Patent Grant
10262840
1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to a plasma processing apparatus. Particularly, it relates to a plasma processing apparatus which can suppress an influence caused by change of a process condition occurring with the progress of plasma processing.
2. Description of the Background Art
For example, the plasma processing apparatus is an apparatus for importing an etching gas into a vacuum process chamber, generating plasma discharge in the imported etching gas under a reduced pressure to thereby generate radicals or ions, and inducing the radicals or ions to a surface of a wafer as a subject of processing to make the radicals or ions react with the surface of the wafer to thereby etch the surface of the wafer.
With the advance of reduction in size of a produced device, such a plasma processing apparatus might not be able to obtain desired performance because of various disturbances even when a predetermined recipe was used for processing.
Therefore, run-to-run control capable of suppressing an influence caused by various disturbances has been used. Run-to-run control is a technique for changing a recipe as a production condition in accordance with each wafer or lot to be processed so that an influence caused by change of process conditions can be suppressed.
For example, JP-A-2003-17471 has disclosed a plasma processing apparatus for processing a specimen contained in a vacuum process chamber, which includes a sensor for monitoring a process quantity during processing, a processed result estimation model for estimating a processed result, and an optimum recipe calculation model for calculating an optimum recipe based on the result estimated by the processed result estimation model, wherein plasma processing is controlled based on the recipe generated by the optimum recipe calculation model.
On the other hand, JP-A-2006-72791 has disclosed a model predictive control apparatus for predicting a subject of control by using control subject models and evaluating the prediction to perform optimum control on the subject of control, which includes control subject models with different sampling periods, wherein one of the control subject models is selected in accordance with change of the sampling period so that both shortening of arithmetic processing time and securement of prediction accuracy can be achieved.
In a plasma etching apparatus, an etching process is generally performed based on a predetermined process condition called recipe. Etching performance (etching rate, etching size, etc.) however often varies in accordance with change of the state of a reaction product deposited on an inner wall or the like of a process chamber, the wear-out degree of each component, etc. To reduce such variations, run-to-run control for changing the process condition in accordance with each wafer to be processed may be used as described above.
Etching rate and processing size are indices for judging whether the result processed by the etching apparatus is good or not. It is however necessary to convey the wafer to an inspection device for measuring the etching rate or processing size. For this reason, a unit capable of evaluating the processed result (performance result) immediately after processing is required for achieving run-to-run control in accordance with each wafer to be processed.
Assume now that the performance result is not directly measured but indirectly measured based on data which can be monitored during processing such as plasma light emission. When, for example, the relation between a monitor value and a performance result is formed as a model in advance, the model can be referred to so that the monitor value can be used in place of the performance result.
Incidentally, for achievement of such run-to-run control, it is necessary to generate a control model by modeling the relation between a process monitor value clearly associated with a processed result obtained in accordance with each wafer to be processed and a control variable capable of controlling the process monitor value.
In
On the other hand, when plasma light emission during the process takes a larger value or a smaller value than the target value 1, the etching performance result is not a desired value because the value of plasma light emission indicates some change of the process condition.
Run-to-run control operates to bring the performance result close to a target value when the performance result is likely to go out of the desired value. That is, in run-to-run control, a control quantity for a next process (e.g. next wafer process) is calculated based on a difference between the obtained process monitor value and the target value 1 and a process condition (recipe) for the next process is corrected based on the calculated control quantity so that the process is executed in the corrected process condition.
In this example, plasma light emission intensity is designed to converge at the target value 1 by run-to-run control. There may be however the case where it impossible to perform control to make the plasma light emission intensity coincident with the target value 1. In practice, the plasma light emission intensity is controlled with some variation 3 as shown in the example of
Incidentally, the example disclosed in JP-A-2003-17471 cannot be applied to such a long-term process change that the process condition changes in a lot or between lots. In addition, in the example disclosed in JP-A-2006-72791, the control subject models with different sampling periods cannot be applied to such a process that the process condition changes in accordance with each term (in a lot or between lots).
