US20040225488A1 - System and method for examining mask pattern fidelity - Google Patents

System and method for examining mask pattern fidelity Download PDF

Info

Publication number
US20040225488A1
US20040225488A1 US10665451 US66545103A US2004225488A1 US 20040225488 A1 US20040225488 A1 US 20040225488A1 US 10665451 US10665451 US 10665451 US 66545103 A US66545103 A US 66545103A US 2004225488 A1 US2004225488 A1 US 2004225488A1
Authority
US
Grant status
Application
Patent type
Prior art keywords
mask
simulation
wafer
design
files
Prior art date
Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
Abandoned
Application number
US10665451
Inventor
Wen-Chuan Wang
Shih-Ming Chang
Chih-Cheng Chin
Chi-Lun Lu
Sheng-Chi Chin
Hung-Chang Hsieh
Current Assignee (The listed assignees may be inaccurate. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy of the list.)
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) Ltd
Original Assignee
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) Ltd
Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date

Links

Images

Classifications

    • GPHYSICS
    • G03PHOTOGRAPHY; CINEMATOGRAPHY; ELECTROGRAPHY; HOLOGRAPHY
    • G03FPHOTOMECHANICAL PRODUCTION OF TEXTURED OR PATTERNED SURFACES, e.g. FOR PRINTING, FOR PROCESSING OF SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICES; MATERIALS THEREFOR; ORIGINALS THEREFOR; APPARATUS SPECIALLY ADAPTED THEREFOR
    • G03F1/00Originals for photomechanical production of textured or patterned surfaces, e.g., masks, photo-masks, reticles; Mask blanks or pellicles therefor; Containers specially adapted therefor; Preparation thereof
    • G03F1/36Masks having proximity correction features; Preparation thereof, e.g. optical proximity correction [OPC] design processes
    • GPHYSICS
    • G03PHOTOGRAPHY; CINEMATOGRAPHY; ELECTROGRAPHY; HOLOGRAPHY
    • G03FPHOTOMECHANICAL PRODUCTION OF TEXTURED OR PATTERNED SURFACES, e.g. FOR PRINTING, FOR PROCESSING OF SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICES; MATERIALS THEREFOR; ORIGINALS THEREFOR; APPARATUS SPECIALLY ADAPTED THEREFOR
    • G03F1/00Originals for photomechanical production of textured or patterned surfaces, e.g., masks, photo-masks, reticles; Mask blanks or pellicles therefor; Containers specially adapted therefor; Preparation thereof
    • G03F1/68Preparation processes not covered by groups G03F1/20 - G03F1/50
    • G03F1/82Auxiliary processes, e.g. cleaning or inspecting
    • G03F1/84Inspecting

Abstract

A method and system is disclosed for examining mask pattern fidelity. First, a mask picture is generated from a first mask with a first OPC model applied to a mask design thereon. The mask picture is then converted into a mask based simulation file. A first simulation is conducted under a first set of predetermined lithography processing conditions using the converted simulation file to generate one or more files of a first set representing wafer photo resist profile thereof. On the other hand, a mask design in a database mask file is identified which was used for generating the first mask. The first OPC model is applied to the mask design in the database mask file. A second simulation is then conducted under the first set of predetermined lithography processing conditions using the OPCed mask design to generate one or more files of a second set representing wafer photo resist profile thereof. The first and second sets of files are then evaluated together for the purpose of inspecting mask fidelity.

