OSA's Digital Library

Virtual Journal for Biomedical Optics

Virtual Journal for Biomedical Optics

| EXPLORING THE INTERFACE OF LIGHT AND BIOMEDICINE

  • Editors: Andrew Dunn and Anthony Durkin
  • Vol. 7, Iss. 8 — Aug. 2, 2012

Parametric uncertainty in nanoscale optical dimensional measurements

James Potzick and Egon Marx  »View Author Affiliations


Applied Optics, Vol. 51, Issue 17, pp. 3707-3717 (2012)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/AO.51.003707


View Full Text Article

Enhanced HTML    Acrobat PDF (1209 KB)





Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


   


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools

Share
Citations

Abstract

Image modeling establishes the relation between an object and its image when an optical microscope is used to measure the dimensions of an object of size comparable to the illumination wavelength. It accounts for the influence of all of the parameters that can affect the image and relates the apparent feature width (FW) in the image to the true FW of the object. The values of these parameters, however, have uncertainties, and these uncertainties propagate through the model and lead to parametric uncertainty in the FW measurement, a key component of the combined measurement uncertainty. The combined uncertainty is required in order to decide if the result is adequate for its intended purpose and to ascertain if it is consistent with other results. The parametric uncertainty for optical photomask measurements derived using an edge intensity threshold approach has been described previously; this paper describes an image library approach to this issue and shows results for optical photomask metrology over a FW range of 10 nm to 8 µm using light of wavelength 365 nm. The principles will be described; a one-dimensional image library will be used; the method of comparing images, along with a simple interpolation method, will be explained; and results will be presented. This method is easily extended to any kind of imaging microscope and to more dimensions in parameter space. It is more general than the edge threshold method and leads to markedly different uncertainties for features smaller than the wavelength.

OCIS Codes
(110.0180) Imaging systems : Microscopy
(120.0120) Instrumentation, measurement, and metrology : Instrumentation, measurement, and metrology
(120.3940) Instrumentation, measurement, and metrology : Metrology
(180.0180) Microscopy : Microscopy
(180.5810) Microscopy : Scanning microscopy
(290.3700) Scattering : Linewidth

ToC Category:
Instrumentation, Measurement, and Metrology

History
Original Manuscript: September 13, 2011
Revised Manuscript: March 22, 2012
Manuscript Accepted: March 30, 2012
Published: June 4, 2012

Virtual Issues
Vol. 7, Iss. 8 Virtual Journal for Biomedical Optics

Citation
James Potzick and Egon Marx, "Parametric uncertainty in nanoscale optical dimensional measurements," Appl. Opt. 51, 3707-3717 (2012)
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/vjbo/abstract.cfm?URI=ao-51-17-3707


