect to adjusting measurements according to embodiments of the present invention;



FIGS. 8A and 8B are flow charts illustrating features of overall sequence of steps according to embodiments of the present invention;



FIG. 9 is a graph illustrating example measurement values processed according to embodiments of the present invention; and



FIG. 10 is a block diagram representation of a computer within which an example embodiment of the feedback controller can operate according to embodiments of the present invention.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION

A feedback system for a semiconductor manufacturing tool typically includes a metrology station (which can be internal to or external of the tool) to make measurements on one or more characteristics of outputs (e.g., processed wafers) of the tool and a feedback controller to change the operation of the tool based on data points (where a data point is calculated from or equivalent to one or more measurements of a wafer or wafers). Various embodiments of the present invention relate to feedback controllers that include features for identifying outlier data points (i.e., data points that are substantially different from one or more previous data points), for differentiating the outlier data points into erroneous outlier data points and non-erroneous outlier data points (e.g., outliers representing a change in the status of the tool), and for removing the erroneous data points from affecting the operation of the feedback controller and its tool. These embodiments are illustrated in connection with FIGS. 5-6. As noted above, a data point can be calculated from one or more measurements of a single wafer. These measurements can also contain outliers that are substantially different from other measurements taken from the wafer. In at least some embodiments of the present invention, these outlier measurements are identified and removed before calculating any data points for the wafer. These embodiments are described in connection with FIG. 7. In at least some embodiments of the present invention, portions or all of the features of the above-mentioned embodiments relating to identifying and removing outliers from measurements and data points can be combined into one system. These embodiments are described in connection with FIGS. 8A-8B.


Before various embodiments of the present invention are described, the general concept of outliers is first described in more detail. As noted above, an outlier is a data point that is significantly different from previous data points. The significance of the difference can be measured in terms of statistics, e.g., average, median, standard deviation, etc. An outlier data point may indicate that a change has occurred in the tool and that a response by the feedback controller may be required (e.g., adjusting control parameters). In other instances, an outlier data point may indicate that the measurements made by the metrology station are erroneous (i.e., an erroneous outlier data point). In such a case, the erroneous outlier data point is removed from affecting the operation of the feedback controller. To further explain these concepts, an example of an erroneous outlier is illustrated in FIG. 2, and an outlier data point representing a non-erroneous outlier is illustrated in FIG. 3.


More specifically, in FIG. 2, a black line 201 depicts a trace of differences between data points and their respective predicted values in a sequence of processed wafers. In the present invention, the predicted values are calculated based on, in part, previous data points. In the y-axis, difference values, F(k), of the processed wafers are shown. Processed wafer 20 has its difference value at 1, while wafers 1-19 and 21-40 have their difference values at zero. The data point for wafer 20 depicted in FIG. 2 misrepresents or incorrectly characterizes the processes that took place in the tool because the difference value jumps to 1 for wafer 20 and drops back to zero. It may also represent an error in calculating the data point that was the basis for calculating the difference value. Such a data point is preferably treated as an erroneous input. Accordingly, it is desirable to prevent such a data point from being input to the feedback controller.


In FIG. 3, a similar change occurs at processed wafer 20, but the difference values stay at 1 for wafers 21-40. In such a case, the difference value for wafer 20 most likely represents the leading edge of a change rather than an erroneous outlier. The change illustrated in FIG. 3 contains relevant information regarding the processes that took place in the tool. Accordingly, it is desirable to input the data point at the leading edge of the change to the feedback controller in order to make appropriate adjustments.


To distinguish erroneous outliers from non-erroneous outliers, embodiments of the present invention include, among other features, a tool 401, one or more metrology stations 403, and a feedback controller 406 that includes an estimator 405 and an optimizer 407 as illustrated in FIG. 4. The tool 401 is similar to that described above in connection with FIG. 1. The metrology stations 403 (which can be part of, or external to, tool 401) are configured to make one or more measurements on the processed wafers. In particular, the measurements can be of different categories, e.g., the thickness of deposited films, various features of transitions, etc. The metrology stations 403 can also make one or more measurements for each category measurement. For instance, the metrology stations 403 can measure the thickness of a wafer at multiple points on a processed wafer.


The values of the measurements made by the metrology stations 403 are communicated to the controller 406. Upon receiving the measurement values, the estimator 405 calculates one or more data points from the measurements. The estimator 405 is configured to improve prediction capabilities of the controller 406 based on new information, e.g., data points, etc.


Once a data point is calculated, it is processed as shown in FIG. 5. In particular, the estimator 405 determines if the new data point is significantly different from the predicted value, and can thus be considered a “candidate” outlier (step 503). If so, the data point is designated as a candidate outlier (step 504). It is called a candidate because whether the outlier is an erroneous data point or a data point representing a change is determined later. If the data point is not a candidate outlier, then the estimator 405 calculates and communicates a feedback value of the data point to the optimizer 407 (step 509). Here, the feedback value is a value proportional to the difference (if any) between the value of the data point and the predicted value calculated by the controller 406. The optimizer 407 then uses the feedback value in calculating a new set of control parameters. In embodiments of the present invention, the optimizer 407 is configured to produce control parameters in an optimal way (e.g., minimal changes to the control parameters while meeting all targets in driving the tool to produce desired outputs).


If the data point is a candidate outlier, and the previous data point was not marked as a candidate outlier (as determined by step 505 in processing the previous data point), the data point is most likely an erroneous data point (i.e., an erroneous outlier) similar to the one depicted in FIG. 2. As such, no feedback value is communicated to the optimizer 407 (step 511(a)). In other words, such a data point is removed from affecting the operation of the optimizer 407. It follows that if the previous data point is not a candidate outlier, the data point is a candidate, and a subsequent data point is not a candidate, then the data point is an erroneous data point.


In at least some embodiments of the present invention, the estimator 405 determines if two or more previous data points were marked as outliers instead of just one previous data point. In such embodiments, if the two or more previous data points were not marked as outliers, the data point is designated as an erroneous outlier. Once again, no feedback value is communicated to the optimizer 407. When no feedback value is communicated, the optimizer 407 can use the previous set of control parameters in controlling the tool 401.


