Cited by 5Industrial Vision Systems and Defect DetectionAdvancements in Photolithography TechniquesImage Processing Techniques and Applications

Improvement in accuracy of defect size measurement by automatic defect classification

Samir, Bhamidipati, Pereira, Mark, Paninjath, Sankaranarayanan, Jeon, Chan-Uk, Chung, Dong-Hoon, Yoon, Gi-Sung, Jung, Hong-Yul·2015·SPIE Proceedings

Abstract

The blank mask defect review process involves detailed analysis of defects observed across a substrate’s multiple preparation stages, such as cleaning and resist-coating. The detailed knowledge of these defects plays an important role in the eventual yield obtained by using the blank. Defect knowledge predominantly comprises of details such as the number of defects observed, and their accurate sizes. Mask usability assessment at the start of the preparation process, is crudely based on number of defects. Similarly, defect size gives an idea of eventual wafer defect printability. Furthermore, monitoring defect characteristics, specifically size and shape, aids in obtaining process related information such as cleaning or coating process efficiencies. Blank mask defect review process is largely manual in nature. However, the large number of defects, observed for latest technology nodes with reducing half-pitch sizes; and the associated amount of information, together make the process increasingly inefficient in terms of review time, accuracy and consistency. The usage of additional tools such as CDSEM may be required to further aid the review process resulting in increasing costs. Calibre® MDPAutoClassify™ provides an automated software alternative, in the form of a powerful analysis tool for fast, accurate, consistent and automatic classification of blank defects. Elaborate post-processing algorithms are applied on defect images generated by inspection machines, to extract and…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1117/12.2202511

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • For surface defects, the bounding box or horizontal cross-section does not represent the actual defect size, and the largest dimension of all cross-sections is recommended.

    “For surface defects, this does not represent the actual defect size and thus they recommend using the largest dimension of all cross-sections of the detected defect [62].”
  • Traditional automatic visual inspection approaches use the bounding box or the horizontal cross-section of the detected defect to estimate defect size.

    “In automatic visual inspection systems, traditional approaches use the bounding box or the horizontal cross-section of the detected defect to estimate the defect size [61,62].”
  • Traditional automatic visual inspection approaches use the bounding box or the horizontal cross-section of the detected defect to estimate defect size.

    “In automatic visual inspection systems, traditional approaches use the bounding box or the horizontal cross-section of the detected defect to estimate the defect size [61,62].”
  • Previous research showed that a rule-based framework could be used to classify defect types.

    “Previous research showed that a rule-based framework could be used to classify defect types [62].”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Samir, B., Pereira, M., Paninjath, S., Jeon, C.-U., Chung, D.-H., Yoon, G.-S., & Jung, H.-Y.
Affiliations
Samsung Electronics (South Korea) (KR)
Venue
SPIE Proceedings
Publisher
SPIE
Published
2015-10-23
Volume
9635
Pages
963520
ISSN
0277-786X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2179682871
Cited by
5
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2
FWCI
0.00
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Proceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering › Industrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Advancements in Photolithography Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Media Technology › Image Processing Techniques and Applications
Keywords
defect size measurement, automatic defect classification, photomask inspection, defect printability, defect detection, noise reduction, defect localization

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