JP2005079113A - Method for verifying electron beam lithography data, verifying device, verification program, and electron beam lithographic device - Google Patents

Abstract

<P>PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To provide a verification method of electron beam lithography data for surely and rapidly verifying the multiplicity of drawing data after creating the lithography data for multiplex lithography; and to provide a verification device, a verification program, and an electron beam lithographic device. <P>SOLUTION: The method for verifying electron beam lithography data comprises a step for generating a vector that flows back along the contour of a figure, included in lithography data corresponding to each lithography of multiple drawing; a step for counting corresponding to the crossing with the vector, by slicing the figure in a specified direction, a step for obtaining a combined value by combining the counted results for the figure included in the lithography data, corresponding to a pattern to be drawn on a body to be exposed to light, and a step for determining the quality of multiplicity in the lithography data based on the combined value. <P>COPYRIGHT: (C)2005,JPO&NCIPI

Description

[0001]
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
The present invention relates to an electron beam drawing data verification method, a verification apparatus, a verification program, and an electron beam drawing apparatus, and more particularly to an electron beam drawing data verification method capable of reliably and easily verifying the reliability of drawing data in multiple drawing. The present invention relates to a verification apparatus, a verification program, and an electron beam drawing apparatus.
[0002]
[Prior art]
With the improvement in performance of semiconductor integrated circuits, the miniaturization of patterns has been rapidly advanced. An exposure method using an electron beam (EB) has an important role in that a fine pattern having a length of 0.25 micrometers or less, which will be required in the future, can be formed.
[0003]
FIG. 19 is a flowchart showing a part of the manufacturing process of the semiconductor integrated circuit. That is, this figure shows a process of forming an exposure mask M such as a so-called “master reticle”.
First, in step S1, the layout of the semiconductor integrated circuit is designed, and layout data LD is generated. Next, in step S2, the layout data LD is converted, and drawing data DD used in the electron beam drawing apparatus is generated. The drawing data DD is input to the electron beam drawing apparatus EL. On the other hand, a mask material in which a light-shielding layer such as chromium (Cr) is laminated on a light-transmitting substrate such as quartz and a resist layer is further formed thereon is introduced into an electron beam drawing apparatus. Then, the resist layer of the mask material is exposed with an electron beam based on the drawing data DD. Thereafter, the resist layer is developed to selectively remove a part thereof to form a resist pattern. A mask M on which a predetermined pattern is formed can be formed by selectively etching away a light shielding layer such as chrome using the resist pattern as a mask.
[0004]
Patent Document 1 discloses a method for verifying drawing data by performing a logical operation between layout data and drawing data. That is, it is possible to check whether or not the pattern generated in the drawing data is the same as CAD (computer aided design) data.
[0005]
Here, at first, the number of times of drawing on one mask M by the drawing data DD was one. That is, the electron beam lithography apparatus EL irradiates the resist layer on the surface of the mask M with a necessary electron beam by one electron beam exposure.
However, as the acceleration voltage of the electron beam lithography apparatus is increased for the purpose of high resolution and the current of the electron beam is increased to improve the throughput, “resist heating (resist heating) in the drawn pattern is achieved. The effect of “heating” was increased. “Resist heating” is a phenomenon in which energy obtained by subtracting energy necessary for resist exposure from energy transferred to a resist by an electron beam is accumulated as heat, and local sensitivity change occurs. In the case of a photomask using a glass having poor thermal conductivity as a material, the influence of this phenomenon is particularly great.
[0006]
Sensitivity change due to resist heating is observed as dimensional change of the mask pattern. For this reason, as part of increasing the accuracy of masks, multiple drawing has been performed in which an electron beam drawing apparatus draws the same pattern in an overlapping manner.
[0007]
FIG. 20 is a schematic diagram conceptually showing multiple drawing.
In other words, “multiple drawing” is a technique for reducing the influence of resist heating by dividing the dose of electron beam necessary for resist exposure into multiple pieces and overprinting the pattern with each dose. is there. In addition, by overstriking the pattern, the accuracy can be improved by so-called “averaging”. The number obtained by dividing the irradiation amount is called “multiplicity”. Furthermore, in order to improve pattern dimensions and connection accuracy in multiple drawing, a technique of drawing multiple patterns divided into different shapes instead of the same pattern has been realized.
