IP Library Granted Patent US 12,543,540
Granted Patent B2
US 12,543,540 · App. 17/694,402 · Granted Feb 3, 2026

High resolution profile measurement based on a trained parameter conditioned measurement model

Inventors: Stilian Ivanov Pandev (Santa Clara, CA); Arvind Jayaraman (New Hudson, MI)
Assignee: KLA Corporation
H01L22/12G05B13/042G06F18/21322G06F18/21326
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 12,543,540
App. No.
17/694,402
Granted
Feb 3, 2026
Kind
B2
Abstract

Methods and systems for measurements of semiconductor structures based on a trained parameter conditioned measurement model are described herein. The shape of a measured structure is characterized by a geometric model parameterized by one or more conditioning parameters and one or more non-conditioning parameters. A trained parameter conditioned measurement model predicts a set of values of each non-conditioning parameter based on measurement data and a corresponding set of predetermined values for each conditioning parameter. In this manner, the trained parameter conditioned measurement model predicts the shape of a measured structure. Although a parameter conditioned measurement model is trained at discrete geometric points of a structure, the trained model predicts values of non-conditioning parameters for any corresponding conditioning parameter value. In some examples, training data is augmented by interpolation of conditioning parameters and corresponding non-conditioning parameters that lie between discrete DOE points. This improves prediction accuracy of the trained model.

Claims (46)

1 . A system comprising:

one or more metrology systems including an illumination source configured to direct an amount of illumination electromagnetic radiation onto one or more structures disposed on a first wafer and a detector configured to detect an amount of electromagnetic radiation from the one or more structures in response to the amount of incident illumination electromagnetic radiation as an amount of measurement data, a geometric shape of the one or more structures characterized by a geometric model parameterized by one or more conditioning parameters and one or more non-conditioning parameters; and

a computing system configured to:

receive the amount of measurement data from the measurements of the one or more structures disposed on the first wafer;

generate a set of input values of each of the one or more conditioning parameters of the geometric model characterizing the geometric shape of the one or more structures; and

determine an estimated value of each of the one or more non-conditioning parameters corresponding to each of the set of input values of the one or more conditioning parameters from a trained parameter conditioned measurement model, wherein each of the set of input values of the one or more conditioning parameters and the amount of measurement data are provided as input to the trained parameter conditioned measurement model.

2 . The system of claim 1 , the computing system further configured to:

receive an amount of Design of Experiments (DOE) measurement data associated with measurements of one or more DOE structures;

receive known, reference values of one or more conditioning parameters and one or more non-conditioning parameters corresponding to the one or more conditioning parameters at a plurality of discrete locations of the one or more DOE structures, the one or more conditioning parameters and the one or more non-conditioning parameters characterizing a geometric shape of the one or more DOE structures; and

iteratively train the parameter conditioned measurement model based on the amount of DOE measurement data and the known, reference values of the one or more conditioning parameters and the one or more non-conditioning parameters, wherein the training involves a minimization of an optimization function including one or more measurement performance metrics.

3 . The system of claim 2 , wherein the optimization function includes a regularization term associated with each of the one or more measurement performance metrics, and wherein a weighting value associated with each of the regularization terms is dynamically controlled during iteration of the parameter conditioned measurement model.

4 . The system of claim 2 , wherein at least a portion of the amount of DOE measurement data associated with measurements of one or more DOE structures is generated by a simulation.

5 . The system of claim 4 , wherein the reference values of one or more parameters of interest associated with the one or more DOE structures are programmed values associated with the simulation.

6 . The system of claim 2 , wherein the known, reference values of the one or more conditioning parameters and the one or more non-conditioning parameters associated with the one or more DOE metrology targets are measured by a trusted, reference metrology system.

7 . The system of claim 2 , wherein at least a portion of the amount of DOE measurement data is collected from actual measurements of the one or more DOE structures disposed on a second wafer.

8 . The system of claim 7 , wherein the first wafer and the second wafer are the same wafer.

9 . The system of claim 2 , the computing system further configured to:

determine additional reference values of one or more conditioning parameters and one or more non-conditioning parameters corresponding to the one or more conditioning parameters at one or more locations between the plurality of discrete locations of the one or more DOE structures by interpolation.

10 . The system of claim 1 , wherein the trained parameter conditioned measurement model is a machine learning based model.

11 . The system of claim 1 , wherein the geometric shape of the one or more structures characterized by the geometric model parameterized by one or more conditioning parameters and one or more non-conditioning parameters is two dimensional or three dimensional.