In at least some embodiments, instead of preventing the feedback value of every candidate outlier from being input to the optimizer 407, a threshold test is first performed. In these embodiments of the present invention, even if the new data point is determined to be a candidate outlier, if the difference between the data point and the predicted value falls below/above the threshold value, then a feedback value is communicated to the optimizer 407 to be used in calculating the control parameters. It should be noted that the threshold can also be a range as well.


If the estimator 405 determines that the previous data point was also an outlier (or a candidate outlier), this condition is similar to the one depicted in FIG. 3 because the change that took place with the previous data point continues in the current data point. In such a case, the feedback value of the previous data point would not have been communicated to the optimizer 407 for the previous data point, when it should have been because it represented a change. Hence, the estimator 405 first calculates the feedback value of the previous data point, and the feedback value of the new data point is then calculated. The latter value is communicated to the optimizer 407 to be used in calculating the control parameters (step 507).


Although the above description is provided for processing one data point to calculate one feedback value, any number of data points can be used in calculating any number of feedback values. Hence, the optimizer 407 is configured to receive any number of feedback values from the estimator 405. More specifically, when it receives the feedback values from the estimator 405, the optimizer 407 calculates a new set of control parameters. In calculating the new set of control parameters, the optimizer 407 may simply make adjustments to the previous set of control parameters based on the feedback values received.


The above-described features of the controller 406 are now described in more detail by referring to FIG. 6. More specifically, in at least some embodiments of the present invention, in order to determine if a data point is a candidate outlier, a statistical filter is used. In at least some embodiments of the present invention, an exponentially-weighted moving average (EWMA) filter is used. In embodiments of the present invention, other types of filters can also be used, e.g., finite-impulse response, infinite-impulse response, or wavelet-based filters. In the following example, the exponentially-weighted moving average for variance of prediction value can be expressed as:

Sk=β(Fk−Δk)2+(1−β)Sk−1

The corresponding value of standard deviation is expressed as:

Sk=√{square root over (Sk)}

where,

  • 1. β is a coefficient used for the EWMA filter;
  • 2. Fk is the difference between the data point and predicted value for wafer k, and it can be expressed as yk−1actual−yk−1predicated, where
    • yk−1actual is the actual value measured at time/wafer k−1; and
    • yk−1predicted is the predicted value at time/wafer k−1; and
  • 3. Δk is a feedback value for time k, Δk. One example set of equations for calculating a feedback value is as follows:

    if |Fk−Δk|≦Knsk
    Δk+1kFk+(1−λkk
    else
    Δk+1k
    • where, λk is a coefficient used for the EWMA-based filter, which is optionally a function of time and/or other processing events (the value of λk may also be set to be a function of wafer number, distance from target or another type of process related event such as the beginning of a new lot or change in process condition); and
    • Kn is a value called outlier coefficient, which can be set to a certain value, e.g., 0.1.


As the above equations for the feedback value indicate, the feedback value is updated when the difference between Fk and the feedback value is greater than a specified threshold value, Knsk. This places a limit on the size of adjustments the optimizer 407 may make.


Using the above-described equations, the step of determining whether the data point is a candidate outlier is described. First, when a data point is received, a moving average and its square-root values are updated (step 601). Using these values, a threshold test is performed to determine when the data point is a candidate outlier. For instance:


if (Fk−Δk)≧KSk−1, the data point can be marked as “candidate=1”;


if (Fk−Δk)≦−Ksk−1, the data point is marked as “candidate =−1”; and


in all other cases the data point is marked as “candidate =0”.


In other words, the data point is marked as a candidate outlier if |Fk−Δk| is greater than Ksk−1, and it is not marked as an outlier otherwise. Here, K is set to a certain value, e.g., 3. The actual marking is designated as follows:


“0” if the data point is not a candidate;


“1” if actual value for the data point is significantly higher than predicted value and feed back (a candidate); and


“−1” if actual value for the data point is significantly lower than predicted value and feed back (a candidate).


After determining whether a data point is a candidate or not, the estimator 405 determines a state of the data point. Here, a state indicates whether the previous data point was marked as an outlier (step 603):

    • if the data point is not a candidate outlier, the state is set to ‘regular’;
    • if the data point is a candidate outlier and the previous data point was not marked as an outlier, then the data point is meanwhile regarded as an outlier, and the state is set to ‘ignore’; and
    • if the data point is a candidate outlier and the previous data point was not marked as an outlier, both points are used for the filter calculations, and the state is set to ‘two’.


The following is a set of pseudo codes that capture the above-described feature of setting the state of the data point:

















If candidate == 0



State = ‘regular’









If candidate != 0 and candidate*prev_candidate != 1









State = ‘ignore’









If candidate != 0 and candidate*prev_candidate == 1









State = ‘two’









capture pos and neg.










Once the state is set as described above, the estimator 405 performs the steps described in connection with FIG. 5 in calculating the feedback value. In addition, the estimator 405 also calculates various values of the exponentially-weighted moving average filter and its variance to be used when the next data point arrives: If state==‘two’ and new data point was marked as “−1” or “+1”: The following equations calculate the values for the previous and the present data points (steps 605 and 607) and feedback values.
Sk-1=β(Fk-1-Δk-1)2+(1-β)Sk-1  Δk=λk-1Fk-1+(1-λk-1)Δk-1Sk=β(Fk-Δk)2+(1-β)Sk-1Δk+1=λkFk+(1-λk)Δksk=Sk

If state==‘regular’: The following equations calculate the values for the present data points (step 607) and feedback values.
Sk=β(Fk-Δk)2+(1-β)Sk-1ifFk-ΔkKnskΔk+1=λkFk+(1-λk)Δksk=SkelseΔk+1=Δk

If state==‘ignore’ (implemented also if no wafer arrived in case of missing data): The previously set values are as indicated below.
Sk=Sk-1Δk+1=Δksk=Sk


Now turning to describe embodiments relating to identifying and removing outlier measurements in calculating data points, the outlier measurements may occur due to problems related to the metrology stations such as misalignment of the measurement coordinates or due to physical phenomena such as the presence of particles. These problems negatively influence the measurement accuracy. Therefore, it is desirable to identify and remove outlier measurements before they are used in calculating data points. In at least some embodiments of the present invention, measurements and information needed to determine outliers are resource specific. This means the information is retained based upon which specific tool or chamber the wafer was processed. Also, the values for the statistical analysis are advantageously maintained as relative values rather than as absolute values.