[0008]
FIG. 21 is a schematic diagram illustrating multiple drawing divided into different shapes. That is, in the specific example shown in the figure, drawing data DD1 and DD2 respectively corresponding to two drawing operations are generated. Each drawing data is divided into patterns at a drawing field boundary FI. The drawing field boundary FI is shifted between the drawing data DD1 and the drawing data DD2 in order to suppress the occurrence of the pattern “joint” at the drawing field boundary FI.
[0009]
Furthermore, even when an unsimple pattern is trapezoidally divided, the trapezoid dividing direction can be changed in order to obtain an averaging effect.
FIG. 22 is a schematic diagram illustrating multiple drawing in which the trapezoid division direction is changed. That is, since the patterns A and B of the layout data LD are not simple squares, it is convenient to perform a process of dividing them into a plurality of trapezoids. Also in this case, the effect of “averaging” can be obtained by changing the trapezoid division direction between the drawing data DD1 and the drawing data DD2. That is, in the specific example shown in FIG. 22, in the drawing data DD1, the patterns A1 and B1 are divided in the X direction, while in the drawing data DD2, the corresponding patterns A2 and B2 are divided in the Y direction. It is divided into.
[0010]
As described above, multiple drawing is effective for avoiding resist heating and increasing pattern accuracy in an electron beam drawing apparatus. Furthermore, by shifting the drawing field or changing the trapezoidal division direction, an averaging effect can be obtained, and a fine pattern can be formed with high accuracy.
[0011]
[Patent Document 1]
Japanese Patent Laid-Open No. 2001-344302
[Problems to be solved by the invention]
By the way, when multiple drawing is performed by the method as described above, the multiplicity of all patterns must be the same. That is, if the multiplicity is different for each pattern or part of the pattern, the exposure amount of the electron beam is different, and incomplete or excessive exposure is performed.
[0013]
However, conventionally, there has been no suitable method for verifying that all patterns of drawing data have the same multiplicity in multiplex drawing. For example, the verification method disclosed in Patent Document 1 described above is not intended for multiple drawing, and it is easy to deal with cases where the multiplicity is different in some patterns or part of the drawing data. It was not.
[0014]
The present invention has been made on the basis of recognition of such a problem, and an object of the present invention is to create an electron beam drawing data that can reliably and quickly verify the multiplicity of drawing data after creating drawing data for multiple drawing. A verification method, a verification apparatus, a verification program, and an electron beam drawing apparatus are provided.
[0015]
[Means for Solving the Problems]
In order to achieve the above object, according to the present invention, there is provided an electron beam drawing data verification method for verifying drawing data for drawing on an object to be exposed by multiple drawing using an electron beam. Generating a vector that circulates along the outline of the figure included in the drawing data corresponding to each of the drawing, slicing the figure in a predetermined direction, and counting corresponding to the intersection with the vector; Combining the counted results for the graphics included in each of the drawing data corresponding to the pattern to be drawn on the exposure object to obtain a combined value; and multiplicity in the drawing data based on the combined value There is provided a method for verifying electron beam drawing data, characterized by comprising:
[0016]
Or an electron beam drawing data verification device for verifying drawing data for drawing by multiple drawing using an electron beam on an object to be exposed, the drawing data corresponding to each drawing of the multiple drawing Corresponding to a pattern to be drawn on the object to be exposed, means for generating a vector that circulates along the contour of the figure to be circulated, means for slicing the figure in a predetermined direction and counting corresponding to the intersection with the vector And means for combining the counted results for the graphics included in each of the drawing data to obtain a combined value, and means for determining the correctness of multiplicity in the drawing data based on the combined value. A verification apparatus for electron beam drawing data is provided.