The invention is accomplished in consideration of the aforementioned problems. An object of the invention is to provide a plasma processing apparatus which can execute run-to-run control in which the process condition of the apparatus is reflected, and which can obtain stable performance results.
To solve the aforementioned problems, the invention uses the following means.
A plasma processing apparatus for generating plasma in a vacuum processing device and applying plasma processing to specimens disposed in the vacuum processing device by use of the generated plasma, including: a monitor device which monitors a process quantity generated at plasma processing; a monitor value estimation unit which has at least one monitor quantity variation model for storing change of a monitor value of the process quantity in accordance with the number of processed specimens and which estimates a monitor value for a next process by referring to the monitor quantity variation model; and a control quantity calculation unit which stores a control model indicating a relation between a control quantity for controlling the process quantity of the vacuum processing device and a monitor value and which calculates the control quantity based on a deviation of the estimated monitor value for the next process from a target value to thereby control the process quantity.
With the aforementioned configuration, the invention can provide a plasma processing apparatus which can execute run-to-run control in which the process condition of the apparatus is reflected, and which can obtain stable performance results.
An embodiment of the invention will be described below with reference to the accompanying drawings. Although an aim in modeling process conditions will be described first while a plasma etching apparatus is taken as an example, the invention can be applied to any processing apparatus using plasma, such as a plasma CVD apparatus.
Referring to
First, the increasing pattern 10 is repeated in accordance with each separating line 2. Although the separating line 2 is a line indicating change of a lot, the separating line 2 is a unit for performing trial running of a process chamber called aging or plasma cleaning for cleaning the chamber with plasma in terms of process.
That is, when a wafer process is repeated, the internal state of the chamber such as the state or temperature of an inner wall of the chamber varies according to each process, so that a process environment changes. The change of the environment results in change of plasma light emission intensity. When aging or plasma cleaning is executed, the state of the process chamber is restored to a state close to the initial state and the chamber environment is reflected on plasma light emission intensity so that the plasma light emission intensity is restored to a state close to the initial state.
By repeating this, each pattern 10 of plasma light emission intensity appears.
There is however the case where the state of the chamber cannot be restored to the original state perfectly by aging or plasma cleaning executed in accordance with each lot. Deviations from the original state are exhibited in the pattern 11.
The state of the chamber can be however restored to the initial state when cleaning of the process chamber opened to the atmospheric air, called wet cleaning, is executed. That is, the pattern 11 is repeated in accordance with the wet cleaning.
Although the shapes of patterns are shown here as an example, patterns may have various forms in accordance with the subject of processing, the process condition, the apparatus, etc. That is, the patterns can be reworded as process models. Accordingly, one of the patterns 10 and 11 is referred to as “short-term variation model” because the pattern 10 appears in a relatively short term, while the other pattern 11 is referred to as “long-term variation model” because the pattern 11 appears in a relatively long term.
Incidentally, consideration of only the short-term model or consideration of only the long-term model may be required in accordance with the process.
In the background art, only one control model indicating the relation between a process monitor value and a control variable was applied to a control loop to execute run-to-run control. Some process condition was however impossible to express only in the control model. As a result, the control varied. It is therefore apparent that more stable control than the control according to the background art can be achieved if control is executed while the aforementioned long-term and short-term variation models are considered in addition to the control model.
The process model indicating the process behavior of the inside of a process chamber 100 at the time of execution of run-to-run control is a model obtained by combining a long-term variation model 21, a short-term variation model 22 and a control model 23.
The long-term variation model 21 receives as an input a number 24 (N1) of processed wafers from wet cleaning and outputs a plasma light emission monitor value 18. For example, the long-term variation model 21 can be given as a model represented by the expression 1:
Y1=A1×A1(N
in which Y1 is the process monitor value (e.g. plasma light emission monitor value), N1 is the number of processed wafers from wet cleaning, and A1, B1, C1 and D1 are long-term variation model coefficients.