In these embodiments, the estimator 405 receives a number of measurements from one or more of metrology stations 403 (step 701). In particular, the estimator 405 retains sufficient information to determine in which specific tool or chamber the wafer was processed. After receiving the measurements from the metrology stations, the estimator 405 calculates their mean and variance values (step 703). In particular, the mean and variance are expressed as:
Mi=1nik=1nixikVi=(1ni-1)k=1ni(xik-Mi)2

    • where,
    • data sets are designated as set j and run/wafer i;
    • Mi is the mean; and
    • Vi is the variance.


The mean and variance values can be calculated using a portion or all of the population of the measurements collected for the run/wafer i. The set i corresponds to data which is a subset of the total measurements performed, defined as xik where k=1, . . . , ni, with ni being the fraction of the total data collected for the run/wafer i.


Since in most semiconductor manufacturing processes the variation of the metrology scales with the average value, a scaling operation (i.e., dividing the variance by a squared mean) can be performed and stored as a scaled variance, Di. However, a check is performed before the scaling operation to determine if the mean is too small to perform a scaling operation, e.g., a half of a squared mean value is smaller than the variance (step 705). If the scaling is performed, a register called “FLAG” is set to one (step 709). If the scaling is not performed, the “FLAG” register and the scaled variance are set to zero (step 707). The following is a set of equations describing these features:
if(Vi<Mi2/2)FLAG=1Di=ViMi2elseDi=0FLAG=0


The estimator 405 then calculates a filtered estimate of the Di and Vi, which are designated as Di+1f and Vi+1f, respectively (step 711). One example filter is the EWMA.


 if i=1

Di+1f=Di
Vi+1f=Vi
else
Di+1f=λ·min(Di+1, Di)+(1−λ)·Dif
Vi+1f=λ·min(Vi+1, Vi)+(1−λ)·Vif


The estimator 405 then calculates the standard deviation, σi. This value is calculated in two different ways based on to which value the “FLAG” was set (step 713).

if i=1
if FLAG=1
σi=√{square root over (Di)}
else
σi=√{square root over (Vi)}
else
if FLAG=1
σi=√{square root over({hacek over (D)})}i
else
σi=√{square root over({hacek over (V)})}i


The estimator 405, which receives a reliability level from a user (step 715), calculates a sigma coefficient Kf, based on the reliability level. The estimator 405 also calculates the median, Rji, of the measurement values (step 717). Using the median, Rji, for run/wafer i data set j, the sigma coefficient Kf, and the filtered estimate of the standard deviation σi, the estimator 405 calculates an interval (step 719). An example of the interval can be expressed as:


 if FLAG=1

Rji−KfσiRji≦xki≦Rji+KfσiRji
else
Rji−Kfσi≦xki≦Rji+Kfσi


The estimator 405 calculates the average of the set of measurement values that fall within the interval (step 721). The estimator 405 replaces all measurements in set j that lie outside the interval with the average value, and sets these points to be outliers (step 723). The estimator 405 then recalculates and stores the filtered estimate values (step 725). The value of X is configurable in a graphical user interface.


Although embodiments described above in connection with FIG. 7 have been separately described from the embodiments describe above in connection with FIGS. 5-6, it should be noted that features of these embodiments can be combined. For instance, when one or more metrology stations make a number of measurements on a processed wafer, these measurements can first undergo the calculations as illustrated in FIG. 7. Subsequently, the calculated averages are designated as data points, and then can undergo the processes as illustrated in FIGS. 5-6. Example embodiments of the present invention that combine the features mentioned above are described below in connection with FIGS. 8A and 8B.


As illustrated in FIG. 8A, measurements that include the value of goodness-of-fit (GOF) are received from the metrology stations 403 (step 801). The estimator 405 conducts a measurement outlier screening (step 803). This step is similar to the steps described above in connection with calculating an interval for the measurements; however, in these embodiments, the GOF and statistical outlier limits for specifically controlled output are provided from memory (805). If all measurements are outside the interval, then the measurements are not used in calculating a feedback value (step 809). If all measurements are not outside the interval, then the estimator 405 calculates the average value of the measurements that fall within the interval (step 811). The estimator 405 then updates statistical information (step 813), which can then be stored as an array of statistical information for specific controlled output from previous runs (step 815).


The average value calculated in step 811 is used as a data point. The estimator 405 performs a data point outlier screen step, which determines whether the data point is a candidate outlier similar to the steps described above in connection with FIGS. 5-6. Based on step 817, the estimator 405 determines if the data point is an outlier. If it is an outlier, then the data point is not used in calculating a feedback value (step 825). A state of the data point is determined similar to the steps described above in connection with steps 603, 605 and 607 (step 821). The estimator 405 stores the current state of the data point (step 823). If the data point is not an outlier, the estimator 405 performs a feedback value screening (step 827), which is similar to the threshold test described above in connection with FIGS. 5-6. Based on the feedback value screening, the estimator 405 determines whether the feedback value is within noise limits (step 829). If the feedback value is within the noise limits, then the feedback value is not communicated to the optimizer 407 (step 831). Otherwise, the feedback value is communicated to the optimizer (step 833). Regardless of whether the feedback value falls within the noise limits, the estimator updates statistical information of relating to the data point (step 835). The resulting values are stored as statistical information for specific controlled output from previous runs to be used in performing the feedback outlier screening (step 837) and noise screening steps (step 839).


