1. Field of the Invention
This invention generally relates to segmenting pixels in an image of a wafer for defect detection.
2. Description of the Related Art
The following description and examples are not admitted to be prior art by virtue of their inclusion in this section.
Wafer inspection, using either optical or electron beam technologies, is an important technique for debugging semiconductor manufacturing processes, monitoring process variations, and improving production yield in the semiconductor industry. With the ever decreasing scale of modern integrated circuits (ICs) as well as the increasing complexity of the manufacturing process, inspection becomes more and more difficult.
In each processing step performed on a semiconductor wafer, the same circuit pattern is printed in each die on the wafer. Most wafer inspection systems take advantage of this fact and use a relatively simple die-to-die comparison to detect defects on the wafer. However, the printed circuit in each die may include many areas of patterned features that repeat in the x or y direction such as the areas of DRAM, SRAM, or FLASH. This type of area is commonly referred to as an array area (the rest of the areas are called random or logic areas). To achieve better sensitivity, advanced inspection systems employ different strategies for inspecting the array areas and the random or logic areas.
Intensity may be used as a feature of segmentation to group similar intensity pixels together. Then, the same set of defect detection parameters are applied to all of the pixels in the same group (intensity-based). However, this method has a number of disadvantages. For example, an intensity-based segmentation algorithm can be used when a geometry feature scatters uniformly. Often, however, this is not enough. For example, in an intensity- or sum-of-intensity-based segmentation, a wafer image can be segmented into a quiet array segment, a noisy page break segment, and a noisy intersection segment. However, defects of interest (DOIs) in a quiet segment can be missed if a quiet segment is misclassified as a noisy segment. Segments can be misclassified when the same cutline between segments leads to different segmentation in training and runtime. Such misclassification of the segments may also be bad for any pre-processing of the image such as that which removes the periodic pattern in the page break area. As such, segmentation based purely on intensity or sum of intensity is prone to instability related to intensity variation from job-to-job during runtime. Therefore, other property-based segmentation is needed.
Another method for segmenting output of a dark field (DF) inspection system is projection-based segmentation (PBS). PBS provides a relatively simple way to separate segments in regions based on the relative projected intensity in the x and y directions. Most of the time, the PBS approach works well. However, since it is used in the pre-processing part of DF wafer inspection algorithms, there are cases when the PBS segmentation result fluctuates along the side of the underlying physical structure pattern, which makes the projection-based segmentation unstable. The direct result is to mis-segment some quiet segments as noisy segments and vice versa. The impact is to cause the defect inspection to be less adaptive to local noise.
An additional method for segmenting output of a dark field inspection system is median intensity-based segmentation (MBS). MBS is more stable than PBS because most of the time the median intensity differences between the array region and page break region are substantial, which provides easier separation between array and page break. However, the segment boundaries from the MBS can be irregular, which might not correlate to the underlying physical structure pattern very well.
Accordingly, it would be advantageous to develop methods and systems for segmenting pixels in an image of a wafer for defect detection that do not have one or more of the disadvantages described above.
The following description of various embodiments is not to be construed in any way as limiting the subject matter of the appended claims.
One embodiment relates to a computer-implemented method for segmenting pixels in an image of a wafer for defect detection. The method includes determining a statistic for individual pixels based on a characteristic of the individual pixels in an image acquired for a wafer by an inspection system. The method also includes assigning the individual pixels to first segments based on the statistic and detecting one or more edges between the first segments in an image of the first segments. In addition, the method includes generating an edge map by projecting the one or more edges across an area corresponding to the image for the wafer. The method further includes assigning the individual pixels to second segments by applying the first segments and the edge map to the image for the wafer thereby segmenting the image. Defect detection is performed based on the second segments to which the individual pixels are assigned. Steps of the method are performed by a computer system.
Each of the steps of the computer-implemented method described above may be performed as described further herein. The computer-implemented method described above may include any other step(s) of any other method(s) described herein. The computer-implemented method described above may be performed using any of the systems described herein.
Another embodiment relates to a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing program instructions executable on a computer system for performing a method for segmenting pixels in an image of a wafer for defect detection. The method includes the steps of the computer-implemented method described above. The computer-readable medium may be further configured as described herein. The steps of the method may be performed as described further herein. In addition, the method for which the program instructions are executable may include any other step(s) of any other method(s) described herein.
An additional embodiment relates to a system configured to segment pixels in an image of a wafer for defect detection. The system includes an inspection subsystem configured to generate an image for a wafer. The system also includes a computer subsystem configured for performing the steps of the method described above. The system may be further configured as described herein.
Other objects and advantages of the invention will become apparent upon reading the following detailed description and upon reference to the accompanying drawings in which:
While the invention is susceptible to various modifications and alternative forms, specific embodiments thereof are shown by way of example in the drawings and will herein be described in detail. It should be understood, however, that the drawings and detailed description thereto are not intended to limit the invention to the particular form disclosed, but on the contrary, the intention is to cover all modifications, equivalents and alternatives falling within the spirit and scope of the present invention as defined by the appended claims.
Turning now to the drawings, it is noted that the figures are not drawn to scale. In particular, the scale of some of the elements of the figures is greatly exaggerated to emphasize characteristics of the elements. It is also noted that the figures are not drawn to the same scale. Elements shown in more than one figure that may be similarly configured have been indicated using the same reference numerals.
One embodiment relates to a computer-implemented method for segmenting pixels in an image of a wafer for defect detection. The computer-implemented method may include acquiring an image of a wafer generated by an inspection system. Acquiring the image for the wafer may be performed using the inspection system. For example, acquiring the image may include using the inspection system to scan light over the wafer and to generate image(s) responsive to light scattered and/or reflected from the wafer detected by the inspection system during scanning. In this manner, acquiring the image may include scanning the wafer. However, acquiring the image does not necessarily include scanning the wafer. For example, acquiring the image may include acquiring the image from a computer-readable storage medium in which the image has been stored (e.g., by the inspection system). Acquiring the image from the storage medium may be performed in any suitable manner, and the storage medium from which the image is acquired may include any of the storage media described herein. Although in some embodiments described herein, the image acquired for the wafer may be referred to or described as an “image frame,” the image for the wafer used in the embodiments described herein may include any image or portion of any image that can be generated or acquired by any wafer inspection system.