Description

    CROSS REFERENCE
  • [0001]
    This application claims the benefits of U.S. Provisional Patent No. 60/467,977, which was filed on May 5, 2003.
  • BACKGROUND
  • [0002]
    The present disclosure relates generally to integrated circuit (IC) manufacturing, and more particularly to an improved method and system for examining mask fidelity to determine an appropriate method to create a mask.
  • [0003]
    Photolithography is one of the principal processes in the manufacture of semiconductor devices, and consists of patterning the wafer's surface in accordance with the circuit design of the semiconductor devices to be produced. More specifically, a circuit design to be fabricated on the wafer is first patterned on a mask or reticle. The wafer is coated with a photo resist material, and is then placed in a photolithography tool to be exposed to light passing through the reticle to produce a latent image of the reticle on the photo resist material. Thereafter, the exposed photo resist material is developed to produce the image of the mask on the wafer. After the completion of the photolithography process, the uppermost layer of the wafer is etched, a new layer is deposited, and the photolithography and etching operations are started again. In this repetitive manner, a multi-layer semiconductor wafer is produced.
  • [0004]
    As is well known, photolithography tools utilize a lamp or a laser as a light source, and utilize a relatively high numerical aperture (NA) objective to achieve a relatively high resolution. The optics of such tools are generally designed to produce reduction (negative magnification) of the image of the reticle onto the wafer. In order to obtain operating semiconductor devices, the reticle must be defect free. Moreover, in most modern processes, the reticle is used in a repeated manner to create many dies on the wafer. Therefore, various reticle inspection tools have been developed and are available commercially.
  • [0005]
    During the photolithography process, certain entities on the mask will be distorted or lost altogether. This is referred to generally as a fidelity issue. It includes phenomenon such as line end shortening, corner rounding, and small serif disappearance, etc. Some of those are caused by errors on the masks themselves, while others can be caused by processing mistakes. When generating an actual photo mask from a digital mask design, a mask fidelity problem may occur. When circuits on the wafers are made from such a mask, certain errors will then show on the wafer.
  • [0006]
    It should be appreciated by those skilled in the art that to produce an operational microelectronic circuit, a mask must be as defect-free as possible, preferably completely defect-free. Therefore, mask inspection tools are needed to detect various defects in the masks that can potentially reduce the microelectronic circuit fabrication yields. Smaller feature sizes on the masks used in the photolithographic process, as well as the use of OPC masks, require more sensitive tools for mask inspection. Numerous systems for mask inspection have been developed in response to the growing demands for inspecting mask fidelity problems.
  • [0007]
    The earliest automated inspection tools for detecting mask errors utilized a technique termed die-to-die inspection where the acquired images of a die on the mask are compared to corresponding images of a second die from the same mask. Any difference between one die to the other die indicated the presence of a defect. The technique was limited in that certain mask surface defects (called “surface” defects, for example, a particle on the surface of a mask) could remain undetected and later appear in a critical mask region after handling of the mask.
  • [0008]
    Moreover, defects can be detected by inspecting the mask using the image of the mask produced by the light transmitted through the mask and the light reflected by one face of the mask. The mask inspection tool that uses this method acquires both images then analyzes the images. The results of the analysis of the two images yield information on the condition of the mask. The image analysis method may use die-to-die comparison, die-to-database comparison, or reflected image to transmitted image comparison. In the die-to-database method, the acquired die images from the mask images are compared to images that are simulated using the mask design specifications.
  • [0009]
    Such an inspection system can detect defects that may or may not print on the photo resist during the actual photolithographic process. The major drawback of this method is that it studies the physical structure of the mask independently of the optical image actually produced by the mask on the wafer. For instance, variations in the line width of the image that the mask produces frequently are higher than the corresponding variation in the line width of the mask itself. It is desirable, therefore, to relate the physical structure of the mask to the actual image that the mask creates on the photo resist, and to study directly the image that the mask actually produces.
  • [0010]
    In order to facilitate the evaluation of the mask performance at the wafer level, tools have been developed that are able to scan a mask and yield an aerial image of the mask as it would appear at the wafer plane. According to this method, the mask inspection system replicates an optical exposure tool's critical parameters used during the exposure of the photo resist during semiconductor device fabrication. The mask inspection device then applies a set, or a plurality of sets, of exposure conditions that may be used in the actual photolithographic process to create an aerial image, or plurality of images, from the mask. In particular, these systems match the wavelength, the partial coherence of the exposure light, illumination aperture and the imaging numerical aperture (NA) of the optical exposure system. The created aerial image is typically magnified and detected using a CCD camera that is sensitive to the ultraviolet radiation. The use of the aerial imaging method permits the detection of the mask defects that would print during the actual photolithographic process. The acquired aerial images are analyzed using software algorithms developed for defect identification.
  • [0011]