The results of performing the above-described embodiments of the present invention are graphically illustrated in FIG. 9. In particular, each data point represents a wafer being processed by Chemical Vapor Deposition (CVD). A metrology station collects thickness measurements of the processed wafers. For the measurements within normal operation, the average values of the measurements are used as the data points. When the measurements are out of range 907 (e.g., above a threshold value set to detect catastrophic cases), then the tool is halted and a message (e.g., an e-mail message and/or page) is sent to an operator. Moreover, such a set of measurements is not used in calculating a feedback value. When one of the measurements is out of an interval (e.g., 905), then the measurement is replaced with the average of the measurements within the interval and the filter values are stored.


Embodiments of the present invention can be implemented as a set of computer executable codes (e.g., computer programs), implemented using computer hardware, or any combination of them. In particular, embodiments of the present invention are described in terms of various flow charts as shown in FIGS. 5-8A, B. Various acts depicted in the flow charts can be implemented as codes in computer programs or using computer hardware.


Now turning to describe the software implemented embodiments of the present invention, FIG. 10 illustrates a block diagram of such embodiments. A bus 1056 serves as the main information highway interconnecting various components. CPU 1058 is the central processing unit, performing calculations and logic operations required to execute the processes of the present invention as well as other programs. Read only memory (ROM) 1060 and random access memory (RAM) 1062 constitute the main memory. Disk controller 1064 interfaces one or more disk drives to the system bus 1056. These disk drives are, for example, floppy disk drives 1070, or CD ROM or DVD (digital video disks) drives 1066, or internal or external hard drives 1068. These various disk drives and disk controllers are optional devices.


A display interface 1072 interfaces display 1048 and permits information from the bus 1056 to be displayed on display 1048. Communications with external devices such as the other components of the system described above, occur utilizing, for example, communication port 1074. Optical fibers and/or electrical cables and/or conductors and/or optical communication (e.g., infrared, and the like) and/or wireless communication (e.g., radio frequency (RF), and the like) can be used as the transport medium between the external devices and communication port 1074. Peripheral interface 1054 interfaces the keyboard 1050 and mouse 1052, permitting input data to be transmitted to bus 1056. In addition to these components, the analyzer also optionally includes an infrared transmitter and/or infrared receiver. Infrared transmitters are optionally utilized when the computer system is used in conjunction with one or more of the processing components/stations that transmits/receives data via infrared signal transmission. Instead of utilizing an infrared transmitter or infrared receiver, the computer system may also optionally use a low power radio transmitter 1080 and/or a low power radio receiver 1082. The low power radio transmitter transmits the signal for reception by components of the production process, and receives signals from the components via the low power radio receiver. The low power radio transmitter and/or receiver are standard devices in the industry.


Although the embodiments depicted in FIG. 10 are illustrated having a single processor, a single hard disk drive and a single local memory, the analyzer is optionally suitably equipped with any multitude or combination of processors or storage devices. For example, the various embodiments may be replaced by, or combined with, any suitable processing system operative in accordance with the principles of embodiments of the present invention, including sophisticated calculators, and hand-held, laptop/notebook, mini, mainframe and super computers, as well as processing system network combinations of the same.


Computer readable memory medium stores computer readable code or instructions. As one example, the medium may be used with disk drives illustrated in FIG. 10. Typically, memory media such as a CD ROM, a digital video disk, or floppy disks will contain, for example, a multi-byte locale for a single byte language and the program information for controlling the modeler to enable the computer to perform the functions described herein. Alternatively, ROM 1060 and/or RAM 1062 illustrated in FIG. 10 can also be used to store the program information that is used to instruct the central processing unit 1058 to perform the operations associated with various automated processes of the present invention. Other examples of suitable computer readable media for storing information include magnetic, electronic, or optical (including holographic) storage, some combination thereof, etc.


In general, it should be emphasized that the various components of embodiments of the present invention can be implemented in hardware, software or a combination thereof. In such embodiments, the various components and steps would be implemented in hardware and/or software to perform the functions of embodiments of the present invention. Any presently available or future developed computer software language and/or hardware components can be employed in such embodiments of the present invention. For example, at least some of the functionality mentioned above could be implemented using Visual Basic, C, C++, or any computer language appropriate in view of the processor(s) being used. It could also be written in an interpretive environment such as Java and transported to multiple destinations to various users.


The many features and advantages of embodiments of the present invention are apparent from the detailed specification, and thus, it is intended by the appended claims to cover all such features and advantages of the invention, which fall within the true spirit, and scope of the invention. Further, since numerous modifications and variations will readily occur to those skilled in the art, it is not desired to limit the invention to the exact construction and operation illustrated and described, and accordingly, all suitable modifications and equivalents may be resorted to, falling within the scope of the invention.

