IP Library › Granted Patent US 12,566,385
Granted Patent B2
US 12,566,385 · App. 17/764,245 · Granted Mar 3, 2026

Method for determining a field-of-view setting

Inventors: Wim Tjibbo Tel (Veldhoven, NL); Hermanus Adrianus Dillen (Veldhoven, NL); Koen Thuijs (Vught, NL); Laurent Michel Marcel Depre (Revel, FR); Christopher Prentice (Grenoble, FR)
Assignee: ASML NETHERLANDS B.V.
G03F7/70491G03F7/70616G03F7/7085
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 12,566,385
App. No.
17/764,245
Granted
Mar 3, 2026
Kind
B2
Abstract

A method of determining a field of view setting for an inspection tool having a configurable field of view, the method including: obtaining a process margin distribution of features on at least part of a substrate; obtaining a threshold value; identifying, in dependence on the obtained process margin distribution and the threshold value, one or more regions on at least part of the substrate; and determining the field of view setting in dependence on the identified one or more regions.

Claims (49)

1 . A method comprising:

obtaining a distribution of process margin values of features on at least part of a substrate, the process margin representing a tolerance of a metric associated with features on at least part of the substrate;

identifying, by comparison of at least one of the process margin values of the obtained process margin distribution with a threshold value, one or more regions on at least part of the substrate;

determining a field of view (FOV) setting for an inspection tool having a configurable FOV in dependence on the identified one or more regions; and

physically configuring or modifying the inspection tool to realize a FOV with the FOV setting and/or outputting a signal representing, or based on, the FOV setting to a tool or system for enabling the physical configuration or modification of the inspection tool to realize a FOV with the FOV setting.

2 . The method according to claim 1 , further comprising determining a sampling scheme, wherein determining the sampling scheme comprises one or more selected from:

co-determining the sampling scheme and FOV setting;

determining the sampling scheme in dependence on the FOV setting;

determining the FOV setting in dependence on the sampling scheme;

determining the sampling scheme in dependence on the process margin distribution;

determining the sampling scheme in dependence on the threshold value; or

determining the sampling scheme in dependence on the identified one or more regions.

3 . The method according to claim 2 , wherein the determining a sampling scheme comprises determining one or more selected from:

a number of FOVs used;

a location of a FOV;

a size of a FOV; or

a density of measurements performed with images obtained by a FOV.

4 . The method according to claim 1 , wherein the determining a FOV setting comprises determining a number of FOVs, a size of a FOV and/or a location of a FOV.

5 . The method according to claim 1 , wherein the size of a FOV is configurable at the location of the FOV; and

a determination is made to use more than one size of FOV.

6 . The method according to claim 1 , wherein the FOV setting and/or a sampling scheme are determined in further dependence on an expected measurement time associated with the implementation of a sampling scheme on one or more regions of the at least part of the substrate, such that the sampling scheme provides a lower overall measurement time than a sampling scheme that measures all of the features on the at least part of the substrate.

7 . The method according to claim 1 , wherein the process margin distribution comprises data on a variation of the tolerance of the metric associated with features on at least part of the substrate; and

the identified one or more regions on the at least part of the substrate are one or more regions in which tolerance values comprised by the process margin distribution are less than the threshold value.

8 . The method according to claim 1 , wherein the determined FOV setting and/or a sampling scheme are dependent on a determined minimum number of occurrences of at least one feature that are required for determining a metric of the at least one feature.

9 . The method according to claim 1 , wherein determining the FOV setting and/or a sampling scheme comprises determining to increase the number of FOVs in order to achieve a minimum number of occurrences of at least one feature.

10 . The method according to claim 1 , wherein determining the FOV setting and/or a sampling scheme comprises determining to decrease the number of FOVs in order to avoid using substantially more FOVs than that required to achieve a minimum number of occurrences of at least one feature.

11 . The method according to claim 1 , further comprising obtaining an allowed maximum measurement time for obtaining metrology data of features on at least part of a substrate;

wherein the FOV setting and/or a sampling scheme is determined in dependence on the obtained allowed maximum measurement time such that the time required to obtain measurements according to the determined FOV setting and/or sampling scheme is less than or equal to the allowed maximum measurement time.

12 . The method according to claim 1 , wherein the process margin distribution comprises values of a metric of the features; and

the metric is edge placement error, EPE; overlay local overlay, LOVL; or local critical dimension uniformity, LCDU.

13 . The method according to claim 1 , wherein the inspection tool is an e-beam based inspection tool.

14 . A computing system configured to determine a sampling scheme and/or field of view setting for an inspection tool according to the method of claim 1 .

15 . A non-transitory computer-readable medium comprising instructions therein, the instructions, when executed by a computing system, configured to cause the computing system to at least:

obtain a distribution of process margin values of features on at least part of a substrate, the process margin representing a tolerance of a metric associated with features on at least part of the substrate;

identify, by comparison of at least one of the process margin values of the obtained process margin distribution with a threshold value, one or more regions on at least part of the substrate;

determine a field of view (FOV) setting for an inspection tool having a configurable FOV in dependence on the identified one or more regions; and

cause physical configuration or modification of the inspection tool to realize a FOV with the FOV setting and/or output a signal representing, or based on, the FOV setting to a tool or system for enabling the physical configuration or modification of the inspection tool to realize a FOV with the FOV setting.