[0017]
Or an electron beam drawing data verification program for causing a computer to verify drawing data for drawing on an object to be exposed by multiple drawing using an electron beam, wherein the computer supports each drawing of the multiple drawing. A vector that circulates along the contour of the graphic included in the drawing data to be generated is generated, and the graphic is sliced in a predetermined direction and counted in correspondence with the intersection with the vector, so that a pattern to be drawn on the object to be exposed is obtained. Correspondingly, an electronic device comprising: combining the counted results of the graphics included in each of the drawing data to calculate a combined value; and determining whether the multiplicity in the drawing data is correct based on the combined value A verification program for line drawing data is provided.
[0018]
Alternatively, an electron beam drawing apparatus that can perform drawing by multiple drawing using an electron beam on an object to be exposed based on the drawing data, and is included in the drawing data corresponding to each drawing of the multiple drawing Generating a vector that circulates along the contour of the figure, slicing the figure in a predetermined direction and counting corresponding to the intersection with the vector, and corresponding to a pattern to be drawn on the object to be exposed. A step of combining the counted results for the graphics included in each of the drawing data to obtain a combined value, and a step of determining the correctness of multiplicity in the drawing data based on the combined value; There is provided an electron beam drawing apparatus including the drawing data verification unit.
[0019]
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION
Hereinafter, embodiments of the present invention will be described in detail with reference to the drawings.
[0020]
FIG. 1 is a flowchart showing a drawing data verification method according to an embodiment of the present invention.
That is, the drawing data verification method of the present embodiment can be expressed as a series of steps from drawing data input (step S102) to number-of-times determination (step S114).
[0021]
Hereinafter, this verification method will be described with reference to a part of the drawing data illustrated in FIG. 22 as the simplest specific example.
[0022]
2 to 6 are conceptual diagrams for explaining a drawing data verification method according to the present embodiment.
That is, FIGS. 2A and 2B are schematic diagrams showing the drawing data DD1 and DD2 shown in FIG. 22, respectively. Hereinafter, a specific example in which the verification method of the present embodiment is performed on the patterns P1 and P2 that are multiplexed and expressed by the drawing data DD1 and DD2 will be described.
[0023]
First, drawing data is input as shown in step S102 in FIG. As shown in FIG. 2, the drawing data includes a plurality of data DD1 and DD2 that are multiplexed by converting layout data. In this step, the flag n that appears later in step S114 is reset to a predetermined value, for example, “0”.
[0024]
Next, in step S104, the drawing data is divided. For example, in the case of the drawing data illustrated in FIG. 2, it may be divided for each pattern (for example, P1, P2, etc.), and each pattern is further divided into a plurality of figures (for example, P3, P4, etc.). Also good.
[0025]
Next, in step S106, the divided pattern or figure is vectorized. For example, the patterns P1 and P2 included in the drawing data DD1 and DD2 will be described. As illustrated in FIGS. 3A and 3B, a vector that circulates in one direction along the contour is generated. Although FIG. 3 shows a specific example of vectorization clockwise (clockwise), it may be vectorized counterclockwise (counterclockwise) on the contrary.
[0026]
Next, in step S108, the slices are counted. That is, the vectorized pattern is sliced in a predetermined direction, and vectors that intersect the slice are counted. As a counting method, for example, a positive 1 is determined when the X component of the intersecting vector is negative, and a negative 1 is determined when it is positive.
[0027]
FIGS. 4A and 4B are conceptual diagrams illustrating the case where the vectorized patterns P1 and P2 are sliced in the Y direction and counted.
FIGS. 5A and 5B are graphs showing changes in counts obtained for the patterns P1 and P2, respectively.
When slicing in the direction of the arrow Y, if the initial value is set to zero, the coordinates first intersect with the contour vectors of the patterns P1 and P2, and the count increases to 1. Then, when passing the patterns P1 and P2 at the coordinate Y2, it intersects with the contour vector and returns to zero.
[0028]
After the patterns are counted in the respective drawing data in this way, the counts are synthesized in step S110. That is, the count is synthesized for each pattern (for example, patterns P1 and P2) included in the multiplexed drawing data (for example, data DD1 and DD2).