Claims
  • 1. A method of controlling a semiconductor manufacturing tool using a feedback control mechanism, comprising: (a) receiving a plurality of data points relating to an output of the tool including a current data point and at least one previous data point; (b) determining whether the current data point is an outlier based on: (b-1) comparing the current data point to a statistical representation of the at least one previous data point; and (b-2) whether the at least one previous data point is an outlier; and (c) disregarding the current data point in calculating a feedback value of the feedback control mechanism if the current data point is determined as an outlier.
  • 2. The method of claim 1, wherein (b) further comprises: determining the current data point as an outlier only if the at least one previous data point is not an outlier.
  • 3. The method of claim 1 or 2, further comprising: (d) calculating the feedback value of the feedback control mechanism using the current data point and the at least one previous data point if the current data point is determined as not an outlier.
  • 4. The method of claim 1 or 2, further comprising: (d) calculating a previous feedback value for the at least one previous data point and then calculating the feedback value based on the previous feedback value and the current data point if the at least one previous data point is an outlier and the current data point is an outlier.
  • 5. The method of claim 1 or 2, wherein the statistical representation of (b-1) is a weighted moving average of the at least one previous data point.
  • 6. The method of claim 1 or 2, wherein the statistical representation of (b-1) is an exponentially-weighted moving average of the at least one previous data point.
  • 7. The method of claim 1 or 2, wherein the statistical representation of (b-1) is expressed as: Sk=β(Fk−Δk)2+(1−β)Sk−1
  • 8. The method of claim 7, wherein the value of Δk is calculated as: if |Fk−Δk|≦Knsk Δk+1=λkFk+(1−λk)Δk else Δk+1=Δk where, λk is a coefficient; Kn is an outlier coefficient; and sk=√{square root over (Sk)}.
  • 9. The method of claim 7, further comprising: updating Sk as Sk=β(Fk−Δk)2+(1−β)Sk−1 when the current data point is determined as not an outlier.
  • 10. The method of claim 7, further comprising: updating Sk as Sk=Sk−1 when the current data point is determined as an outlier.
  • 11. The method of claim 6, further comprising: updating Sk as Sk−1=β(Fk−1−Δk−1)2+(1−β)Sk−1; and then updating Sk as Sk=β(Fk−Δk)2+(1−β)Sk−, when the current data point is determined as not an outlier and the previous data was not determined as an outliner.
  • 12. The method of claim 1 or 2, further comprising: making a plurality of measurements on the output of the tool using at least one metrology station; and calculating the current data point based on the plurality of measurements.
  • 13. The method of claim 12, further comprising: calculating an interval based on statistical information relating to the plurality of measurements; identifying a subset among the plurality of measurements that fall within the interval; and calculating the current data point from the subset of the plurality of the measurements.
  • 14. The method of claim 13, wherein the statistical information relates to at least one of a median and a standard deviation of the plurality of measurements.
  • 15. The method of claim 14, further comprising: calculating the standard deviation based on one of a variance and a scaled variance of the plurality of measurements.
  • 16. A system of controlling a semiconductor manufacturing tool using a feedback control mechanism, comprising: an estimator configured to receive a plurality of data points relating to an output of the tool including a current data point and at least one previous data point, wherein the estimator is further configured to determine whether the current data point is an outlier based on comparing the current data point to a statistical representation of the at least one previous data point, and whether the at least one previous data point is an outlier, and wherein the estimator is further configured to disregard the current data point in calculating a feedback value of the feedback control mechanism if the current data point is determined as an outlier.
  • 17. The system of claim 16, wherein the estimator is further configure to determine the current data point as an outlier only if the at least one previous data point is an outlier.
  • 18. The system of claim 16, wherein the estimator is further configured to calculate the feedback value of the feedback control mechanism using the current data point and the at least one previous data point if the current data point is determined as not an outlier.
  • 19. The system of claim 16, wherein the estimator is further configured to calculate a previous feedback value for the at least one previous data point and then calculate the feedback value based on the previous feedback value and the current data point if the at least one previous data point is an outlier and the current data point is an outlier.
  • 20. The system of claim 16, wherein the statistical representation of is a weighted moving average of the at least one previous data point.
  • 21. The system of claim 16, wherein the statistical representation of is an exponentially-weighted moving average of the at least one previous data point.
  • 22. The system of claim 16, wherein the statistical representation of is expressed as: Sk=β(Fk−Δk)2+(1−β)Sk−1
  • 23. The system of claim 22, wherein the value of Δk is calculated as: if |Fk−Δk|≦Knsk Δk+1=λFk+(1−λk)Δk else Δk+1=Δk where, λk is a coefficient; Kn is an outlier coefficient; and sk=√{square root over (Sk)}.
  • 24. The system of claim 22, wherein the estimator is further configured to update Sk as Sk=β(Fk−Δk)2+(1−β)Sk−1 when the current data point is determined as not an outlier.
  • 25. The system of claim 22, wherein the estimator is further configured to update Sk as Sk=Sk−1 when the current data point is determined as an outlier.
  • 26. The system of claim 22, wherein the estimator is further configured to update Sk as Sk−1=β(Fk−1−Δk−1)2+(1−β)Sk−1; and Sk as Sk=β(Fk−Δk)2+(1−β)Sk−1, when the current data point is determined as not an outlier and the previous data was not determined as an outliner.
  • 27. The system of claim 16, further comprising: at least one metrology station configured to make a plurality of measurements on the output of the tool, wherein the estimator is further configured to calculate the current data point based on the plurality of measurements.
  • 28. The system of claim 27, the estimator is further configured to calculate an interval based on statistical information relating to the plurality of measurements, configured to identify a subset among the plurality of measurements that fall within the interval, and configured to calculate the current data point from the subset of the plurality of the measurements.
  • 29. The system of claim 28, wherein the statistical information relates to at least one of a median and a standard deviation of the plurality of measurements.
  • 30. The system of claim 29, the estimator is further configured to calculate the standard deviation based on one of a variance and a scaled variance of the plurality of measurements.
  • 31. A system of controlling a semiconductor manufacturing tool using a feedback control mechanism, comprising: (a) means for receiving a plurality of data points relating to an output of the tool including a current data point and at least one previous data point, where in the at least one previous data point is received before the current data point; (b) means for determining whether the current data point is an outlier based on: (b-1) comparing the current data point to a statistical representation of the at least one previous data point; and (b-2) whether the at least one previous data point is an outlier; and (c) means for disregarding the current data point in calculating a feedback value of the feedback control mechanism if the current data point is determined as an outlier.
  • 32. The method of claim 31, further comprising: means for determining the current data point as an outlier only if the at least one previous data point is an outlier.
  • 33. The system of claim 31, further comprising: (d) means for calculating the feedback value of the feedback control mechanism using the current data point and the at least one previous data point if the current data point is determined as not an outlier.
  • 34. The system of claim 31, further comprising: (d) means for calculating a previous feedback value for the at least one previous data point and then calculating the feedback value based on the previous feedback value and the current data point if the at least one previous data point is an outlier and the current data point is an outlier.
