IP Library › Granted Patent US 12,332,573
Granted Patent B2
US 12,332,573 · App. 17/640,792 · Granted Jun 17, 2025

Method for determining defectiveness of pattern based on after development image

Inventors: Marleen Kooiman (Eindhoven, NL); Maxim Pisarenco (Son en Breugel, NL); Abraham Slachter (Waalre, NL); Mark John Maslow (Eindhoven, NL); Bernardo Andres Oyarzun Rivera (Rotterdam, NL); Wim Tjibbo Tel (Helmond, NL); Ruben Cornelis Maas (Utrecht, NL)
Assignee: ASML Netherlands B.V.
G03F7/7065G03F7/705G03F7/70625G06T7/001G06T7/33G06T2207/10061G06T2207/20081G06T2207/20084G06T2207/30148
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 12,332,573
App. No.
17/640,792
Granted
Jun 17, 2025
Kind
B2
Abstract

Described herein is a method of training a model configured to predict whether a feature associated with an imaged substrate will be defective after etching of the imaged substrate and determining etch conditions based on the trained model. The method includes obtaining, via a metrology tool, (i) an after development image of the imaged substrate at a given location, the after development image including a plurality of features, and (ii) an after etch image of the imaged substrate at the given location; and training, using the after development image and the after etch image, the model configured to determine defectiveness of a given feature of the plurality of features in the after development image. In an embodiment, the determining of defectiveness is based on comparing the given feature in the after development image with a corresponding etch feature in the after etch image.

Claims (38)

1. A method of training a model configured to predict whether a feature associated with an imaged substrate will be defective after etching of the imaged substrate, the method comprising:

obtaining, via a metrology tool, (i) an after development image of the imaged substrate at a given location, the after development image including a plurality of features, and (ii) an after etch image of the imaged substrate at the given location, the after etch image including etched features corresponding to the plurality of features; and

training, using the after development image and the after etch image, the model configured to determine defectiveness of a given feature of the plurality of features in the after development image,

wherein the determining of defectiveness is based on comparing the given feature in the after development image with a corresponding etch feature in the after etch image.

2. The method of claim 1 , wherein the model is an empirical model or a machine learning model, wherein the empirical model is a function of a physical characteristic of the feature associated with the imaged substrate.

3. The method of claim 1 , wherein the obtaining of the after development image comprises:

imaging, via a patterning apparatus, a mask pattern on a substrate;

obtaining a developed substrate of the imaged substrate;

aligning the metrology tool to the developed substrate at a given location; and

capturing an image of the developed substrate.

4. The method of claim 1 , wherein the obtaining of the after etch image comprises:

etching, via an etch process with specified etch conditions, the imaged substrate;

aligning the metrology tool to the etched substrate at the given location; and

capturing the after etch image of the etched substrate.

5. The method of claim 4 , wherein the etch conditions include etchant composition, plasma gas parameters, etching rate, electro-magnetic fields, a plasma potential, an inductive or a capacitive type of etching, a temperature of the substrate, ion energy distribution, ion angular distribution, sputtering and redeposition rates, or a combination thereof.

6. The method of claim 1 , wherein the training comprises:

aligning, based on the plurality of features, the after development image and the after etch image;

comparing each of the features of the plurality of features in the after development image with a corresponding feature of etched features in the after etch image;

determining, based on the comparison, whether a given etched feature in the after etch image satisfy a defect condition;

responsive to not satisfying the defect condition, classifying the given etched feature as defective; and

adjusting a model parameter value of the model based on the defectiveness of the given etched feature.

7. The method of claim 6 , wherein the adjusting of the model parameter value includes adjusting values of a plurality of model parameters.

8. The method of claim 6 , wherein the defective condition is a physical characteristic of the given etched feature in the after etch image.

9. The method of claim 8 , wherein the physical characteristic is at least one of:

a critical dimension of the given etched feature; or

a displacement of the given etched feature with respect to the given feature of the after development image.

10. The method of claim 1 , wherein the defectiveness is characterized by at least one of:

a binary determination of defective or not defective; or

a probability of the given feature being defective.

11. The method of claim 2 , wherein the machine learning model is a convolution neural network.

12. The method of claim 11 , wherein a plurality of model parameters are weights or biases associated with one or more layers of the machine learning model.

13. The method of claim 12 , wherein the plurality of model parameters being weights or biases includes the model parameters being weights and biases.

14. The method of claim 1 , wherein the metrology tool is an optical microscope or an electron beam microscope.

15. A system for determining a fraction of features that will fail after etching, the system comprises:

a metrology tool for capturing an after development image (ADI) of a substrate at a given location, the after development image including a plurality of features; and

a processor configured to:

execute a model for determining failure rates of the plurality of features of ADI that will fail after etching,

wherein the model is a combination of (i) a first probability distribution function configured to estimate a distribution of physical characteristic values for non-failing holes, and (ii) a second probability function configured to determine failure rates based on physical characteristic values of all the plurality of features of the ADI.