FIG. 6 is a graph showing the result of combining the counts shown in FIGS. 5 (a) and 5 (b). That is, when the count of the pattern P1 and the count of the pattern P2 are combined, the count number of the overlapping portion is “2” as shown in FIG. This combined count number corresponds to “multiplicity”, that is, the number of overstrikes in multiple drawing.
[0029]
Once the counts are combined in this way, it is next determined in step S112 whether the combined value of the counts is binary. Specifically, for example, it is determined whether the combined value of the count is only “0” or “predetermined value”.
In the specific example shown in FIG. 6, the combined value of the counts is “0” or “2”. That is, the combined values of the counts where the patterns P1 and P2 do not exist are all “0”, and the combined values of the portions where the patterns P1 and P2 exist are all “2”. Thus, when only “2”, that is, multiplicity or “0” is obtained, it can be said that the drawing data is accurately multiplexed and there is no portion where the multiplicity is excessive or insufficient. On the other hand, as described later with reference to a specific example, if a composite value of the count that is neither “0” nor “predetermined value (for example, multiplicity)” appears, There will be an abnormality in multiplicity.
[0030]
In step S112, if the composite value of the count includes a numerical value that does not correspond to either “0” or “predetermined value”, there is a multiplicity defect in the drawing data, and therefore “defective (NG)”. And the verification process can be terminated.
[0031]
On the other hand, if the composite value of the count is only binary, for example, “0” or “predetermined value” in step S112, the process proceeds to step S114, and it is determined whether or not the flag n is the predetermined value N. To do. The flag n represents the number of processed slices. The predetermined value N represents the number of slices to be processed.
[0032]
When the flag n is less than the predetermined number N, n is increased by 1, and the process returns to step S108, and steps S108 to S114 are repeated based on another slice. On the other hand, if the flag n reaches the predetermined number N, no abnormality in the multiplicity has been found for all slices, so the verification process is terminated and the result that the multiplicity of the drawing data is accurate is obtained. Output.
[0033]
As described above, according to the present invention, the contour of the pattern included in the multiplexed drawing data is vectorized, and the multiplicity in the multiple drawing is determined by a simple and clear method of counting the vectors along the slice. Abnormalities can be detected reliably and easily. The resources required for the vectorization and counting process are relatively small. For this reason, CPU power consumption is low, and even a small computer can be used for high-speed processing, which is advantageous in terms of throughput and cost.
[0034]
Next, a specific example in which the verification method of this embodiment is applied when a pattern is divided will be described with reference to FIGS.
[0035]
FIG. 7 is a schematic diagram showing a pattern to be processed in this specific example. That is, the figure shows a pattern in layout data before conversion into drawing data.
[0036]
FIG. 8 is a schematic diagram illustrating a series of processes from generation of drawing data to verification thereof in this specific example.
That is, when layout data LD is input in step S202, first, in step 204, it can be divided into a plurality of drawing fields. At this time, the pattern F is appropriately divided by a boundary line FI appropriately provided in the X direction and the Y direction.
[0037]
Next, in step S206, the data is multiplexed according to the multiplicity.
In step S208, the data is further divided into shot units. In this way, multiplexed drawing data DD1 and DD2 can be generated. In the specific example shown in FIG. 8, the drawing data DD1 and DD2 are divided so that the shot division directions are different from each other.
[0038]
Once the drawing data is generated in this way, the multiplicity is verified in step S212. As the verification process in step S212, the verification method of the present invention can be used. Hereinafter, a specific example in which the drawing data verification method of the present invention is executed on the portion surrounded by the broken line A in the patterns F1 and F2 included in the multiplexed drawing data DD1 and DD2 will be described.
[0039]
FIGS. 9A and 9B are schematic views showing a part of the patterns F1 and F2, respectively. Here, the pattern shown in FIG. 5A is divided into shots in the Y direction (vertical direction), and the pattern shown in FIG. 4B is divided into shots in the X direction (horizontal direction).
[0040]
FIG. 10 is a schematic diagram showing the result of vectorization for each of these divided figures. That is, a vector is formed so as to circulate along the outline of each divided figure. In this specific example, vectorization is performed counterclockwise (counterclockwise).