12 . The system of claim 1 , wherein the amount of measurement data includes measurements of the one or more structures by at least one optical based metrology system, at least one x-ray based metrology system, or any combination thereof.

13 . The system of claim 1 , wherein the one or more conditioning parameters is a height parameter, and wherein the one or more non-conditioning parameters includes any of a critical dimension, a tilt, an ellipticity, and a helix.

14 . A method comprising:

illuminating one or more structures disposed on a first wafer with an amount of illumination electromagnetic radiation;

detecting an amount of electromagnetic radiation from the one or more structures in response to the amount of incident illumination electromagnetic radiation as an amount of measurement data, a geometric shape of the one or more structures characterized by a geometric model parameterized by one or more conditioning parameters and one or more non-conditioning parameters;

generating a set of input values of each of the one or more conditioning parameters of the geometric model characterizing the geometric shape of the one or more structures; and

determining an estimated value of each of the one or more non-conditioning parameters corresponding to each of the set of input values of the one or more conditioning parameters from a trained parameter conditioned measurement model, wherein each of the set of input values of the one or more conditioning parameters and the amount of measurement data are provided as input to the trained parameter conditioned measurement model.

15 . The method of claim 14 , further comprising:

receiving an amount of Design of Experiments (DOE) measurement data associated with measurements of one or more DOE structures;

receiving known, reference values of one or more conditioning parameters and one or more non-conditioning parameters corresponding to the one or more conditioning parameters at a plurality of discrete locations of the one or more DOE structures, the one or more conditioning parameters and the one or more non-conditioning parameters characterizing a geometric shape of the one or more DOE structures; and

iteratively training the parameter conditioned measurement model based on the amount of DOE measurement data and the known, reference values of the one or more conditioning parameters and the one or more non-conditioning parameters, wherein the training involves a minimization of an optimization function including one or more measurement performance metrics.

16 . The method of claim 15 , further comprising:

dynamically controlling a weighting value associated with each regularization term during iteration of the parameter conditioned measurement model, wherein the optimization function includes a regularization term associated with each of the one or more measurement performance metrics.

17 . The method of claim 15 , further comprising:

determining additional reference values of one or more conditioning parameters and one or more non-conditioning parameters corresponding to the one or more conditioning parameters at one or more locations between the plurality of discrete locations of the one or more DOE structures by interpolation.

18 . The method of claim 14 , wherein the amount of measurement data includes measurements of the one or more structures by at least one optical based metrology system, at least one x-ray based metrology system, or any combination thereof.

19 . A system comprising:

one or more metrology systems including an illumination source configured to direct an amount of illumination electromagnetic radiation onto one or more structures disposed on a first wafer and a detector configured to detect an amount of electromagnetic radiation from the one or more structures in response to the amount of incident illumination electromagnetic radiation as an amount of measurement data, a geometric shape of the one or more structures characterized by a geometric model parameterized by one or more conditioning parameters and one or more non-conditioning parameters; and

a non-transitory, computer-readable medium including instructions that when executed by one or more processors of a computing system cause the computing system to:

receive the amount of measurement data from the measurements of the one or more structures disposed on the first wafer;

generate a set of input values of each of the one or more conditioning parameters of the geometric model characterizing the geometric shape of the one or more structures; and

determine an estimated value of each of the one or more non-conditioning parameters corresponding to each of the set of input values of the one or more conditioning parameters from a trained parameter conditioned measurement model, wherein each of the set of input values of the one or more conditioning parameters and the amount of measurement data are provided as input to the trained parameter conditioned measurement model.

20 . The system of claim 19 , the non-transitory, computer-readable medium further including instructions that when executed by one or more processors of the computing system cause the computing system to:

receive an amount of Design of Experiments (DOE) measurement data associated with measurements of one or more DOE structures;

receive known, reference values of one or more conditioning parameters and one or more non-conditioning parameters corresponding to the one or more conditioning parameters at a plurality of discrete locations of the one or more DOE structures, the one or more conditioning parameters and the one or more non-conditioning parameters characterizing a geometric shape of the one or more DOE structures; and

iteratively train the parameter conditioned measurement model based on the amount of DOE measurement data and the known, reference values of the one or more conditioning parameters and the one or more non-conditioning parameters, wherein the training involves a minimization of an optimization function including one or more measurement performance metrics.