Assignments (6)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Nov 21, 2022
From: KOOIMAN, MARLEEN; MASLOW, MARK JOHN; PISARENCO, MAXIM; SLACHTER, ABRAHAM; OYARZUN RIVERA, BERNARDO ANDRES
To: ASML NETHERLANDS B.V.
Reel/Frame 061843/0770 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Nov 21, 2022
From: KOOIMAN, MARLEEN; MASLOW, MARK JOHN; PISARENCO, MAXIM; SLACHTER, ABRAHAM; OYARZUN RIVERA, BERNARDO ANDRES
To: ASML NETHERLANDS B.V.
Reel/Frame 061845/0148 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Nov 21, 2022
From: KOOIMAN, MARLEEN; MASLOW, MARK JOHN; PISARENCO, MAXIM; SLACHTER, ABRAHAM; OYARZUN RIVERA, BERNARDO ANDRES; TEL, WIM TJIBBO; MAAS, RUBEN CORNELIS
To: ASML NETHERLANDS B.V.
Reel/Frame 061845/0603 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Nov 21, 2022
From: KOOIMAN, MARLEEN; MASLOW, MARK JOHN; PISARENCO, MAXIM; SLACHTER, ABRAHAM; OYARZUN RIVERA, BERNARDO ANDRES; TEL, WIM TJIBBO; MAAS, RUBEN CORNELIS
To: ASML NETHERLANDS B.V.
Reel/Frame 061846/0728 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Mar 11, 2022
From: KOOIMAN, MARLEEN; PISARENCO, MAXIM; SLACHTER, ABRAHAM; MASLOW, MARK JOHN
To: ASML NETHERLANDS B.V.
Reel/Frame 059241/0977 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Mar 11, 2022
From: KOOIMAN, MARLEEN; PISARENCO, MAXIM; SLACHTER, ABRAHAM; MASLOW, MARK JOHN; OYARZUN RIVERA, BERNARDO ANDRES
To: ASML NETHERLANDS B.V.
Reel/Frame 059242/0540 →
Priority Claims (6)
EP 19195527 · Sep 5, 2019 · regional
EP 19196323 · Sep 10, 2019 · regional
EP 19218296 · Dec 19, 2019 · regional
EP 20169181 · Apr 10, 2020 · regional
EP 20176236 · May 25, 2020 · regional
EP 20189952 · Aug 6, 2020 · regional
Continuity (1)
Related Publication 20220342316A1 · Oct 27, 2022
References Cited (25)
US 20020107650A1 · Wack et al. · 2002 [cited by applicant]
US 20070061772A1 · Ye et al. · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 20090157360A1 · Ye et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 20180164792A1 · Lin et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20180275523A1 · Biafore et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20190005357A1 · Bhaviripudi · 2019 [cited by examiner]
CN 107728589A · 2018 [cited by applicant]
EP 3462240A1 · 2019 [cited by applicant]
TW 201843533A · 2018 [cited by applicant]
TW 201905588A · 2019 [cited by applicant]
TW 201928528A · 2019 [cited by applicant]
WO WO2018125219A1 · 2018 [cited by applicant]
WO WO2019162346A1 · 2019 [cited by applicant]
Seiro Miyoshi et al: “Novel prediction methodology for etched hole patterning failure”, Proceedings of SPIE, vol. 8324, Mar. 9, 2012 (Mar. 9, 2012), p. 83241J, XP055673753, 1000 20th St. Bellingham WA 98225-6705 USA ISS… [cited by examiner]
Office Action of the intellectual Property Office of Taiwan issued in related Taiwanese Patent Application No. 111136792; mailed Aug. 4, 2023 (18 pgs.). [cited by applicant]
International Search Report and Written Opinion issued by the International Searching Authority in related International Application No. PCT/EP2020/074663, mailed Feb. 9, 2021 (14 pgs.). [cited by applicant]
Office Action issued by the Intellectual Property Office (IPO) in related ROC (Taiwan) Patent Application No. 109130441, issued Nov. 12, 2021 (15 pgs.). [cited by applicant]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generalized_extreme_value_distribution. [cited by applicant]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truncated_normal_distribution. [cited by applicant]
G. Andrew et al., “Deep Canonical Correlation Analysis,” Proceedings of the 30 [cited by applicant]
A. Kraskov et al., “Estimating mutual information”. The American Physical Society, Physical Review E 69, 066138 (2004). [cited by applicant]
O. Inoue et al., “Review of scanning electron microscope-based overlay measurement beyond 3-nm node device”, J. Micro/Nanolithography, MEMS MOEMS 18(2), 021206 (Apr.-Jun. 2019). [cited by applicant]
M. J. Maslow et al., “Impact of Local Variability on Defect-Aware Process Windows,” Proceedings of SPIE 10957, Extreme Ultraviolet (EUV) Lithography X, 109570H (Mar. 26, 2019). [cited by applicant]
P. De Bisschop et al., “Stochastic effects in EUV Lithography,” Proceedings of SPIE 10583, Extreme Ultraviolet (EUV) Lithography IX, 105831K (Mar. 19, 2018); doi: 10.1117/12.2300541. [cited by applicant]
S. Miyoshi et al., “Novel prediction methodology for etched hole patterning failure”, SPIE—International Society for Optical Engineering. Proceedings, vol. 8324, Mar. 9, 2012, p. 843, 83241J, XP055673753, US. [cited by applicant]
Cited By (2)
US 12,585,201 US 12,670,575