The method includes determining a statistic for individual pixels based on a characteristic of the individual pixels in an image acquired for a wafer by an inspection system. In one embodiment, the characteristic is image intensity of the individual pixels. In some embodiments, the statistic is median image intensity of the individual pixels. In this manner, the method may include determining a statistic for each of the individual pixels on a pixel-by-pixel basis even though the statistic for any one pixel may be determined using the characteristic of multiple pixels in the image. For example, the median intensity of one single pixel may be determined based on the image intensity of that pixel as well as the image intensity of the surrounding pixels. The median image intensity may be determined using any suitable method or algorithm. In addition, the characteristic and the statistic may include any other suitable characteristic and statistic of the individual pixels determined in any suitable manner.
The method also includes assigning the individual pixels to first segments based on the statistic. If the statistic is median image intensity as described above, this step may be similar to median intensity-based segmentation (MBS). However, additional steps described herein help to define segment boundaries in MBS with greater accuracy. “Segments” can be generally defined as different portions of an entire range of possible values for the individual pixels. The segments may be defined based on values for the statistic of the individual pixels depending on the defect detection algorithm that uses the segments. For instance, in the multiple die auto-thresholding (MDAT) algorithm, the value for the statistic of the individual pixels that is used to define the first segments may include median intensity value. In one such illustrative and non-limiting example, if the entire range of median intensity values is from 0 to 255, one of the first segments may include median intensity values from 0 to 100 and another of the first segments may include median intensity values from 101 to 255. In this manner, one of the first segments corresponds to darker pixels in the image, and the other of the first segments corresponds to brighter pixels in the image. The first segments used in the embodiments described herein may be determined in any suitable manner, and the individual pixels may be assigned to the first segments using any suitable method and/or algorithm.
In one embodiment, the method includes generating an image showing the statistic determined for the individual pixels, and assigning the individual pixels to the first segments is performed based on the image showing the statistic. For example, the method may include labeling the image for the wafer based on the pixel intensity statistics (e.g., median intensity, range-based, etc.). In addition, although some embodiments are described herein as being based on median intensity, it is to be understood that the embodiments may be based on any statistic first with edge detection as described herein performed later. In one such example shown in
That image may then be used for the first segmentation. For example, first segments 12 in image 10 may be defined to include pixels having values for the statistic in one range, and first segments 14 may be defined to include pixels having values for the statistic in another range different from the first. Therefore, the pixels in the image can be separated into first segments based on the statistic. Assigning the pixels to the first segments does not necessarily include generating an image as described above and using the image for the first segmentation may be performed in any other suitable manner.
The method also includes detecting one or more edges between the first segments in an image of the first segments. In some embodiments, the method includes generating the image of the first segments by labeling the individual pixels based on the first segments to which the individual pixels were assigned. For example, as shown in
In one embodiment, the one or more edges include at least one edge that extends in the x direction, at least one edge that extends in the y direction, or a combination of at least one edge that extends in the x direction and at least one edge that extends in the y direction. For example, edge detection may include horizontal and/or vertical edge detection. In one such example, for each pixel (i, j) in an image such as the labeled image described above, edge detection may add 1 to the horizontal edge at the ith location if (i, j−1), (i, j+1) belong to different segments. In addition, edge detection may add 1 to the vertical edge at the jth location if (i−1, j), (i+1, j) belong to different segments. In the example shown in
In some embodiments, the method includes modifying the one or more detected edges before generating the edge map described further herein based on spatial characteristics of the one or more detected edges. This step may include “pruning” redundant edges. For example, due to physical structure roughness and inspection system resolution limitations, the edge of segments in an image is not always clean cut. Therefore, the edge detection step may detect multiple edges (redundant edges) that are substantially close together around a real physical edge. As such, the one or more detected edges may be modified using, for example, a dilation algorithm to merge (or reduce) the edges that are substantially close to one another into one edge. The dilation algorithm may include any suitable dilation algorithm known in the art.
The method also includes generating an edge map by projecting the one or more edges across an area corresponding to the image for the wafer. In this manner, the methods described herein may perform projection-based segmentation (PBS) based on edge information. For example, as shown in
Detecting edges based on a statistic-based (e.g., median intensity-based) segment map and then projecting the edge(s) in the x and/or y directions can greatly help to reduce the ambiguity of the edge(s) compared to intensity-based projection. As such, this approach can be used to accurately segment frame images for the underlying structure patterns. The edge detection described herein that can be performed on a segment map and projection based on the edge map is also advantageously stable (with respect to any intensity variations in the light detected from the wafer that is used to form the image for the wafer). For example, an MBS segment map is stable for performing edge detection in x and y. In addition, projection based on the x and y edges is much more stable than edge projection based on other characteristics of the image for the wafer.
The method also includes assigning the individual pixels to second segments by applying the first segments and the edge map to the image for the wafer thereby segmenting the image. Therefore, the embodiments described herein may segment (and label) the frame image based on the edges. The method may segment the pixels based on a combination of image intensity (used to define the first segments that are applied to the image) and intensity change pattern (used to define the edge map that is applied to the image) to accurately segment the underlying structures. For example, even relatively thin vertical areas with relatively low image intensity can be segmented out with the approaches described herein. In addition, edge projection in x and y described herein is substantially stable for reconstructing the segment map (for the second segments).
In one embodiment, assigning the individual pixels to the second segments includes generating the second segments based on the first segments and the edge map and applying the second segments to the individual pixels. For example, the segmentation mask (or image 16 showing the first segments) may be combined with the grid (or edge map 32 showing the edges) to generate second segment groups shown in image 34 in
Defect detection is performed based on the second segments to which the individual pixels are assigned. For example, the embodiments described herein can be used as pre-processing method(s) to separate regions into different segments, but are not themselves an inspection or defect detection algorithm. The embodiments described herein can be used for pre-processing for any inspection algorithm. In this manner, defect detection may be performed in any suitable manner using any suitable method and/or algorithm.
Steps of the method are performed by a computer system, which may be configured as described further herein.
In one embodiment, assigning the individual pixels to the first segments results in the individual pixels having different levels of noise assigned to different first segments. For example, the methods described herein basically segment low intensity segments from high intensity segments in the form of rectangular bounding boxes. Therefore, the methods described herein essentially separate relatively low noise segments from relatively high noise segments, and the segments having different noise levels can then be processed separately during defect detection such that defects of interest (DOIs) can be detected in each of the segments regardless of the noise levels (e.g., by adjusting a threshold that is applied to the pixels), which also suppresses nuisance, noise, and background signal detection.