    The inspection methods based on die-to-database comparison that are used by the existing aerial imaging systems are not always effective, especially for highly complicated mask designs. The die-to-database comparison method uses models describing the behavior of an optical exposure system used in the mask manufacturing process to produce the simulated image used in the mask inspection. However, various optical and mechanical factors during the mask making process will impact the final mask. As a result, there are limitations in the accuracy of the transformation from database to simulated aerial image. In addition, after the sequence of writing, developing and etching the photo mask, certain errors may be present on the photo mask or in the realized photo mask layout which are not readily detectable as mask defects. For example, variations in the line widths of the image that the photo mask produces at the wafer plane are frequently higher than the corresponding variations in the line widths of the mask itself. This phenomenon is referred to as the Mask Error Enhancement Factor (MEEF). In effect, the MEEF describes the amplification of reticle errors realized on the wafer surface. This MEEF effect is most noticeable when the lithography involves resolving features on a semiconductor wafer which are smaller than the exposing wavelength of the light used by the exposure tool which forms the patterns on the wafers. The mask defect inspection method utilized by the mask vendor, typically specified by the customer, is often the last automated layout inspection a mask receives prior to use in the wafer facility. After receipt at the wafer fabrication facility, the mask is used to image semiconductor wafers for production of semiconductor devices
  • [0012]
    While photo mask manufacturers strive to deliver zero-defect photo masks to their customers, there is a certain limit in their photo mask inspection capabilities. From the perspective of photo mask manufacturers, the ideal goal would be to create a circuit on the wafer that closely mimic what is in a digital design in a database. What is needed is an improved method and system for detecting mask fidelity problem so that it can be determined how an appropriate mask should be created.
  • SUMMARY
  • [0013]
    A method and system is disclosed for determining mask fidelity problems during the manufacturing of electronic circuits. A real and ideal mask simulation required digital files are generated, and go through simulations to generate results that can be compared to obtain quantitative evaluation of the fidelity problem of the mask.
  • [0014]
    A method and system is disclosed for examining mask pattern fidelity. First, a mask picture is generated from a first mask with a first OPC model applied to a mask design thereon. The mask picture is then converted into a mask based simulation file. A first simulation is conducted under a first set of predetermined lithography processing conditions using the converted simulation file to generate one or more files of a first set representing wafer photo resist profile thereof. On the other hand, a mask design in a database mask file is identified which was used for generating the first mask. The first OPC model is applied to the mask design in the database mask file. A second simulation is then conducted under the first set of predetermined lithography processing conditions using the OPCed mask design to generate one or more files of a second set representing wafer photo resist profile thereof. The first and second sets of files are then evaluated together for the purpose of inspecting mask fidelity.
  • [0015]
    These and other aspects and advantages will become apparent from the following detailed description, taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, illustrating by way of example the principles of the disclosure.
  • BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
  • [0016]
    [0016]FIG. 1 illustrates a process for conducting a mask pattern fidelity inspection according to one example of the present disclosure.
  • [0017]
    [0017]FIG. 2 illustrates a process for conducting a mask pattern fidelity inspection with a plurality of OPC models according to another example of the present disclosure.
  • [0018]
    [0018]FIG. 3 illustrates a process for conducting a mask pattern fidelity inspection for evaluating the mask making process according to one example of the present disclosure.
  • DETAILED DESCRIPTION
  • [0019]
    A method and system is disclosed for determining mask fidelity problems for manufacturing semiconductor circuits. As it is known in the industry, there are limitations in the accuracy during the transformation from mask design database to an actual mask. The actual mask is different from the mask design due to limitations of the mask-writing tool and other processing variables. After the sequence of writing, developing and etching the mask, certain errors may be present on the mask or in the realized mask layout which are not readily detectable as mask defects. For example, variations in the line width of the image that the mask produces frequently are higher than the corresponding variation in the line width of the mask itself.
  • [0020]
    One process that is done to the mask design to make a better mask is to apply an Optical Proximity Correction (OPC) process to certain entities in the mask design. Such a mask design is known as an OPCed mask design. The OPC process can take on a number of models in the hope that one of them will be the most effective so that the OPCed mask design will produce circuits that closely mimic the size and shape of the circuits in the design database.
  • [0021]
    It is hard to predict which OPC model is good for produce final circuits on the wafer. Some OPC models applied to the mask design may be “too aggressive” in terms of the modifications resulting in distorting features on the wafer. Further, if one only compares an actual mask with a particular OPCed mask design layout, some final wafer pattern fidelity problems caused by other variables in the photolithography process may not be identified. The present disclosure provides an improved method and system for evaluating the mask quality and the effectiveness of the OPC models.
  • [0022]
    [0022]FIG. 1 illustrates a general process 100 for conducting a mask pattern fidelity inspection according to one example of the present disclosure. Starting from a mask design in a database, a selected OPC model is applied to make a mask through an actual mask making process (step 102). A graphical image of the physical mask is obtained in step 104 through a selected standard tool such as a critical dimension scanning electron microscope (CDSEM). The graphical image, whatever the format it is in, may be referred to generally as a mask picture. Through the assistance of available standard software, the mask picture derived from the physical mask can then be converted into a simulation required digital file in step 106 such as a GDS file. This simulation required digital file may be referred to simply as a “mask based simulation file”. A simulation is conducted using this simulation file under a set of predetermined photolithography process conditions (step 108). The result of the simulation will render certain two dimensional and three dimensional wafer resist profile images. In addition, if desired, an aerial image is also obtainable to represent the wafer resist profile. The wafer resist profile images and/or aerial image may be collectively referred to as the “real mask simulation result.”
  • [0023]