Although description has been made here in the case where N1 is the number of processed wafers from wet cleaning, a process for resetting the long-term variation model may be provided so as to be regarded as a starting point so that N1 is the number of processed wafers from the resetting process.
The short-term variation model 22 receives as an input a number 25 (N2) of processed wafers in a lot and outputs a plasma light emission monitor value 19. For example, the short-term variation model 22 can be given as a model represented by the expression 2:
Y2=A2×N22+B2×N2+C2 (2)
in which Y2 is the process monitor value (e.g. plasma light emission monitor value), N2 is the number of processed wafers in a lot, and A2, B2 and C2 are short-term variation model coefficients.
The control model 23 receives as an input a gas change quantity 26 (X3) and outputs a plasma light emission monitor value 20. For example, the control model 23 can be given as a model represented by the expression 3:
Y3=A3×X3 (3)
in which Y3 is the process monitor value (e.g. plasma light emission monitor value), X3 is a control quantity, and A3 is a control model coefficient.
An output 103 of the process chamber 100 is expressed as a combination of the outputs 18, 19 and 20 of the respective models.
As described above, because the internal state of the process chamber can be expressed by a combination of the models, an apparatus capable of controlling a process stably can be achieved if a control system is constructed in accordance with the combination of the models.
A wafer 117 as a subject of an etching process is conveyed to the process chamber 100 and subjected to a plasma etching process. The etching process is executed while an apparatus controller 114 controls an actuator 101 in accordance with a production condition called recipe. The actuator 101 controls a power supply, a pressure control device, a mass-flow controller, etc.
A process monitor 102 monitors the state of the process chamber 100 during the etching process. For example, an emission spectrometer for spectroscopically monitoring plasma light emission during the etching process is used as the process monitor 102.
A monitor value estimation unit 104 has a long-term variation model database 109 and a short-term variation model database 110. Variation models to be processed by the apparatus are stored in the databases respectively in accordance with each recipe or each recipe group. Incidentally, each recipe group is a set of recipes to which one and the same variation model can be applied. Further, past information of wafers processed in the process chamber 100, such as the number 24 of processed wafers from wet cleaning, the number 25 of processed wafers from the top of each lot, etc. can be acquired from a process history management portion 116. Incidentally, the number 25 of processed wafers from the top of each lot is provided as the number of wafers processed in each process chamber. When, for example, a lot of 25 product wafers are processed separately in two process chambers, 13 wafers form one lot in one process chamber and 12 wafers form one lot in the other process chamber in terms of the number 25 of processed wafers.
The monitor value estimation unit 104 calculates an estimated monitor value 105 for a next process without execution of run-to-run control, by using these pieces of information and the measured monitor value 103.
The estimated monitor value 105 for the next process without execution of run-to-run control, which value is calculated by the monitor value estimation unit 104, is compared with a target value 106 of the process monitor value, so that a deviation 112 of the estimated monitor value 105 from the target value 106 is calculated. Incidentally, the target value 106 is a value which has been set in advance in accordance with each recipe or each recipe group.
A control quantity calculation unit 111 has a control model database 115. Control models to be processed by the apparatus are stored in the database 115 in accordance with recipes or recipe groups. The control quantity calculation unit 111 calculates a control quantity 107 for a next process based on a control model selected from the control model database 115 and the deviation 112.
The apparatus controller 114 shown in
On this occasion, each control target item of a recipe 108 is increased or decreased by the next process control quantity 107 calculated by the control quantity calculation unit 111. One recipe is generally composed of a plurality of items but a part of the items are changed based on the control quantity 107.
The plasma processing apparatus according to this embodiment repeats the aforementioned processing in accordance with each wafer process.
Incidentally, run-to-run control can be applied not only to a recipe for product wafers but also to a recipe for a plasma cleaning process executed between product wafer processes. For example, the invention can be applied to run-to-run control for such cleaning processes that a recipe for a current cleaning process is changed to another recipe for a next cleaning process. The invention can be further applied to such run-to-run control that a result (monitor value) of each cleaning process is reflected on a product process or vice versa.