16 . The computer-readable medium of claim 15 , wherein the instructions are further configured to cause the computing system to determine a sampling scheme, wherein determination of the sampling scheme comprises one or more selected from:

co-determination of the sampling scheme and FOV setting;

determination of the sampling scheme in dependence on the FOV setting;

determination of the FOV setting in dependence on the sampling scheme;

determination of the sampling scheme in dependence on the process margin distribution;

determination of the sampling scheme in dependence on the threshold value; or

determination of the sampling scheme in dependence on the identified one or more regions.

17 . The computer-readable medium of claim 15 , wherein the instructions configured to cause the computing system to determine the FOV setting are further configured to cause the computing system to determine a number of FOVs, a size of a FOV and/or a location of a FOV.

18 . The computer-readable medium of claim 15 , wherein the size of a FOV is configurable at the location of the FOV; and a determination is made to use more than one size of FOV.

19 . The computer-readable medium of claim 15 , wherein the FOV setting and/or a sampling scheme are determined in further dependence on an expected measurement time associated with the implementation of a sampling scheme on one or more regions of the at least part of the substrate, such that the sampling scheme provides a lower overall measurement time than a sampling scheme that measures all of the features on the at least part of the substrate.

20 . The computer-readable medium of claim 15 , wherein the process margin distribution comprises data on a variation of the tolerance of the metric associated with features on at least part of the substrate; and

the identified one or more regions on the at least part of the substrate are one or more regions in which tolerance values comprised by the process margin distribution are less than the threshold value.

Assignments (2)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Mar 28, 2022
From: TEL, WIM TJIBBO; DILLEN, HERMANUS ADRIANUS; THUIJS, KOEN; DEPRE, LAURENT MICHEL MARCEL; PRENTICE, CHRISTOPHER
To: ASML NETHERLANDS B.V.
Reel/Frame 059414/0928 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Mar 28, 2022
From: TEL, WIM TJIBBO; DILLEN, HERMANUS ADRIANUS; THUIJS, KOEN; DEPRE, LAURENT MICHEL MARCEL; PRENTICE, CHRISTOPHER
To: ASML NETHERLANDS B.V.
Reel/Frame 059414/0943 →
Priority Claims (2)
EP 19201911 · Oct 8, 2019 · regional
EP 19209797 · Nov 18, 2019 · regional
Continuity (1)
Related Publication 20230023153A1 · Jan 26, 2023
References Cited (42)
US 5229872A · Mumola · 1993 [cited by applicant]
US 5296891A · Vogt et al. · 1994 [cited by applicant]
US 5523193A · Nelson · 1996 [cited by applicant]
US 5969441A · Loopstra et al. · 1999 [cited by applicant]
US 6046792A · Van Der Werf et al. · 2000 [cited by applicant]
US 7587704B2 · Ye et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 10269602B1 · Lin et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 10394131B2 · Hsu · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 10515444B2 · Lin et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20050076322A1 · Ye et al. · 2005 [cited by applicant]
US 20070058853A1 · Minakata · 2007 [cited by examiner]
US 20090039263A1 · Matsuoka et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 20090157360A1 · Ye et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 20090290782A1 · Regensburger · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 20100315614A1 · Hansen · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 20110013824A1 · Yamada · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 20110230999A1 · Chen et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 20130179847A1 · Hansen · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 20140198975A1 · Nakagaki · 2014 [cited by examiner]
US 20190033838A1 · Duffy · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190094684A1 · Park et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20200019069A1 · Hasan · 2020 [cited by examiner]
CN 101034255 · 2007 [cited by applicant]
CN 103163442 · 2013 [cited by applicant]
CN 105045946 · 2015 [cited by applicant]
CN 107430347 · 2017 [cited by applicant]
CN 109540050 · 2019 [cited by applicant]
KR 20080065584 · 2008 [cited by applicant]
KR 20190033755 · 2019 [cited by applicant]
TW 200715443 · 2007 [cited by applicant]
WO WO2007026361A2 · 2007 [cited by examiner]
WO 2018114246 · 2018 [cited by applicant]
WO 2019029933 · 2019 [cited by applicant]
International Search Report and Written Opinion issued in corresponding PCT Patent Application No. PCT/EP2020/074605, dated Dec. 7, 2020. [cited by applicant]
Taiwanese Office Action issued in corresponding Taiwanese Patent Application No. 109133216, dated Jun. 7, 2021. [cited by applicant]
Spence, C.: “Full-Chip Lithography Simulation and Design Analysis—How OPC Is Changing IC Design”, Proc. of SPIE, vol. 5751 (2005). [cited by applicant]
Cao, Y. et al.: “Optimized Hardware and Software For Fast, Full Chip Simulation”, Proc. of SPIE, vol. 5754 (2005). [cited by applicant]
Granik, Y.: “Source Optimization for Image Fidelity and Throughput”, Journal of Microlithography, Microfabrication, Microsystems 3(4) (Oct. 2004). [cited by applicant]
Rosenbluth, A.E. et al., “Optimum mask and source patterns to print a given shape,” J. Microlith., Microfab., Microsyst, vol. 1, No. 1 (Apr. 2002). [cited by applicant]
Socha, R. et. al.: “Simultaneous Source Mask Optimization (SMO)”, Proc. of SPIE, vol. 5853 (2005). [cited by applicant]
Office Action issued in corresponding Korean Patent Application No. 10-2022-7011786, dated Aug. 26, 2024. [cited by applicant]
Office Action issued in corresponding Chinese Patent Application No. 202080070675, dated Jul. 18, 2024. [cited by applicant]