In another embodiment, at least one of the first segments corresponds to a region on the wafer containing structures having a first characteristic, and at least another of the first segments corresponds to a region on the wafer containing structures having a second characteristic that is different than the first characteristic. For example, since wafer structures that have different characteristics will affect the light from the wafer detected by the inspection system in different ways and since the first segments may be defined based on a statistic related to the image of the wafer (e.g., median image intensity), the first segments can be used to separate different regions of the wafer containing different structures. In addition, since the first segments are defined based on a statistic of a characteristic of the individual pixels, instead of the characteristic itself, the first segments can be used to separate the regions with relatively high accuracy.
In some embodiments, at least one of the second segments corresponds to a region on the wafer containing structures having a first characteristic, and at least another of the second segments corresponds to a region on the wafer containing structures having a second characteristic that is different than the first characteristic. For example, since the second segments are based, at least in part, on the first segments and since different first segments may, as described above, correspond to different regions containing structures having different characteristics, the second segments may also correspond to different regions containing structures having different characteristics.
In one embodiment, at least one of the first segments corresponds to a page break region of a device being fabricated on the wafer, and at least another of the first segments corresponds to an array region of the device. Page breaks are generally defined in the art as regions of a die separating substantially continuous regions of physical memory. Each of the continuous regions of physical memory may be commonly referred to as a page frame. Inside a dark field array region, there is no substantial feature difference and therefore no substantial intensity difference, only some background noise. However, since the page breaks include dramatically different structures than the array regions, there will be a substantial intensity difference in the image for the page breaks compared to the array regions. Therefore, the embodiments can separate an array segment from a page break segment. As described further herein, median intensity may be the statistic of the characteristic of the individual pixels that is used to assign the individual pixels to the first segments. Using median intensity as described herein is advantageous because it is stable for differentiating array from page break in terms of intensity difference.
In some embodiments, at least one of the second segments corresponds to a page break region of a device being fabricated on the wafer, and at least another of the second segments corresponds to an array region of the device. For example, since the second segments are based, at least in part, on the first segments and since some of the first segments may, as described above, correspond to page break regions while other first segments may correspond to array regions, some of the second segments may also correspond to page break regions and other second segments may correspond to array regions.
In one embodiment, the method is performed during scanning of the wafer by the inspection system. For example, as image frames are acquired for a wafer during scanning, the method may be performed for each or at least some of the image frames. In this manner, the method may be performed in real time during inspection by a computer subsystem of an inspection system, which may be configured as described further herein.
In another embodiment, the image for the wafer includes one of multiple image frames acquired sequentially for different areas on the wafer during scanning of the wafer by the inspection system. For example, a detector or detection subsystem of the inspection system may capture multiple image frames as the wafer is moved relative to the inspection system or vice versa. Therefore, the image frames may be acquired at different positions on the wafer. The method described herein may be performed for any or all of those image frames. For example, in one such embodiment, the method is performed for more than one of the multiple image frames. In this manner, the method may be performed independently and separately for each image frame on a frame-by-frame basis.
In some embodiments, the image for the wafer includes one of multiple image frames acquired simultaneously for one area on the wafer by multiple detection subsystems of the inspection system, and the method includes assigning individual pixels in at least one other of the multiple image frames to the second segments by applying the first segments and the edge map to the at least one other of the multiple image frames. For example, the segmentation result generated using any one frame image can be applied to image frames across other detection subsystems (or “channels”) of the inspection system for the same job. In this manner, the segmentation determined for image frames generated by one channel may, in some instances, be applied to an image frame generated by another channel.
In some embodiments, the inspection system is a dark field inspection system. Therefore, the embodiments described herein may be used for segmentation on a dark field inspection system, which may be configured as described further herein. In addition, the embodiments described herein improve the accuracy, stability, and ease of use of the segmentation of wafer images produced by a dark field scanning inspection system. However, the embodiments described herein are not specific to a particular wafer or layer or a specific inspection system. For example, the method may be used to segment any images, no matter what kind of inspection system was used to acquire the images.
The method may also include storing results of any of the step(s) of the method in a computer-readable storage medium. The results may include any of the results described herein and may be stored in any manner known in the art. The storage medium may include any suitable storage medium known in the art. After the results have been stored, the results can be accessed in the storage medium and used as described herein, formatted for display to a user, used by another software module, method, or system, etc.
Another embodiment relates to a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing program instructions executable on a computer system for performing a method (i.e., a computer-implemented method) for segmenting pixels in an image of a wafer for defect detection. One such embodiment is shown in
Program instructions 38 implementing methods such as those described herein may be stored on computer-readable medium 40. The computer-readable medium may be a storage medium such as a magnetic or optical disk, or a magnetic tape or any other suitable non-transitory computer-readable medium known in the art.
The program instructions may be implemented in any of various ways, including procedure-based techniques, component-based techniques, and/or object-oriented techniques, among others. For example, the program instructions may be implemented using Matlab, Visual Basic, ActiveX controls, C, C++ objects, C#, JavaBeans. Microsoft Foundation Classes (“MFC”), or other technologies or methodologies, as desired.
Computer system 40 may take various forms, including a personal computer system, mainframe computer system, workstation, system computer, image computer, programmable image computer, parallel processor, or any other device known in the art. In general, the term “computer system” may be broadly defined to encompass any device having one or more processors, which executes instructions from a memory medium.
An additional embodiment relates to a system configured to segment pixels in an image of a wafer for defect detection. One embodiment of such a system is shown in
Light exiting polarizing component 50 is directed to wafer 52 at an oblique angle of incidence, which may include any suitable oblique angle of incidence. The inspection subsystem may also include one or more optical components (not shown) that are configured to direct light from light source 48 to polarizing component 50 or from polarizing component 50 to wafer 52. The optical components may include any suitable optical components known in the art such as, but not limited to, a reflective optical component. In addition, the light source, the polarizing component, and/or the one or more optical components may be configured to direct the light to the wafer at one or more angles of incidence (e.g., an oblique angle of incidence and/or a substantially normal angle of incidence). The inspection subsystem may be configured to perform the scanning by scanning the light over the wafer in any suitable manner.