In step 602, determination is made as to whether the process is a subject of run-to-run control or not. For example, a process called aging may be applied at the top of each lot and a cleaning process may be applied between product wafers when a product lot (of 25 product wafers) is to be processed. If only product wafers are intended for run-to-run control in this case, aging and cleaning are not intended for run-to-run control. Incidentally, the cleaning process may be intended for run-to-run control.
In step 603, a process monitor value obtained during the process is acquired. The acquired monitor value is the latest value processed in the past based on the same recipe or recipe group as in the next process. On this occasion, the monitor value may be calculated by averaging or statistical processing in accordance with each process processing time or each step or may be calculated by multivariate analysis such as principal component analysis.
In step 604, an uncontrolled monitor value is calculated based on the acquired monitor value. As for a calculation method, a control quantity on the occasion that the acquired monitor value was processed and a control model used on this occasion are used for calculating back to a monitor quantity (deviation) changed by control. Then, a difference between the acquired monitor value and the calculated-back monitor quantity (deviation) is calculated as an uncontrolled monitor value.
In step 605, determination is made as to whether a long-term variation model to be used for later calculation needs to be moved or not, or whether a short-term variation model to be used for later calculation needs to be moved or not. For example, a long-term variation model is moved for processing of the first wafer in a product lot or processing just after aging, but a short-term variation model is moved for processing of the second wafer or each wafer after the second wafer in the product lot or processing just after plasma cleaning between products. In step 606 or 607, the long-term variation model or the short-term variation model is moved.
First, when the uncontrolled monitor value obtained in the step 604 is plotted, a point 31 is obtained as shown in
Alternatively, as shown in
In step 608, an estimated monitor value for a next process is calculated. This value is a value estimated based on the long-term variation model and the short-term variation model when control is not performed (the recipe is not changed) in the next process.
First, a composite model 37 is obtained based on the short-term variation model 33 and the long-term variation model 36. The short-term variation model and the long-term variation model used on this occasion are models moved in the steps 606 and 607. Then, a value 38 according to the number N of processed wafers in the next process is calculated on the composite model 37. This value 38 is used as an estimated monitor value for the next process.
In step 609, a deviation of the estimated monitor value calculated in the step 608 from a target value set in accordance with each recipe or each recipe group is calculated. That is, control will be made in the next process so that the deviation can be adjusted in accordance with the target value.
In step 610, a control quantity is calculated based on the deviation calculated in the step 609 and the control model. A method of calculating the control quantity will be described with reference to
In step 611, the control quantity calculated in the previous step is added to the recipe for the next process to thereby generate process conditions used in the next process.
In step 612, the process is executed based on the recipe to which the control quantity has been added in the step 611.
In step 613, a process history for the process in the step 612 indicating the number of processed wafers from wet cleaning executed on the process chamber opened to the atmospheric air, the number of processed wafers from an aging process executed at the top of each lot, etc. is recorded.
In step 614 or 616, determination is made as to whether the variation model is to be reset or not, after determination in the step 602 results in that the process is not a subject of control. For example, in the case of the long-term variation model, the model is reset when the process chamber is just after execution of wet cleaning (step 615). On the other hand, in the case of the short-term variation model, the model is reset just after separation of a product lot, that is, execution of an aging process (step 617).
Each model is reset is as follows. In the example of the long-term variation model represented by the expression 1, the variable N1 is reset to 1 (or 0). In the example of the short-term variation model represented by the expression 2, the variable N2 is reset to 1 (or 0). Incidentally, the condition for resetting each model can be set in any other event than the aforementioned events and there may be the case where each model is not reset in some event.
Although the flow shown in
Although the flow shown in
An etching process in semiconductor production generally has process units called steps. Process conditions such as gas flow rate, pressure, electric power, etc. are defined in accordance with the process units respectively. One recipe is composed of a set of the conditions according to the steps.