    On the other hand, a layout of the mask design from a database corresponding to the physical mask is identified in step 110, and the same OPC model as used in making the mask is applied to the design layout to generate a digital mask file. The digital file may be referred to as the “design based simulation file.” The simulation file from the design is then simulated in step 112 with the same photolithography process conditions used for the mask picture simulation in step 108. Similarly, the result of the simulation will render certain two dimensional and three dimensional wafer resist profile images, and/or an aerial image. They are referred to as the “ideal mask simulation result.”
  • [0024]
    The real and ideal mask simulation results are then compared in step 114 to obtain quantitative evaluation of the fidelity problem of the mask for the particular OPC model. The simulation results can be compared in various ways so that the mask fidelity problems are quantified and qualified (step 116). For example, coordinates of correlated points on simulation results derived from the ideal and real masks can be compared. A threshold can be set to identify errors that will cause fidelity problems on the wafer. Through this method, the differences in the “wafer results” can be identified that are caused by the difference between the ideal mask and actual mask. Further, if “unacceptable” areas within the total area of the wafer is bigger than a predetermined threshold, the OPC model or/and the particular mask making process applied can be viewed as unacceptable. It is also noted that the comparison can be done to a portion or a particular feature of the mask, but it can also be applied globally to the entire mask.
  • [0025]
    [0025]FIG. 2 is a process 200 for comparing a plurality of OPC models to determined which one should be applied resulting in the best actual mask corresponding to a particular mask design. It would also determine which OPC models are unusable under a set of predetermined mask making process conditions. In step 202, a selected set of OPC models are applied to make a set of masks through an actual mask making process. A graphical image for each of the physical masks is obtained in step 204 through a selected tool such as a critical dimension scanning electron microscope (CDSEM). Through the assistance of available standard software, the mask pictures derived from the physical masks can then be converted into simulation required digital files in step 206 (e.g., GDS files). The simulation required digital files are referred to as a “mask based simulation files.” A simulation is conducted using each mask based simulation file under a set of predetermined photolithography process conditions (step 208). The result of each simulation will render certain two dimensional and three dimensional wafer resist profile images. In addition, if desired, an aerial image is also obtainable. The wafer resist profile images and/or aerial image are collectively referred to as the “real mask simulation result.” On the other hand, a layout of the mask design from a database corresponding to the physical mask is identified in step 210, and the same OPC models as used in making the mask are applied to the design layout to generate a set of digital mask files. The digital mask files may be referred to as the “design based simulation files.” The design based simulation files are then simulated in step 212 with the same photolithography process conditions used for the mask picture simulation in step 208.
  • [0026]
    At this point, a set of real mask simulation results corresponding to the same mask design have been obtained. The differences are largely caused by the different OPC models applied. When evaluating the results, they can be each compared against the corresponding mask simulation result. They can also be subject to a “horizontal” comparison in which relative “aggressiveness” of the OPC models are clearly identified. Through this process, the best OPC model may be identified that is suitable to a particular mask making process.
  • [0027]
    It is further noted that the present method can also be applied to detect a best mask making process by comparing various masks sharing the same design database and OPC model but having different mask making process variables. The mask making process include variables that can affect the end result of the finished mask. For example, various writing tools such as an E-Beam writer or optical writer, and their respective writing conditions such as exposure dosage or writing sequence can introduce variables that affect the resulting mask. Other processes also contribute to the fidelity of the mask. A post exposure or post resist developing baking may contribute to the uncertainty of the mask fidelity based on baking time, temperature, baking mode, etc. In a resist developing process, the developing time, chuck speed, developing mode can all be variables.
  • [0028]
    An etching process can have more variables such as the etching gases used, pressure, power, etc.
  • [0029]
    [0029]FIG. 3 illustrate a process for evaluating the mask making process 300. A set of masks are made in step 302, with each one of them having variables specifically controlled in the mask making process that are different than others. Respective mask pictures can be obtained in step 304, and mask based simulation files are made therefrom in step 306. Simulations are conducted in step 308 to extract wafer resist profiles based on these different mask basked simulation files. From the mask design end, the design file is identified and the same OPC model is applied in step 310, and a separate simulation is conducted in step 312. These simulations are evaluated against each other in step 314 to identify a preferred mask making process for the mask design used.
  • [0030]
    As such, the disclosed method and system can detect which mask is the best among all in terms of mask fidelity, the best OPC model, as well as the best mask making process. Various benefits are achieved over conventional approaches. For example, it separates possible errors caused purely by processes for making the mask from other errors caused by other photolithography processes when using the actual mask. By using this method, the fidelity problem caused by the mask itself can be clearly identified, and a best OPC model or a best mask can be selected for final manufacturing need.
  • [0031]
    The above disclosure provides many different embodiments, or examples, for implementing different features of the invention. Specific examples of components, and processes are described to help clarify the invention. These are, of course, merely examples and are not intended to limit the invention from that described in the claims.
  • [0032]
    While the invention has been particularly shown and described with reference to the preferred embodiment thereof, it will be understood by those skilled in the art that various changes in form and detail may be made therein without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention, as set forth in the following claims.

