The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Exploration of alternative mask for 0.33NA extreme ultraviolet single patterning at pitch 28-nm metal design
Abstract
Extending 0.33NA extreme ultraviolet (EUV) single patterning to pitch 28 nm will enable significantly shorter process flow for N2 node and cost-efficiency of metal layers patterning. At the same time, EUV single patterning becomes very challenging in terms of stochastic defectivity and process window. To enable EUV single patterning at pitch 28 nm with good process window and patterning fidelity (low defectivity and line edge roughness), three mask candidates are considered: a standard binary Ta-based absorber mask, a high extinction (high-k) absorber mask, and a low-n attenuated phase-shift mask (attPSM). The patterning performance of these three mask candidates is compared by means of source mask optimization. The patterning performance of the candidate masks is assessed using an imec N3 (foundry N2 equivalent) random logic M1 layout. The impact of mask tonality (bright field versus dark field) and insertion of sub-resolution assist features (SRAFs) on pattern fidelity and process window is evaluated. Considering all the aspects, simulations indicate that the low-n attPSM has the best patterning performance both for dark-field mask with SRAFs and bright-field mask without SRAFs.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Mask defects are detrimental for performance and mask inspection is of paramount importance to locate and repair defects.
“Mask defects are detrimental for performance and mask inspection is of paramount importance to locate and repair defects 10 8 .”
From Extreme ultraviolet lithography (2024) · cites this paper as [108]
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Extreme ultraviolet lithography
Kazazis, D., Santaclara, J. G., van Schoot, J., Mochi, I., & Ekinci, Y. (2024) · Nature Reviews Methods Primers · doi:10.1038/s43586-024-00361-z · Cited by 149
Ronse, K. (2024) · IEEE Electron Devices Magazine · doi:10.1109/med.2023.3336276 · Cited by 14
Metadata
- Authors
- Xu, D., Gillijns, W., Tan, L. E., Philipsen, V., & Kim, R.-H.
- Affiliations
- IMEC (BE)
- Venue
- Journal of Micro/Nanopatterning, Materials, and Metrology
- Publisher
- SPIE-Intl Soc Optical Eng
- Published
- 2022-04-07
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 02
- Pages
- 1-15
- ISSN
- 2708-8340 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4226115525
- Cited by
- 5
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2022: 1
- FWCI
- 0.27
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Micro/Nanopatterning Materials and Metrology (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Advancements in Photolithography Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Radiation › Advanced X-ray Imaging Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Surfaces, Coatings and Films › Nanofabrication and Lithography Techniques
- Keywords
- EUV lithography, metal patterning, mask design, attenuated phase shift mask, tantalum absorber, source mask optimization, sub-resolution assist features, process window, defectivity, line edge roughness
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