[0041]
FIG. 11 is a schematic diagram illustrating slices of these vector data. That is, as represented by the arrow Y in the figure, each of the multiplexed patterns (graphics) is sliced in a predetermined direction and counted at the intersection with the contour vector. Here, when the X component of the intersecting vector is positive, it is counted as plus 1, and when it is negative, it is counted as minus 1.
In the case of the specific example of FIG. 11A, counting in the direction of the arrow Y first becomes plus 1 when intersecting the vector V1, and then returns to 0 by intersecting the vector V2. On the other hand, in the specific example of FIG. 11B, counting in the direction of the arrow Y first becomes plus 1 when intersecting the vector V3, and then returns to 0 by intersecting the vector V4. Crosses V5 and becomes plus one. Since these vectors V4 and V5 substantially overlap, the count can remain positive when crossed. Finally, the vector V6 is crossed to return to the count.
That is, in both cases of FIGS. 11A and 11B, when counting on the slice Y, there is a rectangular distribution that rises from 0 to plus 1 at the coordinate Y1 and returns from plus 1 to 0 at the coordinate Y2. can get.
[0042]
FIG. 12 is a graph obtained by combining these counts. That is, when the counts of the patterns F1 and F2 are combined, the combined value is “2” corresponding to the multiplicity in the range from the coordinates Y1 to Y2, and “0” in the other portions. Therefore, there is no abnormality in the multiplicity, and it can be verified that the layout data is accurately multiplexed and converted into drawing data.
[0043]
Next, a case where there is an abnormality in multiplicity will be described with reference to a specific example.
[0044]
FIG. 13 is a schematic diagram showing a layout data pattern in this example.
[0045]
FIG. 14 is a schematic diagram showing a pattern of drawing data corresponding to the pattern F.
That is, the pattern F is divided into three figures F1, F2 and F3. The figures F1 and F3 are assigned to the first drawing data DD1, and the figure F2 is assigned to the second drawing data DD2, and multiple drawing is performed.
[0046]
FIG. 15 is a schematic diagram for explaining an example of vectorization, slices, and counts in these drawing data. That is, in the case of the specific example shown in the figure, the vectors are vectorized counterclockwise (counterclockwise) along the outlines of the figures F1 to F3.
[0047]
FIG. 16 is a graph showing a combined value of counts sliced in the direction of arrow Y. Here, when the X component of the vector crossing the slice is positive, it is counted as plus 1, and when it is negative, it is counted as minus 1.
When sliced in the direction of the arrow Y, first, it intersects the contour vector of the figure F1 at the coordinate Y1, and the count increases from “0” to “1”. Next, at the coordinate Y2, since it further intersects with the contour vector of the figure F2, the combined value of the counts increases from “1” to “2”. Next, the composite value of the count decreases from “2” to “1” when passing through the graphic F2 at the coordinate Y3, and returns from “1” to “0” when passing through the graphic F1 at the coordinate Y4. In FIG. 15, the combined value of the count corresponding to the place is shown in the figure.
[0048]
As can be seen from FIGS. 15 and 16, when there is a partial overlap, a binary value, that is, a value other than “0” and “predetermined value” appears in the combined value of the count when sliced in a predetermined direction. . When the electron beam drawing is performed using the drawing data having such an overlapping portion, the exposure amount becomes excessive in the overlapping portion of the graphic, that is, the portion where the combined value of the count is “2”, which causes problems such as resist heating. Will occur.
[0049]
Accordingly, when a binary value, that is, a value other than “0” and “predetermined value” appears in the composite value of the count, it is determined as “abnormal” in step S210 of FIG. 8, and processing is performed without drawing (step S212). Can be terminated.
[0050]
As described above, according to the present invention, in the drawing data for multiple drawing, whether or not the multiplicity is uniform, or whether or not there is a partial overlap or defect in the figure (pattern). Can be reliably and easily verified. In addition, since figures (patterns) are vectorized, resources such as CPU power and memory capacity required for the verification process can be reduced. Therefore, quick verification can be performed using a small computer.