  • 35. The system of claim 31, wherein the statistical representation of is a weighted moving average of the at least one previous data point.
  • 36. The system of claim 31, wherein the statistical representation of is an exponentially-weighted moving average of the at least one previous data point.
  • 37. The system of claim 31, wherein the statistical representation of is expressed as: Sk=β(Fk−Δk)2+(1−β)Sk−1
  • 38. The system of claim 37, wherein the value of Δk is calculated as: if |Fk−Δk|≦Knsk Δk+1=λkFk+(1−λk)Δk else Δk+1=Δk where, λk is a coefficient; Kn is an outlier coefficient; and sk=√{square root over (Sk)}.
  • 39. The system of claim 37, further comprising: means for updating Sk as Sk=β(Fk−Δk)2+(1−β)Sk−when the current data point is determined as not an outlier.
  • 40. The system of claim 37, further comprising: means for updating Sk as Sk=Sk−1 when the current data point is determined as an outlier.
  • 41. The system of claim 37, further comprising: means for updating Sk as Sk−1=β(Fk−1−Δk−1)2+(1−β)Sk−1; and then means for updating Sk as Sk=β(Fk−Δk)2+(1−β)Sk−1, when the current data point is determined as not an outlier and the previous data was not determined as an outliner.
  • 42. The system of claim 31, further comprising: means for making a plurality of measurements on the output of the tool using at least one metrology station; and means for calculating the current data point based on the plurality of measurements.
  • 43. The system of claim 42, further comprising: means for calculating an interval based on statistical information relating to the plurality of measurements; means for identifying a subset among the plurality of measurements that fall within the interval; and means for calculating the current data point from the subset of the plurality of the measurements.
  • 44. The system of claim 43, wherein the statistical information relates to at least one of a median and a standard deviation of the plurality of measurements.
  • 45. The system of claim 44, further comprising: means for calculating the standard deviation based on one of a variance and a scaled variance of the plurality of measurements.
  • 46. A computer readable medium for storing instructions being executed by one or more computers, the instructions directing the one or more computers for controlling a semiconductor manufacturing tool using a feedback control mechanism, the instructions comprising implementation of the steps of: (a) receiving a plurality of data points relating to an output of the tool including a current data point and at least one previous data point; (b) determining whether the current data point is an outlier based on: (b-1) comparing the current data point to a statistical representation of the at least one previous data point; and (b-2) whether the at least one previous data point is an outlier; and (c) disregarding the current data point in calculating a feedback value of the feedback control mechanism if the current data point is determined as an outlier.
  • 47. The method of claim 46, further comprising: determining the current data point as an outlier only if the at least one previous data point is an outlier.
  • 48. The medium of claim 46, further comprising: (d) calculating the feedback value of the feedback control mechanism using the current data point and the at least one previous data point if the current data point is determined as not an outlier.
  • 49. The medium of claim 46, further comprising: (d) calculating a previous feedback value for the at least one previous data point and then calculating the feedback value based on the previous feedback value and the current data point if the at least one previous data point is an outlier and the current data point is an outlier.
  • 50. The medium of claim 46, wherein the statistical representation of (b-1) is a weighted moving average of the at least one previous data point.
  • 51. The medium of claim 46, wherein the statistical representation of (b-1) is an exponentially-weighted moving average of the at least one previous data point.
  • 52. The medium of claim 46, wherein the statistical representation of (b-1) is expressed as: Sk=β(Fk−Δk)2+(1−β)Sk−1
  • 53. The medium of claim 52, wherein the value of Δk is calculated as: if |Fk−Δk|≦Knsk Δk+1=λkFk+(1−λk)Δk else Δk+1=Δk where, λk is a coefficient; Kn is an outlier coefficient; and Sk=√{square root over (Sk)}.
  • 54. The medium of claim 52, further comprising: updating Sk as Sk=β(Fk−Δk)2+(1−β)Sk−1 when the current data point is determined as not an outlier.
  • 55. The medium of claim 52, further comprising: updating Sk as Sk=Sk−1 when the current data point is determined as an outlier.
  • 56. The medium of claim 52, further comprising: updating Sk as Sk−1=β(Fk−1−Δk−1)2+(1−β)Sk−1; and then updating Sk as Sk=β(Fk−Δk)2+(1−β)Sk−1, when the current data point is determined as not an outlier and the previous data was not determined as an outliner.
  • 57. The medium of claim 46, further comprising: making a plurality of measurements on the output of the tool using at least one metrology station; and calculating the current data point based on the plurality of measurements.
  • 58. The medium of claim 57, further comprising: calculating an interval based on statistical information relating to the plurality of measurements; identifying a subset among the plurality of measurements that fall within the interval; and calculating the current data point from the subset of the plurality of the measurements.
  • 59. The medium of claim 58, wherein the statistical information relates to at least one of a median and a standard deviation of the plurality of measurements.
  • 60. The medium of claim 59, further comprising: calculating the standard deviation based on one of a variance and a scaled variance of the plurality of measurements.
  • 61. A system of manufacturing semiconductor devices using a feedback control mechanism, comprising: at least one processing tool configured to perform at least one semiconductor fabrication step on at least one wafer; at least one metrology station coupled to the at least one processing tool and configured to make measurements on the at least one wafer; an estimator configured to receive a plurality of data points relating to an output of the at least one tool including a current data point and at least one previous data point calculated base on the measurements made by the at least one metrology station, wherein the estimator is further configured to determine whether the current data point is an outlier based on comparing the current data point to a statistical representation of the at least one previous data point, and whether the at least one previous data point is an outlier, and wherein the estimator is further configured to disregard the current data point in calculating a feedback value of the feedback control mechanism if the current data point is determined as an outlier.
  • 62. The system of claim 61, wherein the estimator is further configure to determine the current data point as an outlier only if the at least one previous data point is an outlier.
  • 63. The system of claim 61, further comprising: an optimizer coupled to the estimator to receive the feedback value and configured to generate at least one control parameter for operating the at least one tool based on the feedback value.
  • 64. The system of claim 61, wherein the at least one tool is an etcher.
  • 65. A method of controlling a semiconductor manufacturing tool using a feedback control mechanism, comprising: (a) receiving a plurality of data points relating to an output of the tool including a current data point, a subsequent data point, and at least one previous data point; (b) determining the current data point as an erroneous outlier: (b-1) if a difference between the current data point and a predicted value, which is calculated from a statistical representation of the at least one previous data point, is outside of a threshold; (b-2) if the at least one previous data point is not an outlier; and (b-3) if the subsequent data point is not an outlier; and (c) disregarding the current data point in calculating a feedback value of the feedback control mechanism if the current data point is determined as an erroneous outlier.
  • 66. The method of claim 65, wherein the statistical representation of (b-1) is an exponentially-weighted moving average of the at least one previous data point.
  • 67. The method of claim 66, wherein the statistical representation of (b-1) is expressed as: Sk=β(Fk−Δk)2+(1−β)Sk−1
  • 68. The method of claim 67, wherein the threshold is calculated as: |Fk−Δk|≦Knsk where, λk is a coefficient; Kn is an outlier coefficient; and sk=√{square root over (Sk)}.
RELATED APPLICATION