Sort:  Author  |  Year  |  Journal  |  Reset  

References

  1. NIST SRM 2059 Photomask Linewidth Standard is available from the Office of Standard Reference Materials, NIST, EM 205, Gaithersburg, MD 20899. See sample certificate at https://www-s.nist.gov/srmors/certificates/view_certGIF.cfm?certificate=2059 .
  2. J. Potzick, “Metrology and process control: dealing with measurement uncertainty,” Proc. SPIE 7638, 76381U (2010). [CrossRef]
  3. D. Nyyssonen, “Linewidth measurement with an optical microscope: the effect of operating conditions on the image profile,” Appl. Opt. 16, 2223–2230 (1977). [CrossRef]
  4. J. Villarrubia, A. Vladar, and M. Postek, “Scanning electron microscope dimensional metrology using a model-based library,” Surf. Interface Anal. 37, 951–958, doi:10.1002/sia.2087 (2005). [CrossRef]
  5. J. Villarrubia, “Morphological estimation of tip geometry for scanned probe microscopy,” Surf. Sci. 321, 287–300 (1994). [CrossRef]
  6. NIST SRM 2800 Microscope Pitch Standard is available from the Office of Standard Reference Materials, NIST, EM 205, Gaithersburg, MD 20899. For details see sample certificate at https://www-s.nist.gov/srmors/certificates/view_certGIF.cfm?certificate=2800 .
  7. M. Davidson, “A modal model for diffraction gratings,” J. Mod. Opt. 50, 1817–1834 (2003). [CrossRef]
  8. R. F. Harrington, Time-Harmonic Electromagnetic Fields (McGraw-Hill, 1961).
  9. R. F. Harrington, Field Computations by Moment Methods (Krieger, 1982).
  10. A. Taflove and S. C. Hagness, Computational Electrodynamics, the Finite-Difference Time-Domain Method, 3rd ed. (Artech House, 2005).
  11. E. Marx and J. Potzick, “Simulation of optical microscope images for photomask feature size measurements,” in Proceedings of 2005 IEEE Antennas and Propagation Society International Symposium (IEEE, 2005), pp. 2116–2119.
  12. E. Marx, “Images of strips on and trenches in substrates,” Appl. Opt. 46, 5571–5587 (2007). [CrossRef]
  13. SEMI Standard P35, “Terminology for microlithography metrology,” SEMI International Standards, San Jose, California.
  14. R. Attota, R. M. Silver, and J. Potzick, “Optical illumination and critical dimension analysis using the through-focus focus metric,” Proc. SPIE 6289, 62890Q (2006). [CrossRef]
  15. Joint Committee for Guides in Metrology, JCGM 100:2008, Evaluation of Measurement Data—Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement (JCGM, 2008), http://www.bipm.org/en/publications/guides/gum.html .
  16. B. Taylor and C. Kuyatt, “Guidelines for evaluating and expressing the uncertainty of NIST measurement results,” NIST Technical Note 1297 (National Institute of Standards and Technology, 1994).
  17. R. Silver, T. Germer, R. Attota, B. Barnes, B. Bunday, J. Allgair, E. Marx, and J. Jun, “Fundamental limits optical critical dimension metrology: a simulation study,” Proc. SPIE 6518, 65180U (2007). [CrossRef]
  18. R. M. Silver, N. F. Zhang, B. Barnes, H. Zhou, A. Heckert, R. Dixson, T. Germer, and B. Bunday, “Improving optical measurement accuracy using multi-technique nested uncertainties,” Proc. SPIE 7272, 727202 (2009). [CrossRef]
  19. R. M. Silver, N. F. Zhang, B. M. Barnes, H. Zhou, J. Qin, and R. Dixson, “Nested uncertainties and hybrid metrology to improve measurement accuracy,” Proc. SPIE 7971, 797116 (2011). [CrossRef]
  20. J. Potzick, E. Marx, and M. Davidson, “Parametric uncertainty in optical image modeling,” Proc. SPIE 6349, 63494U (2006). [CrossRef]
  21. International Organization for Standardization, ISO/IEC Guide 99:2007, International Vocabulary of Metrology—Basic and General Concepts and Associated Terms (VIM), 3rd ed. (ISO, 2007), http://www.bipm.org/en/publications/guides/vim.html .
  22. C. Frase, D. Gnieser, and H. Bosse, “Model-based SEM for dimensional metrology tasks in semiconductor and mask industry,” J. Phys. D 42, 183001 (2009). [CrossRef]
  23. J. Potzick, “Accuracy and traceability in dimensional measurements,” Proc. SPIE 3332, 471–479 (1998). [CrossRef]
  24. E. Marx and J. Potzick, “Computational parameters in simulation of microscope images,” PIERS Online 5, 11–15 (2009). [CrossRef]

Cited By

Alert me when this paper is cited

OSA is able to provide readers links to articles that cite this paper by participating in CrossRef's Cited-By Linking service. CrossRef includes content from more than 3000 publishers and societies. In addition to listing OSA journal articles that cite this paper, citing articles from other participating publishers will also be listed.


« Previous Article  |  Next Article »

OSA is a member of CrossRef.

CrossCheck Deposited