Light scattered from wafer 52 may be collected and detected by multiple channels of the inspection subsystem during scanning. For example, light scattered from wafer 52 at angles relatively close to normal may be collected by lens 54. Lens 54 may include a refractive optical element as shown in
Light exiting polarizing component 56 is directed to detector 58. Detector 58 may include any suitable detector known in the art such as a charge coupled device (CCD) or another type of imaging detector. Detector 58 is configured to generate an image that is responsive to the scattered light collected by lens 54 and transmitted by polarizing component 56 if positioned in the path of the collected scattered light. Therefore, lens 54, polarizing component 56 if positioned in the path of the light collected by lens 54, and detector 58 form one channel of the inspection subsystem. This channel of the inspection subsystem may include any other suitable optical components (not shown) known in the art such as a Fourier filtering component.
Light scattered from wafer 52 at different angles may be collected by lens 60. Lens 60 may be configured as described above. Light collected by lens 60 may be directed to polarizing component 62, which may include any suitable polarizing component known in the art. In addition, the inspection subsystem may include more than one polarizing component (not shown), each of which may be positioned independently in the path of the light collected by the lens. Each of the polarizing components may be configured to alter the polarization of the light collected by the lens in a different manner. The inspection subsystem may be configured to move the polarizing components into and out of the path of the light collected by the lens in any suitable manner depending on which polarization setting is selected for detection of the light collected by lens 60 during scanning. The polarization setting used for detection of the light collected by lens 60 during scanning may include P, S, or N.
Light exiting polarizing component 62 is directed to detector 64, which may be configured as described above. Detector 64 is also configured to generate an image that is responsive to the collected scattered light that passes through polarizing component 62 if positioned in the path of the scattered light. Therefore, lens 60, polarizing component 62 if positioned in the path of the light collected by lens 60, and detector 64 may form another channel of the inspection subsystem. This channel may also include any other optical components (not shown) described above. In some embodiments, lens 60 may be configured to collect light scattered from the wafer at polar angles from about 20 degrees to about 70 degrees. In addition, lens 60 may be configured as a reflective optical component (not shown) that is configured to collect light scattered from the wafer at azimuthal angles of about 360 degrees.
The inspection subsystem shown in
Computer subsystem 46 is configured to acquire the image(s) generated by the inspection subsystem. For example, image(s) generated by the detectors during scanning may be provided to computer subsystem 46. In particular, the computer subsystem may be coupled to each of the detectors (e.g., by one or more transmission media shown by the dashed lines in
The computer subsystem is configured for performing the steps of the method described herein. The computer subsystem may also be configured to perform any other step(s) of any method embodiment(s) described herein. The computer subsystem, the inspection subsystem, and the system may be further configured as described herein.
It is noted that
Further modifications and alternative embodiments of various aspects of the invention will be apparent to those skilled in the art in view of this description. For example, methods and systems for segmenting pixels in an image of a wafer for defect detection are provided. Accordingly, this description is to be construed as illustrative only and is for the purpose of teaching those skilled in the art the general manner of carrying out the invention. It is to be understood that the forms of the invention shown and described herein are to be taken as the presently preferred embodiments. Elements and materials may be substituted for those illustrated and described herein, parts and processes may be reversed, and certain features of the invention may be utilized independently, all as would be apparent to one skilled in the art after having the benefit of this description of the invention. Changes may be made in the elements described herein without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention as described in the following claims.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3495269 | Mutschler et al. | Feb 1970 | A |
3496352 | Jugle | Feb 1970 | A |
3909602 | Micka | Sep 1975 | A |
4015203 | Verkuil | Mar 1977 | A |
4247203 | Levy et al. | Jan 1981 | A |
4347001 | Levy et al. | Aug 1982 | A |
4378159 | Galbraith | Mar 1983 | A |
4448532 | Joseph et al. | May 1984 | A |
4475122 | Green | Oct 1984 | A |
4532650 | Wihl et al. | Jul 1985 | A |
4555798 | Broadbent, Jr. et al. | Nov 1985 | A |
4578810 | MacFarlane et al. | Mar 1986 | A |
4579455 | Levy et al. | Apr 1986 | A |
4595289 | Feldman et al. | Jun 1986 | A |
4599558 | Castellano, Jr. et al. | Jul 1986 | A |
4633504 | Wihl | Dec 1986 | A |
4641353 | Kobayashi | Feb 1987 | A |
4641967 | Pecen | Feb 1987 | A |
4734721 | Boyer et al. | Mar 1988 | A |
4748327 | Shinozaki et al. | May 1988 | A |
4758094 | Wihl et al. | Jul 1988 | A |
4766324 | Saadat et al. | Aug 1988 | A |
4799175 | Sano et al. | Jan 1989 | A |
4805123 | Specht et al. | Feb 1989 | A |
4812756 | Curtis et al. | Mar 1989 | A |
4814829 | Kosugi et al. | Mar 1989 | A |
4817123 | Sones et al. | Mar 1989 | A |
4845558 | Tsai et al. | Jul 1989 | A |
4877326 | Chadwick et al. | Oct 1989 | A |
4926489 | Danielson et al. | May 1990 | A |
4928313 | Leonard et al. | May 1990 | A |
5046109 | Fujimori et al. | Sep 1991 | A |
5124927 | Hopewell et al. | Jun 1992 | A |
5189481 | Jann et al. | Feb 1993 | A |
5355212 | Wells et al. | Oct 1994 | A |
5444480 | Sumita | Aug 1995 | A |
5453844 | George et al. | Sep 1995 | A |
5481624 | Kamon | Jan 1996 | A |
5485091 | Verkuil | Jan 1996 | A |
5497381 | O'Donoghue et al. | Mar 1996 | A |
5528153 | Taylor et al. | Jun 1996 | A |
5544256 | Brecher et al. | Aug 1996 | A |
5563702 | Emery et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5572598 | Wihl et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
5578821 | Meisberger et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
5594247 | Verkuil et al. | Jan 1997 | A |
5608538 | Edgar et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
5619548 | Koppel | Apr 1997 | A |
5621519 | Frost et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
5644223 | Verkuil | Jul 1997 | A |
5650731 | Fung et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
5661408 | Kamieniecki et al. | Aug 1997 | A |
5689614 | Gronet et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
5694478 | Braier et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5696835 | Hennessey et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5703969 | Hennessey et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5737072 | Emery et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5742658 | Tiffin et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5754678 | Hawthorne et al. | May 1998 | A |
5767691 | Verkuil | Jun 1998 | A |
5767693 | Verkuil | Jun 1998 | A |
5771317 | Edgar | Jun 1998 | A |
5773989 | Edelman et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5774179 | Chevrette et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5795685 | Liebmann et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5822218 | Moosa et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5831865 | Berezin et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5834941 | Verkuil | Nov 1998 | A |
5852232 | Samsavar et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5866806 | Samsavar et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5874733 | Silver et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5884242 | Meier et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5889593 | Bareket | Mar 1999 | A |