Claims (22)

    What is claimed is:
  1. 1. A mask fidelity inspection method comprising:
    generating a mask picture from a first mask, the first mask being made from a predetermined mask design with a first OPC model applied thereto;
    converting the mask picture into a simulation required mask file;
    conducting a first simulation under a first set of predetermined photolithography processing conditions using the simulation required mask file to generate one or more files of a first set representing a first wafer photo resist profile thereof;
    applying the first OPC model to the predetermined mask design in a database mask file format;
    conducting a second simulation under the first set of predetermined photolithography processing conditions using the OPCed mask design to generate one or more files of a second set representing a second wafer photo resist profile thereof; and
    comparing the first and second sets of files.
  2. 2. The method of claim 1 wherein the comparing further includes setting one or more thresholds of the wafer photo resist profile for rejecting the first OPC model used.
  3. 3. The method of claim 1 further comprising repeating all the steps by replacing the first OPC model with one or more other OPC models in the second simulation to determine a preferred OPC model to be used for generating the physical mask.
  4. 4. The method of claim 1 wherein the files of the first and second sets includes two-dimension wafer resist profile simulation files.
  5. 5. The method of claim 1 wherein the files of the first and second sets includes three-dimension wafer resist profile simulation files.
  6. 6. A system for mask fidelity inspection comprising:
    an image capturing tool for generating a mask picture from a first mask with a first OPC model applied to a mask design thereon;
    a database for providing a database mask file used for generating the first mask;
    a first processing tool for converting the mask picture into a simulation required mask file;
    a second processing tool for applying the first OPC model to a mask design represented by the database mask file;
    a simulation tool for conducting a first simulation under a first set of predetermined lithography processing conditions using the converted mask file to generate one or more files of a first set representing a wafer photo resist profile thereof and conducting a second simulation under the first set of predetermined lithography processing conditions using the OPCed mask design to generate one or more files of a second set representing a wafer photo resist profile thereof; and
    a comparison tool for comparing the first and second sets of files.
  7. 7. The system of claim 6 wherein the comparison tool further includes means for quantifying mask fidelity errors for rejecting the first OPC model used.
  8. 8. The system of claim 6 wherein the comparison tool further includes means for detecting non-OPC related errors.
  9. 9. The system of claim 6 wherein the files of the first and second sets include two-dimension wafer resist profile simulation files.
  10. 10. The system of claim 6 wherein the files of the first and second sets include three-dimension wafer resist profile simulation files.
  11. 11. The system of claim 6 wherein the files of the first and second sets further includes aerial images.
  12. 12. A mask fidelity inspection method comprising:
    generating a mask picture from a first mask, the first mask being made from a predetermined mask design with a first OPC model applied thereto;
    generating a second mask picture from a second mask, the second mask being made from the predetermined mask design with a second OPC model applied thereto;
    converting the first and second mask pictures into a first and second mask based simulation files;
    conducting a first simulation session under predetermined photolithography processing conditions using the first mask based simulation file to generate one or more files representing a first wafer photo resist profile thereof;
    conducting a second simulation session under the predetermined photolithography processing conditions using the second mask based simulation file to generate one or more files representing a second wafer photo resist profile thereof; and
    applying the first and second OPC models to the predetermined mask design in a database mask file format;
    conducting a third simulation under the predetermined photolithography processing conditions using the mask design with the third OPC model to generate one or more files of a third set representing an expected wafer photo resist profile thereof;
    conducting a fourth simulation under the predetermined photolithography processing conditions using the mask design with the second OPC model to generate one or more files of a fourth set representing an expected wafer photo resist profile thereof; and
    evaluating the first, second, third and fourth wafer photo resist profiles.
  13. 13. The method of claim 12 wherein the evaluating further includes setting one or more parameter thresholds of the wafer photo resist profiles for identifying the effectiveness of the first or second OPC model with regard to the third or fourth OPC model respectively.
  14. 14. The method of claim 12 wherein the evaluating further includes setting one or more parameter thresholds of the wafer photo resist profiles for identifying relative aggressiveness of the first and second OPC models.
  15. 15. The method of claim 12 wherein the wafer photo resist profiles are aerial images.
  16. 16. The method of claim 12 wherein the files of the first, second, third, or fourth set include two-dimension wafer resist profile simulation files.
  17. 17. The method of claim 13 wherein the files of the first, second, third, or fourth set include three-dimension wafer resist profile simulation files.
  18. 18. A mask fidelity inspection method comprising:
    generating a mask picture from a first mask, the first mask being made from a predetermined mask design with a predetermined OPC model applied thereto under a first mask making process;
    generating a second mask picture from a second mask, the second mask being made from the predetermined mask design with the predetermined OPC model applied thereto but under a second mask making process;
    converting the first and second mask pictures into a first and second mask based simulation files respectively;
    conducting a first simulation session under predetermined photolithography processing conditions using the first mask based simulation file to generate one or more files representing a first wafer photo resist profile thereof;
    conducting a second simulation session under the predetermined photolithography processing conditions using the second mask based simulation file to generate one or more files representing a second wafer photo resist profile thereof; and
    applying the OPC model to the predetermined mask design in a database mask file format;
    conducting a third simulation under the predetermined photolithography processing conditions using the OPCed mask design to generate one or more files of a third set representing an expected wafer photo resist profile thereof; and
    evaluating the first and second wafer photo resist profiles with the expected wafer photo resist profile to determine a preferred mask making process for the predetermined OPC model.
  19. 19. The method of claim 18 wherein the evaluating further includes quantifying one or more mask fidelity errors for determining the preferred mask making process.
  20. 20. The method of claim 18 wherein the files of the first, second, or third set include two-dimension wafer resist profile simulation files.
  21. 21. The method of claim 18 wherein the files of the first, second, or third set are aerial images.
  22. 22. The method of claim 18 wherein the files of the first, second, or third set include three-dimension wafer resist profile simulation files.
US10665451 2003-05-05 2003-09-19 System and method for examining mask pattern fidelity Abandoned US20040225488A1 (en)

