The invention relates to the general field of lithography with particular reference to control of line width and edge roughness after electron beam exposure.
Negative-tone chemically amplified resists (NCAR) have been widely used in electron beam lithography for small dots or fine iso-lines. In general, NCAR, contains base resin, photo acid generator, curing agent, and additives such as a quencher. Referring now to
As the feature sizes approach 0.1 μm or smaller, reduction of line edge roughness (LER) becomes increasingly important. Many CD (critical dimension) reduction methods in the prior art do not have sufficient CD tolerance because LER has also increased substantially. In fact, LER can sometimes be greater than the total budget for CD tolerance. This is schematically illustrated in
Thus, the problem that the present invention addresses is how to precisely control line width in Ebeam resist patterns without an accompanying increase in line edge roughness and/or significant loss of thickness.
A routine search of the prior art was performed with the following references of interest being found:
In U.S. Pat. No. 6,313,492, Hakey et, al. show an e-beam process with negative and positive resists. In U.S. Pat. No. 4,568,601, Araps et al. show an e-beam exposure and curing method for negative resists. Kumar et al. show an e-beam exposure process in U.S. Pat. No. 6,436,810 B1. US 2001-004765A1 (Miyagawa) shows a double exposure e-beam process while Minter et al. reveal a double exposure e-beam process to control liftoff in U.S. Pat. No. 6,218,090 B1.
The following publications of interest are also noted:
It has been an object of at least one embodiment of the present invention to provide a process for transferring a line pattern image into a resist layer.
Another object of at least one embodiment of the present invention has been that exposure of said resist be to an electron beam.
Still another object of at least one embodiment of the present invention has been that said line feature, after processing, have minimum edge roughness.
A further object of at least one embodiment of the present invention has been to provide a process for controlled CD reduction without an accompanying increase in edge roughness.
These objects have been achieved by applying a second Ebeam exposure after the initial one that is used to define the pattern. After this second blanket exposure a longer heat treatment and a stronger development process than before are used. Since the line is already formed at this point, fewer forward scattering electrons are generated at the edge of the resist features, so only edges will be dissolved in a concentrated developer. In addition to reducing edge roughness the disclosed treatment allows the CD to be reduced under tight control since the amount of CD reduction is proportional to the second Ebeam dosage.
In the present invention, we apply an extra Ebeam exposure to provide further curing of the developed resist. The disclosed CD-slimming process incorporates additional E-beam exposure, post exposure bake, and resist development steps to the conventional process. Since fewer forward scattering electrons are generated at the edge of resist features, the edge resists will have less degree of cross-linking as compared to the bulk resists. Therefore, only edge resists will be dissolved in the concentrated developer. The disclosed dimension-slimming process allows us to preserve the feature shape without reducing resist thickness or increasing its LER.
Referring once more to
Resist layer 12 is now developed (the first such of two). Time to develop was for between about 1 and 120 seconds and the developing solution had a concentration of developer agent, such as tetramethylammonium hydroxide (TMAH) or KOH that was between about 0.05 and 0.5 normal. The result, as shown in
Then, as a key feature of the invention, developed resist layer 14 is flood exposed to electron beam 33, as shown in
When the above procedure is followed, the result is line pattern 44, as shown in FIG. 4. This has a smaller minimum width than the original line 14 from which it derived (typically between about 0.07 and 0.13 microns) and is now largely clear of LER problems. (which now range from between about 8 to about 10 nm LER). Additionally, the change in the thickness of the resist layer was minimal. Typically, starting with a resist thickness of between about 200 and 300 nm, at the conclusion of the full process the thickness was still between about 200 and 300 nm.
The process of the present invention thus has two desirable outcomes:
(i) The removal of LER as confirmed in the data shown in FIG. 5. Curve 51 shows how, as the CD is reduced, LER necessarily rises when prior art processes are used. Curve 52 is for LER as a function of CD for the present invention and, as can be seen, there is vet little increase in LER as CD drops. For example, the standard deviation of feature CD of the disclosed process was 3.94 nm, which is very close to the 3.10 nm that was obtained by the regular E-beam process. In contrast, the sigma was 13.16 nm for lines produced using prior art methods such as the lashing process which uses only a single E-beam exposure
(ii) The CD reduction that accompanies the elimination of LER is found to be proportional to the second (flood) exposure by the electron beam. This is shown in curve 61 of
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4568601 | Araps et al. | Feb 1986 | A |
6150070 | Minter et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6218090 | Minter et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6313492 | Hakey et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6436810 | Kumar et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6566274 | Jacot et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
6774043 | Yamaguchi et al. | Aug 2004 | B2 |
20010004765 | Miyagawa | Jun 2001 | A1 |
20030235779 | Hatakeyama et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20040214109 A1 | Oct 2004 | US |