Cited by 70Advancements in Photolithography TechniquesAdvanced X-ray Imaging TechniquesAdvanced optical system design

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Status of EUV micro-exposure capabilities at the ALS using the 0.3-NA MET optic

Abstract

The success of recent static printing experiments at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory’s Advanced Light Source (ALS) using the EUV LLC Engineering Test Stand (ETS) Set-2 optic has demonstrated the utility of synchrotron-based EUV exposure stations. Although not viable light sources for commercial lithography, synchrotrons provide clean, convenient, and extremely flexible sources for developmental microfield lithography. The great flexibility of synchrotron-based illumination arises from the fact that such sources facilitate active coherence reduction, thus enabling the coherence function, or pupil fill, to be actively sculpted in real time. As the commercialization of EUV progresses, the focus of developmental EUV lithography is shifting from low numerical aperture (NA) tools such as the 0.1-NA ETS to higher-NA tools such as the 0.3-NA Micro Exposure Tool (MET). To support printing with MET optics at the ALS, a new printing station has been developed, relying on a scanning illuminator to provide programmable coherence (pupil-fill) control. The illuminator is designed to operate up to a coherence factor (s) of 1 and support the full 200′600 design printed field of view. In addition to a new illuminator design, new focus sensing and dose-control systems have also been implemented. Here we describe the MET printing capabilities in detail and present preliminary printing results with the Sematech Set-2 MET optic.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1117/12.556538

Cites

Statistics

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

Verification

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.

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Naulleau, P., Goldberg, K. A., Anderson, E. H., Bradley, K., Delano, R., Denham, P., Gunion, B., Harteneck, B., Hoef, B., Huang, H., Jackson, K., Jones, G., Kemp, D., Liddle, J. A., Oort, R., Rawlins, A., Rekawa, S., Salmassi, F., Tackaberry, R., Chung, C., Hale, L., Phillion, D., Sommargren, G., & Taylor, J.
Affiliations
  • Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (US)
  • Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (US)
Venue
SPIE Proceedings
Publisher
SPIE
Published
2004-05-20
Volume
5374
Pages
881
ISSN
0277-786X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2061963067
Cited by
70
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
10.34
Type
conference paper
Language
nl
Open access
closed
Locations
Proceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Energy
  • Basic Energy Sciences
  • Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
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 › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Advanced optical system design
Keywords
EUV lithography, dose control

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