[0051]
FIG. 17 is a schematic view illustrating the appearance of the verification device according to the embodiment of the invention. The main body of the verification device 80 is appropriately provided with a CPU (central processing unit), a calculation unit incorporating a memory, and a display unit such as a display. Furthermore, recording / reproducing means such as a hard disk magnetic recording / reproducing apparatus is appropriately incorporated.
[0052]
Further, a recording / reproducing apparatus 81 for driving a magnetic recording medium 83 such as a magnetic recording medium or a magneto-optical recording medium, an optical disk drive 82 for driving an optical disk 84 such as a CD (compact disc) or a DVD (digital versatile disc), etc. Prepare.
[0053]
A magnetic recording medium 83 is inserted into the recording / reproducing apparatus 81, and an optical disk 84 is inserted into the optical disc drive 82 from its insertion slot. And data can be entered into the system and installed.
[0054]
Further, by connecting a predetermined drive device, for example, a ROM 85 or a magnetic tape 86 as a memory device can be used.
Still further, a program or data may be downloaded as appropriate via a wired or wireless transmission medium 87 such as a telephone line or a LAN (local area network).
[0055]
According to the verification apparatus of the present specific example, the drawing data verification method described above with reference to FIGS. 1 to 16 can be executed. For example, a circuit for executing the above-described verification method may be realized as hardware, or may be realized as software that causes a program, that is, a CPU, to execute a series of steps of the verification method of the present invention. Good.
[0056]
The drawing data to be verified may be input from the outside via the magnetic recording medium 83, the optical disk 84, the ROM 85, the magnetic tape 86, the transmission medium 87, or the like, or laid out inside the verification device 80. Drawing data for multiple drawing may be generated by converting the data. In this case, the verification device 80 also functions as a drawing data generation device.
According to the present invention, as described above, since figures (patterns) are vectorized, resources such as CPU power and memory capacity required for the verification process can be reduced. Therefore, quick verification can be performed using a small computer.
[0057]
FIG. 18 is a block diagram of an electron beam drawing apparatus according to an embodiment of the present invention. That is, the electron beam drawing apparatus performs exposure by irradiating the mask substrate 15 with the electron beam 1 through the electron gun 2, the diaphragm 3, the electron lens 4, the blanker 5, and the polarizer 8. The computer 11 sends a target position signal to the position control system 12 and controls the servo motor 14 via the motor control system 13 to move the moving table 16. Further, the position control system 12 compares the position signal of the moving table 16 measured by the laser interferometer 17 with the target position signal from the computer 11 and stops the moving table 16 with a predetermined accuracy. The stop position accuracy of the moving table 16 is, for example, about 0.005 μm.
[0058]
In drawing the mask substrate 15, the computer 11 sends a control signal to the deflection control system 7, the deflection control system 7 sends the position information of the electron beam 1 to the deflector 8, and the electron beam 1 is turned on (ON) off. An (OFF) signal is transmitted to the blanking control system 6. The blanker 5 controls the electron beam 1 on (ON) and off (OFF) in response to these on (ON) and off (OFF) signals. That is, the deflector 8 positions the electron beam 1 at a predetermined position on the mask substrate 15, turns off the blanker 5, and sends a drawing signal to the deflector 8 to start drawing.
According to the present invention, in such an electron beam drawing apparatus, a drawing data verification unit 20 is provided as a preceding stage of the computer 11 or as a part of the computer 11. The drawing data DD is input to the drawing data verification unit 20 and detects an abnormality in multiplicity in the drawing data for multiple drawing as described above with reference to FIGS. If an abnormality is found in the input drawing data, an alarm or the like may be displayed without executing drawing. Alternatively, when an abnormality is found in the drawing data, the drawing data may be restored by the computer 11 and then the electron beam exposure may be executed.
[0059]
According to this specific example, it is possible to provide an electron beam drawing apparatus that can prevent overexposure and underexposure due to an abnormality in the multiplicity of drawing data and improve the yield and throughput of the electron beam drawing process.
[0060]
The embodiments of the present invention have been described above with reference to specific examples. However, the present invention is not limited to these specific examples.