5917332 | Chen et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5932377 | Ferguson et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5940458 | Suk | Aug 1999 | A |
5948972 | Samsavar et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5955661 | Samsavar et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5965306 | Mansfield et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5978501 | Badger et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5980187 | Verhovsky | Nov 1999 | A |
5986263 | Hiroi et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5991699 | Kulkarni et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5999003 | Steffan et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6011404 | Ma et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6014461 | Hennessey et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6040912 | Zika et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6052478 | Wihl et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6060709 | Verkuil et al. | May 2000 | A |
6072320 | Verkuil | Jun 2000 | A |
6076465 | Vacca et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6078738 | Garza et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6091257 | Verkuil et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6091846 | Lin et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6097196 | Verkuil et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6097887 | Hardikar et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6104206 | Verkuil | Aug 2000 | A |
6104835 | Han | Aug 2000 | A |
6117598 | Imai | Sep 2000 | A |
6121783 | Horner et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6122017 | Taubman | Sep 2000 | A |
6122046 | Almogy | Sep 2000 | A |
6137570 | Chuang et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6141038 | Young et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6146627 | Muller et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6171737 | Phan et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6175645 | Elyasaf et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6184929 | Noda et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6184976 | Park et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6191605 | Miller et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6201999 | Jevtic | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6202029 | Verkuil et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6205239 | Lin et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6215551 | Nikoonahad et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6224638 | Jevtic et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6233719 | Hardikar et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6246787 | Hennessey et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6248485 | Cuthbert | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6248486 | Dirksen et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6259960 | Inokuchi | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6266437 | Eichel et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6267005 | Samsavar et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6268093 | Kenan et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6272236 | Pierrat et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6282309 | Emery | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6292582 | Lin et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6324298 | O'Dell et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6344640 | Rhoads | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6363166 | Wihl et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6373975 | Bula et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6388747 | Nara et al. | May 2002 | B2 |
6393602 | Atchison et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6407373 | Dotan | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6415421 | Anderson et al. | Jul 2002 | B2 |
6445199 | Satya et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6451690 | Matsumoto et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6459520 | Takayama | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6466314 | Lehman | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6466315 | Karpol et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6470489 | Chang et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6483938 | Hennessey et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6513151 | Erhardt et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6526164 | Mansfield et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6529621 | Glasser et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6535628 | Smargiassi et al. | Mar 2003 | B2 |
6539106 | Gallarda et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6569691 | Jastrzebski et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
6581193 | McGhee et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6593748 | Halliyal et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6597193 | Lagowski et al. | Jul 2003 | B2 |
6602728 | Liebmann et al. | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6608681 | Tanaka et al. | Aug 2003 | B2 |
6614520 | Bareket et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6631511 | Haffner et al. | Oct 2003 | B2 |
6636301 | Kvamme et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
6642066 | Halliyal et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
6658640 | Weed | Dec 2003 | B2 |
6665065 | Phan et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6670082 | Liu et al. | Dec 2003 | B2 |
6680621 | Savtchouk | Jan 2004 | B2 |
6691052 | Maurer | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6701004 | Shykind et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6718526 | Eldredge et al. | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6721695 | Chen et al. | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6734696 | Horner et al. | May 2004 | B2 |
6738954 | Allen et al. | May 2004 | B1 |
6748103 | Glasser et al. | Jun 2004 | B2 |
6751519 | Satya et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6753954 | Chen | Jun 2004 | B2 |
6757645 | Chang et al. | Jun 2004 | B2 |
6759655 | Nara et al. | Jul 2004 | B2 |
6771806 | Satya et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6775818 | Taravade et al. | Aug 2004 | B2 |
6777147 | Fonseca et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6777676 | Wang et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6778695 | Schellenberg et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6779159 | Yokoyama et al. | Aug 2004 | B2 |
6784446 | Phan et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6788400 | Chen | Sep 2004 | B2 |
6789032 | Barbour et al. | Sep 2004 | B2 |
6803554 | Ye et al. | Oct 2004 | B2 |
6806456 | Ye et al. | Oct 2004 | B1 |
6807503 | Ye et al. | Oct 2004 | B2 |
6813572 | Satya et al. | Nov 2004 | B2 |
6820028 | Ye et al. | Nov 2004 | B2 |
6828542 | Ye et al. | Dec 2004 | B2 |
6842225 | Irie et al. | Jan 2005 | B1 |
6859746 | Stirton | Feb 2005 | B1 |
6879403 | Freifeld | Apr 2005 | B2 |
6879924 | Ye et al. | Apr 2005 | B2 |
6882745 | Brankner et al. | Apr 2005 | B2 |
6884984 | Ye et al. | Apr 2005 | B2 |
6886153 | Bevis | Apr 2005 | B1 |
6892156 | Ye et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
6902855 | Peterson et al. | Jun 2005 | B2 |
6906305 | Pease et al. | Jun 2005 | B2 |
6918101 | Satya et al. | Jul 2005 | B1 |
6919957 | Nikoonahad et al. | Jul 2005 | B2 |
6937753 | O'Dell et al. | Aug 2005 | B1 |
6948141 | Satya et al. | Sep 2005 | B1 |
6959255 | Ye et al. | Oct 2005 | B2 |
6966047 | Glasser | Nov 2005 | B1 |
6969837 | Ye et al. | Nov 2005 | B2 |
6969864 | Ye et al. | Nov 2005 | B2 |
6983060 | Martinent-Catalot et al. | Jan 2006 | B1 |
6988045 | Purdy | Jan 2006 | B2 |
7003755 | Pang et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
7003758 | Ye et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
7012438 | Miller et al. | Mar 2006 | B1 |
7026615 | Takane et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7027143 | Stokowski et al. | Apr 2006 | B1 |