This application claims priority from U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/399,695, filed Aug. 1, 2002, which is incorporated herein by reference.

US Referenced Citations (349)
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
4207520 Flora et al. Jun 1980 A
4209744 Gerasimov et al. Jun 1980 A
4302721 Urbanek et al. Nov 1981 A
4368510 Anderson Jan 1983 A
4609870 Lale et al. Sep 1986 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
4755753 Chern Jul 1988 A
4757259 Charpentier Jul 1988 A
4796194 Atherton Jan 1989 A
4901218 Cornwell Feb 1990 A
4938600 Into Jul 1990 A
4957605 Hurwitt et al. Sep 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
5240552 Yu et al. 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
5369544 Mastrangelo 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
5427878 Corliss Jun 1995 A
5444837 Bomans et al. Aug 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'Donoghue 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
5534289 Bilder et al. Jul 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
5665214 Iturralde 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
5695810 Dubin 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
5761065 Kittler 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
5824599 Schacham-Diamand et al. Oct 1998 A
5825356 Habib et al. Oct 1998 A
5825913 Rostami et al. Oct 1998 A
5828778 Hagi et al. Oct 1998 A
5831851 Eastburn et al. Nov 1998 A
5832224 Fehskens et al. Nov 1998 A
5838595 Sullivan et al. Nov 1998 A
5838951 Song Nov 1998 A
5844554 Geller et al. Dec 1998 A
5857258 Penzes et al. Jan 1999 A
5859777 Yokoyama et al. Jan 1999 A
5859964 Wang et al. Jan 1999 A
5859975 Brewer et al. Jan 1999 A
5862054 Li Jan 1999 A
5863807 Jang et al. Jan 1999 A
5867389 Hamada et al. Feb 1999 A
5870306 Harada Feb 1999 A
5871805 Lemelson Feb 1999 A
5883437 Maruyama 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
5912678 Saxena et al. Jun 1999 A
5916016 Bothra Jun 1999 A
5923553 Yi Jul 1999 A
5926690 Toprac et al. Jul 1999 A
5930138 Lin et al. Jul 1999 A
5940300 Ozaki Aug 1999 A
5943237 Van Boxem Aug 1999 A
5943550 Fulford, Jr. et al. 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
5975994 Sandhu et al. Nov 1999 A
5978751 Pence et al. Nov 1999 A
5982920 Tobin, Jr. et al. Nov 1999 A
6002989 Shiba et al. Dec 1999 A
6012048 Gustin et al. Jan 2000 A
6017771 Yang et al. Jan 2000 A
6036349 Gombar Mar 2000 A
6037664 Zhao et al. Mar 2000 A
6041263 Boston et al. Mar 2000 A
6041270 Steffan et al. Mar 2000 A
6054379 Yau et al. Apr 2000 A
6059636 Inaba et al. May 2000 A
6064759 Buckley et al. May 2000 A
6072313 Li et al. Jun 2000 A
6074443 Venkatesh et al. Jun 2000 A
6077412 Ting et al. Jun 2000 A
6078845 Friedman Jun 2000 A
6094688 Mellen-Garnett et al. Jul 2000 A
6096649 Jang Aug 2000 A
6097887 Hardikar et al. Aug 2000 A
6100195 Chan et al. Aug 2000 A
6108092 Sandhu Aug 2000 A
6111634 Pecen et al. Aug 2000 A
6112130 Fukuda et al. Aug 2000 A
6113462 Yang Sep 2000 A
6114238 Liao Sep 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
6150270 Matsuda et al. Nov 2000 A
6157864 Schwenke et al. Dec 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
6181013 Liu et al. 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
6212961 Dvir 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
6226563 Lim May 2001 B1
6226792 Goiffon et al. May 2001 B1
6228280 Li et al. May 2001 B1
6230069 Campbell et al. May 2001 B1
6236903 Kim et al. May 2001 B1
6237050 Kim et al. May 2001 B1
6240330 Kurtzberg et al. May 2001 B1
6240331 Yun May 2001 B1
6245581 Bonser et al. Jun 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
6259160 Lopatin et al. Jul 2001 B1
6263255 Tan et al. Jul 2001 B1
6268270 Scheid et al. Jul 2001 B1
6271670 Caffey Aug 2001 B1
6276989 Campbell et al. Aug 2001 B1
6277014 Chen et al. Aug 2001 B1
6278899 Piche et al. Aug 2001 B1
6280289 Wiswesser et al. Aug 2001 B1
6281127 Shue Aug 2001 B1
6284622 Campbell et al. Sep 2001 B1
6287879 Gonzales et al. Sep 2001 B1
6290572 Hofmann Sep 2001 B1
6291367 Kelkar 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
6317643 Dmochowski 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
6339727 Ladd Jan 2002 B1
6340602 Johnson et al. Jan 2002 B1
6345288 Reed et al. Feb 2002 B1
6345315 Mishra Feb 2002 B1
6346426 Toprac et al. Feb 2002 B1
6355559 Havemann et al. Mar 2002 B1
6360133 Campbell et al. Mar 2002 B1
6360184 Jacquez Mar 2002 B1
6363294 Coronel et al. 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
6381564 David et al. Apr 2002 B1
6388253 Su May 2002 B1
6389491 Jacobson et al. May 2002 B1