Assignments (1)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded May 24, 2022
From: PANDEV, STILIAN IVANOV; JAYARAMAN, ARVIND
To: KLA CORPORATION
Reel/Frame 059993/0187 →
Continuity (2)
Provisional Application 63181966 · Apr 30, 2021
Related Publication 20220352041A1 · Nov 3, 2022
References Cited (81)
US 5608526A · Piwonka-Corle et al. · 1997 [cited by applicant]
US 5859424A · Norton et al. · 1999 [cited by applicant]
US 6023338A · Bareket · 2000 [cited by applicant]
US 6429943B1 · Opsal et al. · 2002 [cited by applicant]
US 6716646B1 · Wright et al. · 2004 [cited by applicant]
US 6778275B2 · Bowes · 2004 [cited by applicant]
US 6787773B1 · Lee · 2004 [cited by applicant]
US 6992764B1 · Yang et al. · 2006 [cited by applicant]
US 7242477B2 · Mieher et al. · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 7321426B1 · Poslavsky et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 7406153B2 · Berman · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 7478019B2 · Zangooie et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 7626702B2 · Ausschnitt et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 7656528B2 · Abdulhalim et al. · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 7826071B2 · Shchegrov et al. · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 7842933B2 · Shur et al. · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 7873585B2 · Zikson · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 7929667B1 · Zhuang et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 7933026B2 · Opsal et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 8068662B2 · Zhang et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 8138498B2 · Ghinovker · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 9291554B2 · Kuznetsov et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 9826614B1 · Bakeman et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 9885962B2 · Veldman et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 9915522B1 · Jiang et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 10013518B2 · Bakeman et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 10101670B2 · Pandev et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 10152678B2 · Pandev et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 10324050B2 · Hench et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 10352695B2 · Dziura et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20030021465A1 · Adel et al. · 2003 [cited by applicant]
US 20040017574A1 · Vuong · 2004 [cited by examiner]
US 20070176128A1 · Van Bilsen et al. · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 20070221842A1 · Morokuma et al. · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 20090152463A1 · Toyoda et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 20090248340A1 · Tian · 2009 [cited by examiner]
US 20110266440A1 · Boughorbel et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 20120292502A1 · Langer et al. · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 20130208279A1 · Smith · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 20130304424A1 · Bakeman et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 20140019097A1 · Bakeman et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20140064445A1 · Adler · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20140111791A1 · Manassen et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20140172394A1 · Kuznetsov et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20140222380A1 · Kuznetsov et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20140297211A1 · Pandev et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20150046121A1 · Dziura et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20150110249A1 · Bakeman et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20150117610A1 · Veldman et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20150204664A1 · Bringoltz et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20150285749A1 · Moncton et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20150300965A1 · Sezginer et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20160117847A1 · Pandev · 2016 [cited by examiner]
US 20160202193A1 · Hench et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160282105A1 · Pandev · 2016 [cited by examiner]
US 20160320319A1 · Hench et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20170167862A1 · Dziura et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20180106735A1 · Gellineau et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20180107928A1 · Zhang · 2018 [cited by examiner]
US 20180113084A1 · Hench et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20180211891A1 · Veerasingam · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20180293721A1 · Gupta · 2018 [cited by examiner]
US 20180328868A1 · Bykanov et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20190017946A1 · Wack et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190293578A1 · Gellineau · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20200200525A1 · Chouaib · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 20200335406A1 · Liman et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20210063329A1 · Kuznetsov · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 20230092729A1 · Pandev · 2023 [cited by examiner]
CN 106062939B · 2020 [cited by examiner]
JP 6751871B2 · 2020 [cited by applicant]
KR 1020200139800 · 2020 [cited by applicant]
TW 202109023A · 2021 [cited by applicant]
TW 202111319A · 2021 [cited by applicant]
TW 202113924A · 2021 [cited by applicant]
WO WO2019195481A1 · 2019 [cited by examiner]
WO 2021037484 · 2021 [cited by applicant]
WO 2021037484A1 · 2021 [cited by applicant]
International Search Report mailed on Jul. 27, 2022, for PCT Application No. PCT/US2022/024508 filed on Apr. 13, 2022 by KLA Corporation, 4 pages. [cited by applicant]
Lemaillet, Germer, Kline et al., “Intercomparison between optical and x-ray scatterometry measurements of FinFET structures” by Proc. SPIE, v.8681, p. 86810Q (2013). [cited by applicant]
Kline et al., “X-ray scattering critical dimensional metrology using a compact x-ray source for next generation semiconductor devices,” J. Micro/Nanolith. MEMS MOEMS 16(1), 014001 (Jan.-Mar. 2017). [cited by applicant]