7030966 | Hansen | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7030997 | Neureuther et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7053355 | Ye et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7061625 | Hwang et al. | Jun 2006 | B1 |
7071833 | Nagano et al. | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7103484 | Shi et al. | Sep 2006 | B1 |
7106895 | Goldberg et al. | Sep 2006 | B1 |
7107517 | Suzuki et al. | Sep 2006 | B1 |
7107571 | Chang et al. | Sep 2006 | B2 |
7111277 | Ye et al. | Sep 2006 | B2 |
7114143 | Hanson et al. | Sep 2006 | B2 |
7114145 | Ye et al. | Sep 2006 | B2 |
7117477 | Ye et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7117478 | Ye et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7120285 | Spence | Oct 2006 | B1 |
7120895 | Ye et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7123356 | Stokowski et al. | Oct 2006 | B1 |
7124386 | Smith et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7133548 | Kenan et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7135344 | Nehmadi et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7136143 | Smith | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7152215 | Smith et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7162071 | Hung et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7171334 | Gassner | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7174520 | White et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7194709 | Brankner | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7207017 | Tabery et al. | Apr 2007 | B1 |
7231628 | Pack et al. | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7236847 | Marella | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7271891 | Xiong et al. | Sep 2007 | B1 |
7379175 | Stokowski et al. | May 2008 | B1 |
7383156 | Matsusita et al. | Jun 2008 | B2 |
7386839 | Golender et al. | Jun 2008 | B1 |
7388979 | Sakai et al. | Jun 2008 | B2 |
7418124 | Peterson et al. | Aug 2008 | B2 |
7424145 | Horie et al. | Sep 2008 | B2 |
7440093 | Xiong et al. | Oct 2008 | B1 |
7570796 | Zafar et al. | Aug 2009 | B2 |
7676077 | Kulkarni et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7683319 | Makino et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7738093 | Alles et al. | Jun 2010 | B2 |
7739064 | Ryker et al. | Jun 2010 | B1 |
7760929 | Orbon et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 |
7769225 | Kekare et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7877722 | Duffy et al. | Jan 2011 | B2 |
7890917 | Young et al. | Feb 2011 | B1 |
7904845 | Fouquet et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
7968859 | Young et al. | Jun 2011 | B2 |
8041103 | Kulkarni et al. | Oct 2011 | B2 |
8073240 | Fischer et al. | Dec 2011 | B2 |
8112241 | Xiong | Feb 2012 | B2 |
8126255 | Bhaskar et al. | Feb 2012 | B2 |
8204297 | Xiong et al. | Jun 2012 | B1 |
8611639 | Kulkarni et al. | Dec 2013 | B2 |
20010017694 | Oomori et al. | Aug 2001 | A1 |
20010019625 | Kenan et al. | Sep 2001 | A1 |
20010022858 | Komiya et al. | Sep 2001 | A1 |
20010043735 | Smargiassi et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20020010560 | Balachandran | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020019729 | Chang et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020026626 | Randall et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020033449 | Nakasuji et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020035461 | Chang et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020035641 | Kurose et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020035717 | Matsuoka | Mar 2002 | A1 |
20020088951 | Chen | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020090746 | Xu et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020134936 | Matsui et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020144230 | Rittman | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020145734 | Watkins et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020164065 | Cai et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020176096 | Sentoku et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020181756 | Shibuya et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20020186878 | Hoon et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20020192578 | Tanaka et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030004699 | Choi et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030014146 | Fujii et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030017664 | Pnueli et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030022401 | Hamamatsu et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030033046 | Yoshitake et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030048458 | Mieher et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030048939 | Lehman | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030057971 | Nishiyama et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030076989 | Maayah et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030086081 | Lehman | May 2003 | A1 |
20030094572 | Matsui et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030098805 | Bizjak et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030128870 | Pease et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030138138 | Vacca et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030138978 | Tanaka et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030169916 | Hayashi et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030173516 | Takane et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030192015 | Liu | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030207475 | Nakasuji et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030223639 | Shlain et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20030226951 | Ye et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20030227620 | Yokoyama et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20030228714 | Smith et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20030229410 | Smith et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20030229412 | White et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20030229868 | White et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20030229875 | Smith et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20030229880 | White et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20030229881 | White et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20030237064 | White et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040030430 | Matsuoka | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040032908 | Hagai et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040049722 | Matsushita | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040052411 | Qian et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040057611 | Lee et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040066506 | Elichai et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040091142 | Peterson et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040094762 | Hess et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040098216 | Ye et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040102934 | Chang | May 2004 | A1 |
