IP Library Granted Patent US 12,420,373
Granted Patent B2
US 12,420,373 · App. 17/683,054 · Granted Sep 23, 2025

Control of processing parameters during substrate polishing using cost function

Inventors: Benjamin Cherian (San Jose, CA); Sivakumar Dhandapani (San Jose, CA)
Assignee: Applied Materials, Inc.
B24B37/005
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 12,420,373
App. No.
17/683,054
Granted
Sep 23, 2025
Kind
B2
Abstract

Controlling a polishing system includes receiving from an in-situ monitoring system, for each region of a plurality of regions on a substrate being processed by the polishing system, a sequence of characterizing values for the region. For each region, a polishing rate is determined for the region, and an adjustment is calculated for at least one processing parameter. Calculation of the adjustment includes minimizing a cost function that includes, for each region, i) a difference between a current characterizing value or an expected characterizing value at an expected endpoint time and a target characterizing value for the region, and ii) a plurality of a projected future pressure changes over time for the region and/or a plurality of differences between projected future pressures over time and a baseline pressure for the region.

Claims (108)

1. A computer program product for controlling a polishing system comprising a non-transitory computer readable medium comprising instructions for causing one or more computers to:

receive from an in-situ monitoring system, for each region of a plurality of regions on a substrate being processed by the polishing system, a sequence of characterizing values for the region;

for each region, determine a polishing rate for the region;

for each particular parameter update time of a plurality of parameter update times, calculate an adjustment for at least one polishing control parameter of the polishing system, wherein calculating the adjustment includes minimizing a cost function that includes, for each region

i) a difference between a current characterizing value or an expected characterizing value at an expected endpoint time and a target characterizing value for the region, and

ii) a plurality of projected future pressure changes to occur at parameter update times subsequent to the particular parameter update time for the region and/or a plurality of differences between projected future pressures to occur at parameter update times subsequent to the particular parameter update time and a baseline pressure for the region; and

for each particular parameter update time, adjust to the at least one polishing control parameter of the polishing system based on the calculated adjustment.

2. The computer program product of claim 1 , wherein the cost function includes, for each region, the plurality of projected future pressure changes to occur at parameter update times subsequent to the particular parameter update time for the region.

3. The computer program product of claim 1 , wherein the cost function includes, for each region, the plurality of differences between projected future pressures to occur at parameter update times subsequent to the particular parameter update time and the baseline pressure for the region.

4. The computer program product of claim 1 , wherein the cost function includes, for each region, the plurality of projected future pressure changes to occur at parameter update times subsequent to the particular parameter update time for the region and the plurality of differences between projected future pressures to occur at parameter update times subsequent to the particular parameter update time and the baseline pressure for the region.

5. The computer program product of claim 4 , wherein the cost function is a function of a square of each difference between the expected characterizing value at the end of polish and the target characterizing value for the region, a function of a square of each projected future pressure change, a square of each difference between the projected future pressure and the baseline pressure, and a weighted vector norm of expected future polish rates.

6. The computer program product of claim 5 , wherein the cost function includes a first constant for each region and the cost function is a function of the first constant multiplied by the square of the difference between the expected characterizing value and the target characterizing value for the region.

7. The computer program product of claim 6 , wherein the cost function includes a second constant for each region and the cost function is a function of the second constant multiplied by the square of each projected future pressure change.

8. The computer program product of claim 4 , wherein the cost function includes terms corresponding to

J

=

τ

=

0

τ

=

T

-

1

x

(

τ

)

T

Q

(

τ

)

x

(

τ

)

+

u

(

τ

)

T

Ru

(

τ

)

+

x

(

T

)

T

Q

f

x

(

T

)

where τ represents an ordinal number in a sequence projected future pressure changes, x(τ) represents a vector including differences between target values for the characterizing values at τ and measured characterizing values at τ, polishing rates at τ, and differences between estimated pressures at τ baseline pressures at τ, Q(τ) represents a weighting matrix for x(τ), u(τ) represents estimated pressure changes at τ, and R represents a weighting matrix for u(τ), x(T) represents a vector including differences between target values for the characterizing values at a final time T and estimated characterizing values for the final time T, estimated rates at a final time T, and the difference between estimated pressures and baseline pressures at a final time T, and Q f represents a weighting matrix for x(T).

9. The computer program product of claim 8 , comprising instructions to calculate x(τ+1) as Ax(τ)+Bu(τ), where A and B are pre-defined values.