[0061]
For example, when the layout data is converted into drawing data, the multiplicity of multiple drawing can be “4” or other numerical values besides “2”. In addition, the contents of the drawing field division, trapezoidal processing, shot division, and other processing orders, the number of divisions, and the shape of the division are appropriately deviated by a person skilled in the art within the scope of the present invention. It is included in the scope of the present invention. The same applies to the vectorization direction, slice direction, and frequency.
[0062]
Further, the present invention is not limited only to the manufacture of a mask, and it is also possible to perform electron beam drawing on an object to be processed in which a resist is formed on a wafer of a semiconductor integrated circuit.
[0063]
In addition, all electron beam drawing apparatuses that include elements of the present invention and whose design can be appropriately changed by those skilled in the art, and methods for verifying the drawing data, verification apparatuses, and verification programs are included in the scope of the present invention.
[0064]
【The invention's effect】
As described above, according to the present invention, the contour of the pattern included in the multiplexed drawing data is vectorized, and the multiplicity in the multiple drawing is determined by a simple and clear method of counting the vectors along the slice. Abnormalities can be detected reliably and easily. The resources required for the vectorization and counting process are relatively small. For this reason, CPU power consumption is low, and even a small computer can be used for high-speed processing, which is advantageous in terms of throughput and cost.
[0065]
As a result, it is possible to promote high performance, improvement of development efficiency and cost reduction of advanced devices such as semiconductor integrated circuits, and there are great industrial advantages.
[Brief description of the drawings]
FIG. 1 is a flowchart showing a drawing data verification method according to an embodiment of the present invention;
2A and 2B are drawing data DD1 and DD2 shown in FIG. 22, respectively.
FIG. 3 is a schematic diagram showing how a vector that circulates in one direction along the contours of patterns P1 and P2 is generated.
4A and 4B are conceptual diagrams exemplifying a case where vectorized patterns P1 and P2 are sliced in the Y direction and counted. FIG.
FIGS. 5A and 5B are graphs showing changes in counts obtained for patterns P1 and P2, respectively.
6 is a graph showing the result of combining the counts shown in FIGS. 5 (a) and 5 (b). FIG.
FIG. 7 shows a pattern in layout data before conversion into drawing data in a specific example of the present invention.
FIG. 8 is a schematic view illustrating a series of processes from generation of drawing data to verification thereof in the specific example of the present invention.
FIGS. 9A and 9B are schematic views showing a part of patterns F1 and F2, respectively.
FIG. 10 is a schematic diagram showing the result of vectorization for each of the divided figures.
FIG. 11 is a schematic diagram illustrating a slice of vector data.
FIG. 12 is a graph obtained by combining counts.
FIG. 13 is a schematic diagram showing a pattern of layout data in a specific example of the present invention.
14 is a schematic diagram showing a pattern of drawing data corresponding to a pattern F. FIG.
FIG. 15 is a schematic diagram for explaining an example of vectorization, slice, and count in drawing data.
16 is a graph showing a combined value of counts sliced in the direction of arrow Y. FIG.
FIG. 17 is a schematic view illustrating the external appearance of a verification apparatus according to an embodiment of the invention.
FIG. 18 is a block diagram of an electron beam drawing apparatus according to an embodiment of the present invention.
FIG. 19 is a flowchart showing a part of the manufacturing process of the semiconductor integrated circuit.
FIG. 20 is a schematic diagram conceptually showing multiple drawing.
FIG. 21 is a schematic diagram showing multiple drawing divided into different shapes.
FIG. 22 is a schematic diagram illustrating multiple drawing in which the trapezoid division direction is changed.