20040107412 | Pack et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040119036 | Ye et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040120569 | Hung et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040133369 | Pack et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040147121 | Nakagaki et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040174506 | Smith | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040179738 | Dai et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040199885 | Lu et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040223639 | Sato et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20040228515 | Okabe et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20040234120 | Honda et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20040243320 | Chang et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20040246476 | Bevis et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20040254752 | Wisniewski et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050004774 | Volk et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050008218 | O'Dell et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050010890 | Nehmadi et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050013474 | Sim | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050062962 | Fairley et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050069217 | Mukherjee | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050117796 | Matsui et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050132306 | Smith et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050141764 | Tohyama et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050166174 | Ye et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050184252 | Ogawa et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050190957 | Cai et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050198602 | Brankner et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20060000964 | Ye et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060036979 | Zurbrick et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060038986 | Honda et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060048089 | Schwarzband | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060051682 | Hess et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060062445 | Verma et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060066339 | Rajski et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060082763 | Teh et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060159333 | Ishikawa | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060161452 | Hess | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060193506 | Dorphan et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060193507 | Sali et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060236294 | Saidin et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060236297 | Melvin, III et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060239536 | Shibuya et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060265145 | Huet et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060266243 | Percin et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060269120 | Nehmadi et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060273242 | Hunsche et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20060273266 | Preil et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20060277520 | Gennari | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20060291714 | Wu et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20060292463 | Best et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070002322 | Borodovsky et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070011628 | Ouali et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070013901 | Kim et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070019171 | Smith | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070019856 | Furman et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070031745 | Ye et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070032896 | Ye et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070035322 | Kang et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070035712 | Gassner et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070035728 | Kekare et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070052963 | Orbon et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070064995 | Oaki et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070133860 | Lin et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070156379 | Kulkarni et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070230770 | Kulkarni et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070248257 | Bruce et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20070280527 | Almogy et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20070288219 | Zafar et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
20080013083 | Kirk et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080049994 | Rognin et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080058977 | Honda | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080072207 | Verma et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080081385 | Marella et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080163140 | Fouquet et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080167829 | Park et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080250384 | Duffy et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080295047 | Nehmadi et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20080295048 | Nehmadi et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20080304056 | Alles et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20090024967 | Su et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090037134 | Kulkarni et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090041332 | Bhaskar et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090043527 | Park et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090055783 | Florence et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090080759 | Bhaskar et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090210183 | Rajski et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090257645 | Chen et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090284733 | Wallingford et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090290782 | Regensburger | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20090299681 | Chen et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100142800 | Pak et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100146338 | Schalick et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100150429 | Jau et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100226562 | Wu et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20110052040 | Kuan | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110184662 | Badger et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110276935 | Fouquet et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
20120308112 | Hu et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20120319246 | Tan et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20130009989 | Chen et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
20130027196 | Yankun et al. | Jan 2013 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1339140 | Mar 2002 | CN |
1398348 | Feb 2003 | CN |
1646896 | Jul 2005 | CN |
0032197 | Jul 1981 | EP |
0370322 | May 1990 | EP |
1061358 | Dec 2000 | EP |
1061571 | Dec 2000 | EP |
1065567 | Jan 2001 | EP |
1066925 | Jan 2001 | EP |
1069609 | Jan 2001 | EP |
1093017 | Apr 2001 | EP |
1329771 | Jul 2003 | EP |
1480034 | Nov 2004 | EP |
1696270 | Aug 2006 | EP |
7-159337 | Jun 1995 | JP |
2002-071575 | Mar 2002 | JP |
2002-365235 | Dec 2002 | JP |
2003-215060 | Jul 2003 | JP |
2004-045066 | Feb 2004 | JP |
2005-283326 | Oct 2005 | JP |
2009-122046 | Jun 2009 | JP |
10-2001-0007394 | Jan 2001 | KR |
10-2001-0037026 | May 2001 | KR |
10-2001-0101697 | Nov 2001 | KR |
10-2003-0055848 | Jul 2003 | KR |
10-2006-0075691 | Jul 2005 | KR |
10-2005-0092053 | Sep 2005 | KR |
10-2010-0061018 | Jun 2010 | KR |
9857358 | Dec 1998 | WO |
9922310 | May 1999 | WO |
9925004 | May 1999 | WO |
9959200 | May 1999 | WO |
9938002 | Jul 1999 | WO |
9941434 | Aug 1999 | WO |
0003234 | Jan 2000 | WO |
0036525 | Jun 2000 | WO |
0055799 | Sep 2000 | WO |
0068884 | Nov 2000 | WO |
0070332 | Nov 2000 | WO |
0109566 | Feb 2001 | WO |
0140145 | Jun 2001 | WO |
03104921 | Dec 2003 | WO |
2004027684 | Apr 2004 | WO |
2006012388 | Feb 2006 | WO |
2006063268 | Jun 2006 | WO |
2009152046 | Sep 2009 | WO |
2010093733 | Aug 2010 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Jing-Ming Guo, “License Plate Localization and Character Segmentation With Feedback Self-Learning and Hybrid Binarization Techniques”, IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 57, No. 3, May 2008, pp. 1417-1424. |
Jundong Liu, Robust Image Segmentation using Local Median, Proceedings of the 3rd Canadian Conference on Computer and Robot Vision (CRV'06) 0-7695-2542-3/06 $20.00 © 2006 IEEE, 7 pages total. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for PCT/US2013/021940 mailed Apr. 30, 2013. |