6391780 Shih et al. May 2002 B1
6395152 Wang May 2002 B1
6397114 Eryurek et al. May 2002 B1
6400162 Mallory et al. Jun 2002 B1
6405096 Toprac et al. Jun 2002 B1
6405144 Toprac et al. Jun 2002 B1
6417014 Lam et al. Jul 2002 B1
6427093 Toprac Jul 2002 B1
6432728 Tai et al. Aug 2002 B1
6435952 Boyd et al. Aug 2002 B1
6438438 Takagi et al. Aug 2002 B1
6440295 Wang Aug 2002 B1
6442496 Pasadyn et al. Aug 2002 B1
6449524 Miller et al. Sep 2002 B1
6455415 Lopatin et al. Sep 2002 B1
6455937 Cunningham Sep 2002 B1
6465263 Coss, Jr. et al. Oct 2002 B1
6470230 Toprac et al. Oct 2002 B1
6479902 Lopatin et al. Nov 2002 B1
6479990 Mednikov et al. Nov 2002 B1
6482660 Conchieri et al. Nov 2002 B1
6484064 Campbell Nov 2002 B1
6486492 Su Nov 2002 B1
6492281 Song et al. Dec 2002 B1
6495452 Shih Dec 2002 B1
6503839 Gonzales et al. Jan 2003 B1
6515368 Lopatin et al. Feb 2003 B1
6517413 Hu et al. Feb 2003 B1
6517414 Tobin et al. Feb 2003 B1
6528409 Lopatin et al. Mar 2003 B1
6529789 Campbell et al. Mar 2003 B1
6532555 Miller et al. Mar 2003 B1
6535783 Miller et al. Mar 2003 B1
6537912 Agarwal Mar 2003 B1
6540591 Pasadyn et al. Apr 2003 B1
6541401 Herner et al. Apr 2003 B1
6546508 Sonderman et al. Apr 2003 B1
6556881 Miller Apr 2003 B1
6560504 Goodwin et al. May 2003 B1
6563308 Nagano et al. May 2003 B1
6567717 Krivokapic et al. May 2003 B1
6580958 Takano Jun 2003 B1
6587744 Stoddard et al. Jul 2003 B1
6590179 Tanaka et al. Jul 2003 B1
6604012 Cho et al. Aug 2003 B1
6605549 Leu et al. Aug 2003 B1
6607976 Chen et al. Aug 2003 B1
6609946 Tran Aug 2003 B1
6616513 Osterheld Sep 2003 B1
6618692 Takahashi et al. Sep 2003 B1
6624075 Lopatin et al. Sep 2003 B1
6625497 Fairbairn et al. Sep 2003 B1
6630741 Lopatin et al. Oct 2003 B1
6640151 Somekh et al. Oct 2003 B1
6652355 Wiswesser et al. Nov 2003 B1
6660633 Lopatin et al. Dec 2003 B1
6678570 Pasadyn et al. Jan 2004 B1
6708074 Chi et al. Mar 2004 B1
6708075 Sonderman et al. Mar 2004 B1
6725402 Coss, Jr. et al. Apr 2004 B1
6728587 Goldman et al. Apr 2004 B1
6735492 Conrad et al. May 2004 B1
6751518 Sonderman et al. Jun 2004 B1
6774998 Wright et al. Aug 2004 B1
20010001755 Sandhu et al. May 2001 A1
20010003084 Finarov Jun 2001 A1
20010006873 Moore Jul 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
20010044667 Nakano et al. Nov 2001 A1
20020032499 Wilson et al. Mar 2002 A1
20020058460 Lee et al. May 2002 A1
20020070126 Sato et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020077031 Johannson et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020081951 Boyd et al. Jun 2002 A1
20020089676 Pecen et al. Jul 2002 A1
20020102853 Li et al. Aug 2002 A1
20020107599 Patel 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 Crouzen et al. Oct 2002 A1
20020165636 Hasan Nov 2002 A1
20020183986 Stewart et al. Dec 2002 A1
20020185658 Inoue et al. Dec 2002 A1
20020193899 Shanmugasundram 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
20030017256 Shimane Jan 2003 A1
20030020909 Adams et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030020928 Ritzdorf et al. Jan 2003 A1
20030154062 Daft et al. Aug 2003 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (81)
Number Date Country
2050247 Aug 1991 CA
2165847 Aug 1991 CA
2194855 Aug 1991 CA
0 397 924 Nov 1990 EP
0 621 522 Oct 1994 EP
0 747 795 Dec 1996 EP
0 869 652 Oct 1998 EP
0 877 308 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
0 932 195 Jul 1999 EP
1 066 925 Jan 2001 EP
1 067 757 Jan 2001 EP
1 071 128 Jan 2001 EP
1 083 470 Mar 2001 EP
1 092 505 Apr 2001 EP
1 072 967 Nov 2001 EP
1 182 526 Feb 2002 EP
2 347 885 Sep 2000 GB
2 365 215 Feb 2002 GB
61-66104 Apr 1986 JP
61-171147 Aug 1986 JP
01-283934 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
06-184434 Jul 1994 JP
06-252236 Sep 1994 JP
06-260380 Sep 1994 JP
8-23166 Jan 1996 JP
08-50161 Feb 1996 JP
08-149583 Jun 1996 JP
08-304023 Nov 1996 JP
09-34535 Feb 1997 JP
9-246547 Sep 1997 JP
10-34522 Feb 1998 JP
10-173029 Jun 1998 JP
11-67853 Mar 1999 JP
11-126816 May 1999 JP
11-135601 May 1999 JP
2000-183001 Jun 2000 JP
2001-76982 Mar 2001 JP
2001-284299 Oct 2001 JP
2001-305108 Oct 2001 JP
2002-9030 Jan 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
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 0111679 Feb 2001 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 0180306 Oct 2001 WO
WO 0217150 Feb 2002 WO
WO 0231613 Apr 2002 WO
WO 0231613 Apr 2002 WO
WO 0233737 Apr 2002 WO
WO 02074491 Sep 2002 WO
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20040143357 A1 Jul 2004 US
Provisional Applications (1)
Number Date Country
60399695 Aug 2002 US