4.7 Article

Traceable Mueller polarimetry and scatterometry for shape reconstruction of grating structures

期刊

APPLIED SURFACE SCIENCE
卷 421, 期 -, 页码 471-479

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.apsusc.2017.02.091

关键词

Mueller polarimetry; Scatterometry; Ellipsometry; Grating; Nanostructures; Metrology

资金

  1. European Union
  2. European Union: NEMI [NMP.2012.1.4-3 (309672)]
  3. Danish Agency for Science, Technology and Innovation
  4. European Metrology Program (EMRP) Joint Research Project [IND17]
  5. EMRP within the European Association of National Metrology Institutes (EURAMET)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Dimensional measurements of multi-patterned transmission gratings with a mixture of long and small periods are great challenges for optical metrology today. It is a further challenge when the aspect ratio of the structures is high, that is, when the height of structures is larger than the pitch. Here we consider a double patterned transmission grating with pitches of 500 nm and 20 000 nm. For measuring the geometrical properties of double patterned transmission grating we use a combined spectroscopic Mueller polarimetry and scatterometry setup. For modelling the experimentally obtained data we rigorously compute the scattering signal by solving Maxwell's equations using the RCWA method on a supercell structure. We also present a new method for analyzing the Mueller polarimetry parameters that performs the analysis in the measured variables. This new inversion method for finding the best fit between measured and calculated values are tested on silicon gratings with periods from 300 to 600 nm. The method is shown to give results within the expanded uncertainty of reference AFM measurements. The application of the new inversion method and the supercell structure to the double patterned transmission grating gives best estimates of dimensional quantities that are in fair agreement with those derived from local AFM measurements (C) 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据