Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 226

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Reducing focused ion beam damage to transmission electron microscopy samples

Kato, N. I.·2004·Journal of Electron Microscopy

Abstract

One of the most important applications of focused ion beam (FIB) systems is sample preparation for transmission electron microscopy (TEM). However, the use of the FIB inherently involves changing and damaging the sample, and thereby degrades the TEM resolution. This paper addresses the beam-induced damage and artifacts, particularly in applications involving silicon semiconductors. The damage appears in the form of amorphization on the surface of the TEM foil. The characteristics of this amorphous damage were studied by making TEM observations of cross sections of the affected foil. The damage is typically 20 to 30 nm thick for a 30 keV FIB, which is generally overly thick for modern silicon devices with feature sizes less than 250 nm. This paper reviews the reported damage depths of FIB-prepared samples, which are determined by experiments and calculations. Several damage reduction techniques, such as the use of gas-assisted etching, low energy FIB, cleaning the FIBfabricated cross section by wet or dry etching and cleaning by broad ion beam (BIB) milling have also been reviewed, with emphasis on applicability to silicon devices. We conclude that the use of low energy FIB and cleaning by argon BIB are particularly efficient techniques.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/jmicro/dfh080

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Kato, N. I.
Venue
Journal of Electron Microscopy
Published
2004-10-01
Volume
53
Issue
5
Pages
451-458
ISSN
  • 0022-0744 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-9986
OpenAlex
W2157057971
Cited by
226
References
0
FWCI
4.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.