Priority Applications (2)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
US46797703 true 2003-05-05 2003-05-05
US10665451 US20040225488A1 (en) 2003-05-05 2003-09-19 System and method for examining mask pattern fidelity

Applications Claiming Priority (2)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
US10665451 US20040225488A1 (en) 2003-05-05 2003-09-19 System and method for examining mask pattern fidelity
US11786978 US7383530B2 (en) 2003-05-05 2007-04-13 System and method for examining mask pattern fidelity

Publications (1)

Publication Number Publication Date
US20040225488A1 true true US20040225488A1 (en) 2004-11-11

Family

ID=37007694

Family Applications (2)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
US10665451 Abandoned US20040225488A1 (en) 2003-05-05 2003-09-19 System and method for examining mask pattern fidelity
US11786978 Active US7383530B2 (en) 2003-05-05 2007-04-13 System and method for examining mask pattern fidelity

Family Applications After (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
US11786978 Active US7383530B2 (en) 2003-05-05 2007-04-13 System and method for examining mask pattern fidelity

Country Status (1)

Country Link
US (2) US20040225488A1 (en)

Cited By (11)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US20050076322A1 (en) * 2003-10-07 2005-04-07 Jun Ye System and method for lithography simulation
WO2007030704A2 (en) * 2005-09-09 2007-03-15 Brion Technologies, Inc. System and method for mask verification using an individual mask error model
US20070079278A1 (en) * 2005-10-05 2007-04-05 Yasushi Tanaka Method and apparatus for reducing OPC model errors
US20070162887A1 (en) * 2005-10-28 2007-07-12 Sung-Soo Suh Method of fabricating photo mask
US20070187595A1 (en) * 2006-02-16 2007-08-16 Maki Tanaka Method for measuring a pattern dimension using a scanning electron microscope
US20070250805A1 (en) * 2003-05-05 2007-10-25 Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, Ltd. System and method for examining mask pattern fidelity
US20090119045A1 (en) * 2007-11-02 2009-05-07 United Microelectronics Corp. Method of inspecting photomask defect
US7558419B1 (en) 2003-08-14 2009-07-07 Brion Technologies, Inc. System and method for detecting integrated circuit pattern defects
US20100149505A1 (en) * 2008-12-17 2010-06-17 Asml Holding N.V. EUV Mask Inspection System
US20100165310A1 (en) * 2008-12-31 2010-07-01 Asml Holding N.V. EUV Mask Inspection
US20110176719A1 (en) * 2010-01-18 2011-07-21 Nuflare Technology, Inc. Inspection system and method

Families Citing this family (11)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US7469057B2 (en) * 2003-02-26 2008-12-23 Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Corp System and method for inspecting errors on a wafer
JP4247104B2 (en) * 2003-12-18 2009-04-02 株式会社東芝 Pattern verification method, pattern verification system
JP2007142275A (en) * 2005-11-21 2007-06-07 Toshiba Corp Phototmask determining method, semiconductor device manufacturing method, and its program
US8619236B2 (en) 2010-11-24 2013-12-31 International Business Machines Corporation Determining lithographic set point using optical proximity correction verification simulation
US8577489B2 (en) 2011-01-26 2013-11-05 International Business Machines Corporation Diagnosing in-line critical dimension control adjustments using optical proximity correction verification
US8499260B2 (en) 2011-01-26 2013-07-30 International Business Machines Corporation Optical proximity correction verification accounting for mask deviations
US8856705B2 (en) * 2012-05-08 2014-10-07 Freescale Semiconductor, Inc. Mismatch verification device and methods thereof
US8782572B1 (en) * 2013-03-13 2014-07-15 United Microelectronics Corp. Method of optical proximity correction
US20160290934A1 (en) * 2015-04-03 2016-10-06 Kla-Tencor Corporation Optical Die to Database Inspection
US9547745B1 (en) * 2015-07-27 2017-01-17 Dmo Systems Limited System and method for discovering unknown problematic patterns in chip design layout for semiconductor manufacturing
US9915625B2 (en) * 2016-01-04 2018-03-13 Kla-Tencor Corp. Optical die to database inspection