As shown in
Plasma light emission 170 during processing in step 2 of a process N is measured by a spectroscope 171. For example, statistical processing is applied to the measured data to form a process monitor value 172. The reference numeral 173 designates a combination of the monitor value estimation unit 104 and the control quantity calculation unit 111 shown in
Plasma light emission 176 during processing in step 4 of the process N is further measured by a spectroscope 171. For example, statistical processing is applied to the measured data to form a process monitor value 177. The reference numeral 178 designates a combination of the monitor value estimation unit 104 and the control quantity calculation unit 111 shown in
As described above, control logics each for monitoring one step can be combined for monitoring a plurality of steps.
In
As described above, in accordance with this embodiment, in such run-to-run control that process conditions are changed according to each wafer process, a process model indicating long-term or short-term variation of the state of a process processing apparatus is applied to a control loop, so that a stable processed result can be obtained even when process variation such as variation in a lot or variation between lots exists.
| Number | Date | Country | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2009-235274 | Oct 2009 | JP | national |
This application is a continuation of application Ser. No. 12/696,571, filed on Jan. 29, 2010, now pending, which claims the benefit of Japanese Application No. JP 2009-235274, filed Oct. 9, 2009, in the Japanese Patent Office, the disclosures of which are incorporated herein by reference.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 6587744 | Stoddard et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
| 7695948 | Black | Apr 2010 | B2 |
| 8046193 | Yetter, Jr. | Oct 2011 | B2 |
| 8992721 | Kagoshima | Mar 2015 | B2 |
| 20020197745 | Shanmugasundram | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20030003607 | Kagoshima | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030045009 | Tanaka et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20040166598 | Miya | Aug 2004 | A1 |
| 20040220693 | Mouli | Nov 2004 | A1 |
| 20050016682 | Nagatomo et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050125090 | Sakano | Jun 2005 | A1 |
| 20050158886 | Tanaka | Jul 2005 | A1 |
| 20050256601 | Lee | Nov 2005 | A1 |
| 20060015206 | Funk et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
| 20060287754 | Sugamoto | Dec 2006 | A1 |
| 20070065593 | Wajda | Mar 2007 | A1 |
| 20080064127 | Yu et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
| 20080237184 | Yakushiji et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
| 20090276077 | Good | Nov 2009 | A1 |
| 20100178415 | Nishimori | Jul 2010 | A1 |
| 20110083808 | Kagoshima | Apr 2011 | A1 |
| 20120095574 | Greenlee | Apr 2012 | A1 |
| 20160349736 | Cheng | Dec 2016 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 3392486 | Oct 2018 | EP |
| 2003-017471 | Jan 2003 | JP |
| 2005-038976 | Feb 2005 | JP |
| 2006-013013 | Jan 2006 | JP |
| 2006-072791 | Mar 2006 | JP |
| 2006-074067 | Mar 2006 | JP |
| 2012-212894 | Nov 2012 | JP |
| 200849325 | Feb 1997 | TW |
| 200814216 | Mar 2008 | TW |
| 200849321 | Dec 2008 | TW |
| 1311161 | Jun 2009 | TW |
| 200929340 | Jul 2009 | TW |
| WO 0175534 | Oct 2001 | WO |
| WO 03009345 | Jan 2004 | WO |
| WO 2009055431 | Apr 2009 | WO |
| Entry |
|---|
| Office Action, dated Dec. 2, 2015, which issued during the prosecution of Taiwanese Patent Application No. 102134762, which corresponds to the present application. |
| Office Action, dated Jul. 14, 2015, which issued during the prosecution of Taiwanese Patent Application No. 102134762, which corresponds to the present application. |
| Office Action issued in Taiwanese Patent Application dated May 22, 2013. |
| Japanese Office Action dated Mar. 21, 2013 for Application No. 2009-235274. |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20140277626 A1 | Sep 2014 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parent | 12696571 | Jan 2010 | US |
| Child | 14289773 | US |