[Explanation of symbols]
DESCRIPTION OF SYMBOLS 1 Electron beam 2 Electron gun 3 Aperture 4 Electron lens 5 Blanker 6 Blanking control system 7 Deflection control system 8 Deflector 11 Computer 12 Position control system 13 Motor control system 14 Servo motor 15 Mask substrate 16 Moving stand 17 Laser interferometer 20 Drawing Data verification unit 80 Verification device 81 Recording / playback device 82 Optical disk drive 83 Magnetic recording medium 84 Optical disk 86 Magnetic tape 87 Transmission media DD, DD1, DD2 Drawing data EL Electron beam drawing apparatus FI Drawing field boundary (boundary line)
LD layout data M Mask

Claims (12)

An electron beam drawing data verification method for verifying drawing data for drawing by multiple drawing using an electron beam on an object to be exposed,
Generating a vector that circulates along the contour of the graphic included in the drawing data corresponding to each drawing of the multiple drawing;
Slicing the figure in a predetermined direction and counting corresponding to the intersection with the vector;
Combining the counted results for the graphics included in each of the drawing data corresponding to the pattern to be drawn on the exposure object to obtain a combined value; and multiplicity in the drawing data based on the combined value Determining the correctness of
A method for verifying electron beam drawing data, comprising: When the composite value has only the first value in the portion where the pattern to be drawn does not exist, and the composite value has only the second value in the portion of the pattern to be drawn, many of the drawing data 2. The method of verifying electron beam drawing data according to claim 1, wherein the severity is determined to be normal. 3. The method of verifying electron beam drawing data according to claim 1, wherein when the composite value includes three or more types of values, the multiplicity in the drawing data is determined to be abnormal. When the vector intersects the slice from the first side to the second side, one of positive and negative values having the same absolute value is added to the count,
2. When the vector intersects the slice from the second side toward the first side, one of the positive and negative values is added to the count. 4. The method for verifying electron beam drawing data according to any one of 3 above. 5. The electron beam drawing data verification method according to claim 1, wherein the figure is a part of the pattern obtained by dividing the pattern to be drawn. An electron beam drawing data verification device for verifying drawing data for drawing by multiple drawing using an electron beam on an object to be exposed,
Means for generating a vector that circulates along a contour of a graphic included in drawing data corresponding to each drawing of the multiple drawing;
Means for slicing the figure in a predetermined direction and counting corresponding to the intersection with the vector;
Means for synthesizing the counted results for the graphics included in each of the drawing data corresponding to the pattern to be drawn on the object to be exposed;
Means for determining the correctness of multiplicity in the drawing data based on the composite value;
A verification apparatus for electron beam drawing data, comprising: An electron beam drawing data verification program for causing a computer to verify drawing data for drawing on an object to be exposed by multiple drawing using an electron beam,
On the computer,
Generating a vector that circulates along the contour of the figure included in the drawing data corresponding to each drawing of the multiple drawing;
Slice the figure in a predetermined direction and let it count in response to the intersection with the vector,
Combining the counted results for the figures included in each of the drawing data corresponding to the pattern to be drawn on the exposed object, and calculating a combined value;
An electron beam drawing data verification program for determining whether or not the multiplicity in the drawing data is correct based on the composite value. When the composite value has only the first value in the portion where the pattern to be drawn does not exist, and the composite value has only the second value in the portion of the pattern to be drawn, many of the drawing data 8. The verification program for electron beam drawing data according to claim 7, wherein the severity is determined to be normal. 9. The electron beam drawing data verification program according to claim 7, wherein when the composite value includes three or more types of values, the multiplicity in the drawing data is determined to be abnormal. When the vector crosses from the first side to the second side with respect to the slice, either one of positive and negative values having the same absolute value is added to the count, and Any one of the positive and negative values is added to the count when the vector intersects from the second side toward the first side. Verification program for electron beam drawing data described in 1. 11. The electron beam drawing data verification program according to claim 7, wherein the figure is a part of the pattern obtained by dividing the pattern to be drawn. An electron beam drawing apparatus capable of performing drawing by multiple drawing using an electron beam on an object to be exposed based on drawing data,
Generating a vector that circulates along the contour of the graphic included in the drawing data corresponding to each drawing of the multiple drawing;
Slicing the figure in a predetermined direction and counting corresponding to the intersection with the vector;
Combining the counted results for the graphics included in each of the drawing data corresponding to the pattern to be drawn on the exposure object to obtain a combined value; and multiplicity in the drawing data based on the combined value Determining the correctness of
An electron beam drawing apparatus comprising a drawing data verification unit capable of executing

Images