Citations (5)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US6078738A (en) * 1997-05-08 2000-06-20 Lsi Logic Corporation Comparing aerial image to SEM of photoresist or substrate pattern for masking process characterization
US6272236B1 (en) * 1998-02-24 2001-08-07 Micron Technology, Inc. Inspection technique of photomask
US6466315B1 (en) * 1999-09-03 2002-10-15 Applied Materials, Inc. Method and system for reticle inspection by photolithography simulation
US6670082B2 (en) * 2001-10-09 2003-12-30 Numerical Technologies, Inc. System and method for correcting 3D effects in an alternating phase-shifting mask
US20040172611A1 (en) * 2003-02-28 2004-09-02 Numerical Technologies, Inc. Method and apparatus of wafer print simulation using hybrid model with mask optical images

Family Cites Families (2)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
JP4580529B2 (en) * 2000-09-26 2010-11-17 大日本印刷株式会社 A design pattern data correction method of the semiconductor circuit, the corrected photomask using the design pattern data inspecting method and photomask inspection pattern data producing method of the photomask
US20040225488A1 (en) * 2003-05-05 2004-11-11 Wen-Chuan Wang System and method for examining mask pattern fidelity

Patent Citations (5)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US6078738A (en) * 1997-05-08 2000-06-20 Lsi Logic Corporation Comparing aerial image to SEM of photoresist or substrate pattern for masking process characterization
US6272236B1 (en) * 1998-02-24 2001-08-07 Micron Technology, Inc. Inspection technique of photomask
US6466315B1 (en) * 1999-09-03 2002-10-15 Applied Materials, Inc. Method and system for reticle inspection by photolithography simulation
US6670082B2 (en) * 2001-10-09 2003-12-30 Numerical Technologies, Inc. System and method for correcting 3D effects in an alternating phase-shifting mask
US20040172611A1 (en) * 2003-02-28 2004-09-02 Numerical Technologies, Inc. Method and apparatus of wafer print simulation using hybrid model with mask optical images

Cited By (40)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US20070250805A1 (en) * 2003-05-05 2007-10-25 Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, Ltd. System and method for examining mask pattern fidelity
US7383530B2 (en) 2003-05-05 2008-06-03 Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, Ltd System and method for examining mask pattern fidelity
US7558419B1 (en) 2003-08-14 2009-07-07 Brion Technologies, Inc. System and method for detecting integrated circuit pattern defects
US20050120327A1 (en) * 2003-10-07 2005-06-02 Jun Ye System and method for lithography simulation
US7003758B2 (en) 2003-10-07 2006-02-21 Brion Technologies, Inc. System and method for lithography simulation
US7111277B2 (en) 2003-10-07 2006-09-19 Brion Technologies, Inc. System and method for lithography simulation
US7114145B2 (en) 2003-10-07 2006-09-26 Brion Technologies, Inc. System and method for lithography simulation
US7117477B2 (en) 2003-10-07 2006-10-03 Brion Tecnologies, Inc. System and method for lithography simulation
US7117478B2 (en) 2003-10-07 2006-10-03 Brion Technologies, Inc. System and method for lithography simulation
US20050091633A1 (en) * 2003-10-07 2005-04-28 Jun Ye System and method for lithography simulation
US20070022402A1 (en) * 2003-10-07 2007-01-25 Jun Ye System and method for lithography simulation
US8893067B2 (en) 2003-10-07 2014-11-18 Asml Netherlands B.V. System and method for lithography simulation
US8516405B2 (en) 2003-10-07 2013-08-20 Asml Netherlands B.V. System and method for lithography simulation
US8209640B2 (en) 2003-10-07 2012-06-26 Asml Netherlands B.V. System and method for lithography simulation
US20110083113A1 (en) * 2003-10-07 2011-04-07 Asml Netherlands B.V. System and Method for Lithography Simulation
US7873937B2 (en) 2003-10-07 2011-01-18 Asml Netherlands B.V. System and method for lithography simulation
US20050166174A1 (en) * 2003-10-07 2005-07-28 Jun Ye System and method for lithography simulation
US7120895B2 (en) 2003-10-07 2006-10-10 Brion Technologies, Inc. System and method for lithography simulation
US20050076322A1 (en) * 2003-10-07 2005-04-07 Jun Ye System and method for lithography simulation
US7617477B2 (en) 2005-09-09 2009-11-10 Brion Technologies, Inc. Method for selecting and optimizing exposure tool using an individual mask error model
WO2007030704A3 (en) * 2005-09-09 2007-05-10 Brion Tech Inc System and method for mask verification using an individual mask error model
KR100982135B1 (en) 2005-09-09 2010-09-14 에이에스엠엘 네델란즈 비.브이. System and method for mask verification using an individual mask error model
JP2009508167A (en) * 2005-09-09 2009-02-26 ブライオン テクノロジーズ インコーポレイテッド System and method for performing a mask verification using an individual mask error model
WO2007030704A2 (en) * 2005-09-09 2007-03-15 Brion Technologies, Inc. System and method for mask verification using an individual mask error model
US20070061772A1 (en) * 2005-09-09 2007-03-15 Brion Technologies, Inc. System and method for mask verification using an individual mask error model
US7587704B2 (en) 2005-09-09 2009-09-08 Brion Technologies, Inc. System and method for mask verification using an individual mask error model
US20070061773A1 (en) * 2005-09-09 2007-03-15 Brion Technologies, Inc. Method for selecting and optimizing exposure tool using an individual mask error model
US20070079278A1 (en) * 2005-10-05 2007-04-05 Yasushi Tanaka Method and apparatus for reducing OPC model errors
US7325225B2 (en) 2005-10-05 2008-01-29 Yasushi Tanaka Method and apparatus for reducing OPC model errors
US7475383B2 (en) * 2005-10-28 2009-01-06 Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. Method of fabricating photo mask
US20070162887A1 (en) * 2005-10-28 2007-07-12 Sung-Soo Suh Method of fabricating photo mask
US7732761B2 (en) * 2006-02-16 2010-06-08 Hitachi High-Technologies Corporation Method for measuring a pattern dimension using a scanning electron microscope
US20070187595A1 (en) * 2006-02-16 2007-08-16 Maki Tanaka Method for measuring a pattern dimension using a scanning electron microscope
US20090119045A1 (en) * 2007-11-02 2009-05-07 United Microelectronics Corp. Method of inspecting photomask defect
US7664614B2 (en) * 2007-11-02 2010-02-16 United Microelectronics Corp. Method of inspecting photomask defect
US20100149505A1 (en) * 2008-12-17 2010-06-17 Asml Holding N.V. EUV Mask Inspection System
US9046754B2 (en) 2008-12-17 2015-06-02 Asml Holding N.V. EUV mask inspection system
US20100165310A1 (en) * 2008-12-31 2010-07-01 Asml Holding N.V. EUV Mask Inspection
US20110176719A1 (en) * 2010-01-18 2011-07-21 Nuflare Technology, Inc. Inspection system and method
US8548223B2 (en) * 2010-01-18 2013-10-01 Nuflare Technology, Inc. Inspection system and method