U.S. Appl. No. 60/681,095, filed May 13, 2005 by Nehmadi et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 60/684,360, filed May 24, 2005 by Nehmadi et al. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/652,377, filed Oct. 15, 2012 by Wu et al. |
Allan et al., “Critical Area Extraction for Soft Fault Estimation,” IEEE Transactions on Semiconductor Manufacturing, vol. 11, No. 1, Feb. 1998. |
Barty et al., “Aerial Image Microscopes for the inspection of defects in EUV masks,” Proceedings of SPIE, vol. 4889, 2002, pp. 1073-1084. |
Budd et al., “A New Mask Evaluation Tool, the Microlithography Simulation Microscope Aerial Image Measurement System,” SPIE vol. 2197, 1994, pp. 530-540. |
Cai et al., “Enhanced Dispositioning of Reticle Defects Using the Virtual Stepper With Automoated Defect Severity Scoring,” Proceedings of the SPIE, vol. 4409, Jan. 2001, pp. 467-478. |
Comizzoli, “Uses of Corona Discharges in the Semiconductor Industry,” J. Electrochem. Soc., 1987, pp. 424-429. |
Contactless Electrical Equivalent Oxide Thickness Measurement, IBM Technical Disclosure Bulletin, vol. 29, No. 10, 1987, pp. 4622-4623. |
Contactless Photovoltage vs. Bias Method for Determining Flat-Band Voltage, IBM Technical Disclosure Bulletin, vol. 32, vol. 9A, 1990, pp. 14-17. |
Cosway et al., “Manufacturing Implementation of Corona Oxide Silicon (COS) Systems for Diffusion Furnace Contamination Monitoring,” 1997 IEEE/SEMI Advanced Semiconductor Manufacturing Conference, pp. 98-102. |
Diebold et al., “Characterization and produiction metrology of thin transistor gate oxide films,” Materials Science in Semiconductor Processing 2, 1999, pp. 103-147. |
Dirksen et al., “Impact of high order aberrations on the performance of the aberration monitor,” Proc. Of SPIE vol. 4000, Mar. 2000, pp. 9-17. |
Dirksen et al., “Novel aberration monitor for optical lithography,” Proc. Of SPIE vol. 3679, Jul. 1999, pp. 77-86. |
Garcia et al., “New Die to Database Inspection Algorithm for Inspection of 90-nm Node Reticles,” Proceedings of SPIE, vol. 5130, 2003, pp. 364-374. |
Granik et al., “Sub-resolution process windows and yield estimation technique based on detailed full-chip CD simulation,” Mentor Graphics, Sep. 2000, 5 pages. |
Hess et al., “A Novel Approach: High Resolution Inspection with Wafer Plane Defect Detection,” Proceedings of SPIE—International Society for Optical Engineering; Photomask and Next-Generation Lithography Mask Technology 2008, vol. 7028, 2008. |
Huang et al., “Process Window Impact of Progressive Mask Defects, Its Inspection and Disposition Techniques (go/no-go criteria) Via a Lithographic Detector,” Proceedings of SPIE—The International Society for Optical Engineering; 25th Annual Bacus Symposium on Photomask Technology 2005, vol. 5992, No. 1, 2005, p. 6. |
Huang et al., “Using Design Based Binning to Improve Defect Excursion Control for 45nm Production,” IEEE, International Symposium on Semiconductor Manufacturing, Oct. 2007, pp. 1-3. |
Hung et al., Metrology Study of Sub 20 Angstrom oxynitride by Corona-Oxide-Silicon (COS) and Conventional C-V Approaches, 2002, Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc., vol. 716, pp. 119-124. |
Karklin et al., “Automatic Defect Severity Scoring for 193 nm Reticle Defect Inspection,” Proceedings of SPIE—The International Society for Optical Engineering, 2001, vol. 4346, No. 2, pp. 898-906. |
Lo et al., “Identifying Process Window Marginalities of Reticle Designs for 0.15/0.13 μm Technologies,” Proceedings of SPIE vol. 5130, 2003, pp. 829-837. |
Lorusso et al. “Advanced DFM Applns. Using design-based metrology on CDSEM,” SPIE vol. 6152, Mar. 27, 2006. |
Lu et al., “Application of Simulation Based Defect Printability Analysis for Mask Qualification Control,” Proceedings of SPIE, vol. 5038, 2003, pp. 33-40. |
Mack, “Lithographic Simulation: A Review,” Proceedings of SPIE vol. 4440, 2001, pp. 59-72. |
Martino et al., “Application of the Aerial Image Measurement System (AIMS(TM)) to the Analysis of Binary Mask Imaging and Resolution Enhancement Techniques,” SPIE vol. 2197, 1994, pp. 573-584. |
Miller, “A New Approach for Measuring Oxide Thickness,” Semiconductor International, Jul. 1995, pp. 147-148. |
Nagpal et al., “Wafer Plane Inspection for Advanced Reticle Defects,” Proceedings of SPIE—The International Society for Optical Engineering; Photomask and Next-Generation Lithography Mask Technology. vol. 7028, 2008. |
Numerical Recipes in C. The Art of Scientific Computing, 2nd Ed.,© Cambridge University Press 1988, 1992, p. 683. |
O'Gorman et al., “Subpixel Registration Using a Concentric Ring Fiducial,” Proceedings of the International Conference on Pattern Recognition, vol. ii, Jun. 16, 1990, pp. 249-253. |
Otsu, “A Threshold Selection Method from Gray-Level Histograms,” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, vol. SMC-9, No. 1, Jan. 1979, pp. 62-66. |
Pang et al., “Simulation-based Defect Printability Analysis on Alternating Phase Shifting Masks for 193 nm Lithography,” Proceedings of SPIE, vol. 4889, 2002, pp. 947-954. |
Pettibone et al., “Wafer Printability Simulation Accuracy Based on UV Optical Inspection Images of Reticle Defects,” Proceedings of SPIE—The International Society for Optical Engineering 1999 Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers, vol. 3677, No. II, 1999, pp. 711-720. |
Phan et al., “Comparison of Binary Mask Defect Printability Analysis Using Virtual Stepper System and Aerial Image Microscope System,” Proceedings of SPIE—The International Society for Optical Engineering 1999 Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers, vol. 3873, 1999, pp. 681-692. |
Sahouria et al., “Full-chip Process Simulation for Silicon DRC,” Mentor Graphics, Mar. 2000, 6 pages. |
Sato et al., “Defect Criticality Index (DCI): A new methodology to significantly improve DOI sampling rate in a 45nm production environment,” Metrology, Inspection, and Process Control for Microlithography XXII, Proc. Of SPIE vol. 6922, 692213 (2008), pp. 1-9. |
Schroder et al., Corona-Oxide-Semiconductor Device Characterization, 1998, Solid-State Electronics, vol. 42, No. 4, pp. 505-512. |
Schroder, “Surface voltage and surface photovoltage: history, theory and applications,” Measurement Science and Technology, vol. 12, 2001, pp. R16-R31. |
Schroder, Contactless Surface Charge Semiconductor Characterization, Apr. 2002, Materials Science and Engineering B, vol. 91-92, pp. 196-228. |
Schurz et al., “Simulation Study of Reticle Enhancement Technology Applications for 157 nm Lithography,” SPIE vol. 4562, 2002, pp. 902-913. |
Svidenko et al. “Dynamic Defect-Limited Yield Prediction by Criticality Factor,” ISSM Paper: YE-O-157, 2007. |
Tang et al., “Analyzing Volume Diagnosis Results with Statistical Learning for Yield Improvement” 12th IEEE European Test Symposium, Freiburg 2007, IEEE European, May 20-24, 2007, pp. 145-150. |
Verkuil et al., “A Contactless Alternative to MOS Charge Measurements by Means of a Corona-Oxide-Semiconductor (COS) Technique,” Electrochem. Soc. Extended Abstracts, 1988, vol. 88-1, No. 169, pp. 261-262. |
Verkuil, “Rapid Contactless Method for Measuring Fixed Oxide Charge Associated with Silicon Processing,” IBM Technical Disclosure Bulletin, vol. 24, No. 6, 1981, pp. 3048-3053. |
Volk et al. “Investigation of Reticle Defect Formation at DUV Lithography,” 2002, BACUS Symposium on Photomask Technology. |
Volk et al. “Investigation of Reticle Defect Formation at DUV Lithography,” 2003, IEEE/SEMI Advanced Manufacturing Conference, pp. 29-35. |
Volk et al., “Investigation of Smart Inspection of Critical Layer Reticles using Additional Designer Data to Determine Defect Significance,” Proceedings of SPIE vol. 5256, 2003, pp. 489-499. |
Weinberg, “Tunneling of Electrons from Si into Thermally Grown SiO2,” Solid-State Electronics, 1977, vol. 20, pp. 11-18. |
Weinzierl et al., “Non-Contact Corona-Based Process Control Measurements: Where We've Been, Where We're Headed,” Electrochemical Society Proceedings, Oct. 1999, vol. 99-16, pp. 342-350. |
Yan et al., “Printability of Pellicle Defects in DUV 0.5 um Lithography,” SPIE vol. 1604, 1991, pp. 106-117. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20130188859 A1 | Jul 2013 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61588871 | Jan 2012 | US |