Also Published As

Publication number Publication date Type
US20070250805A1 (en) 2007-10-25 application
US7383530B2 (en) 2008-06-03 grant

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
US7689966B2 (en) Methods, systems, and carrier media for evaluating reticle layout data
US7873204B2 (en) Method for detecting lithographically significant defects on reticles
US20080081385A1 (en) Methods and systems for inspection of wafers and reticles using designer intent data
US7769225B2 (en) Methods and systems for detecting defects in a reticle design pattern
US20030115569A1 (en) Method and system for optical proximity correction
US6954911B2 (en) Method and system for simulating resist and etch edges
US7853920B2 (en) Method for detecting, sampling, analyzing, and correcting marginal patterns in integrated circuit manufacturing
US20080072207A1 (en) Computer-implemented methods and systems for determining different process windows for a wafer printing process for different reticle designs
US6562639B1 (en) Utilizing electrical performance data to predict CD variations across stepper field
US20120013881A1 (en) Method and Apparatus for Determining an Overlay Error
US20010019625A1 (en) Method and apparatus for reticle inspection using aerial imaging
US6765651B1 (en) Fast image simulation for photolithography
US20090024967A1 (en) Computer-implemented methods, systems, and computer-readable media for determining a model for predicting printability of reticle features on a wafer
US5965306A (en) Method of determining the printability of photomask defects
US5849440A (en) Process for producing and inspecting a lithographic reticle and fabricating semiconductor devices using same
US7107571B2 (en) Visual analysis and verification system using advanced tools
US20070133860A1 (en) Methods and systems for binning defects detected on a specimen
US20060051682A1 (en) Methods for simulating reticle layout data, inspecting reticle layout data, and generating a process for inspecting reticle layout data
US7695876B2 (en) Method for identifying and using process window signature patterns for lithography process control
US20100135568A1 (en) Photo-mask and wafer image reconstruction
US20100180251A1 (en) Method for process window optimized optical proximity correction
US20060236294A1 (en) Computer-implemented methods for detecting defects in reticle design data
US20090016595A1 (en) Methods and systems for detecting defects in a reticle design pattern
US6902855B2 (en) Qualifying patterns, patterning processes, or patterning apparatus in the fabrication of microlithographic patterns
US7418124B2 (en) Qualifying patterns, patterning processes, or patterning apparatus in the fabrication of microlithographic patterns

Legal Events

Date Code Title Description
AS Assignment

Owner name: TAIWAN SEMICONDUCTOR MANUFACTURING CO., LTD., TAIW

Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNORS:WANG, WEN-CHUAN;CHANG, SHIH-MING;CHIN, CHIH-CHENG;AND OTHERS;REEL/FRAME:014530/0106

Effective date: 20030916