10. The computer program product of claim 1 , wherein the cost function is subject to a state evolution constraint.

11. The computer program product of claim 1 , wherein the cost function is optimized by linear quadratic regulation.

12. The computer program product of claim 1 , wherein the characterizing value is thickness.

13. The computer program product of claim 1 , wherein the polishing control parameter is pressure of a chamber in a carrier head of the polishing system.

14. A polishing system, comprising:

a platen to support a polishing pad;

a carrier head to hold a substrate in contact with the polishing pad;

a motor to generate relative motion between the carrier head and the polishing pad;

an in-situ monitoring system to, for each region of a plurality of regions on the substrate being polished, generate a sequence of characterizing values for the region;

a controller configured to

for each region, receive the sequence of characterizing values,

for each region, determine a polishing rate for the region,

for each particular parameter update time of a plurality of parameter update times, calculate an adjustment for at least one polishing control parameter of the polishing system, wherein calculating the adjustment includes minimizing a cost function that includes, for each region

i) a difference between a current characterizing value or an expected characterizing value at an expected endpoint time and a target characterizing value for the region, and

ii) a plurality of projected future pressure changes to occur at parameter update times subsequent to the particular parameter update time for the region and/or a plurality of differences between projected future pressures to occur at parameter update times subsequent to the particular parameter update time and a baseline pressure for the region, and

for each particular parameter update time, adjust the at least one polishing control parameter of the polishing system based on the calculated adjustment.

15. The system of claim 14 , wherein the cost function includes, for each region, the plurality of projected future pressure changes to occur at parameter update times subsequent to the particular parameter update time for the region and the plurality of differences between projected future pressures to occur at parameter update times subsequent to the particular parameter update time and the baseline pressure for the region.

16. The system of claim 15 , wherein the cost function is a function of a square of each difference between the expected characterizing value at the end of polish and the target characterizing value for the region, a function of a square of each projected future pressure change, a square of each difference between the projected future pressure and the baseline pressure, and a weighted vector norm of the expected future polish rates.

17. The system of claim 16 , wherein the cost function includes a first constant for each region and the cost function is a function of the first constant multiplied by the square of the difference between the expected characterizing value and the target characterizing value for the region.

18. The system of claim 17 , wherein the cost function includes a second constant for each region and the cost function is a function of the second constant multiplied by the square of each projected future pressure change.

19. A method for controlling a polishing system, the method comprising:

receiving from an in-situ monitoring system, for each region of a plurality of regions on a substrate being processed, a sequence of characterizing values for the region;

for each region, determining a polishing rate for the region;

for each particular parameter update time of a plurality of parameter update times, calculating an adjustment for at least one polishing-control parameter of the polishing system, wherein calculating the adjustment includes minimizing a cost function that includes, for each region

i) a difference between a current characterizing value or an expected characterizing value at an expected endpoint time and a target characterizing value for the region, and

ii) a plurality of projected future pressure changes to occur at parameter update times subsequent to the particular parameter update time for the region and/or a plurality of differences between projected future pressures to occur at parameter update times subsequent to the particular parameter update time and a baseline pressure for the region; and

for each particular parameter update time, adjust to the at least one polishing control parameter of the polishing system on the calculated adjustment.

20. A computer program product for controlling a semiconductor processing system comprising a non-transitory computer readable medium comprising instructions for causing one or more computers to:

receive from an in-situ monitoring system, for each region of a plurality of regions on a substrate being processed, a sequence of characterizing values for the region;

for each region, determine a rate of change of the characterizing values for the region; and

for each particular parameter update time of a plurality of parameter update times, calculate an adjustment for at least one processing control parameter of the processing system, wherein calculating of the adjustment includes minimizing a cost function that includes, for each region

i) a difference between a current characterizing value or an expected characterizing value at an expected endpoint time and a target characterizing value for the region, and

ii) a plurality of projected future changes to the at least one processing parameter to occur at parameter update times subsequent to the particular parameter update time for the region and/or a plurality of differences between projected future parameter values to occur at parameter update times subsequent to the particular parameter update time and a baseline parameter value for the region, and

for each particular parameter update time, adjust to the at least one processing control parameter of the processing based on the calculated adjustment.

Assignments (1)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Apr 18, 2022
From: CHERIAN, BENJAMIN; DHANDAPANI, SIVAKUMAR
To: APPLIED MATERIALS, INC.
Reel/Frame 059624/0366 →
Continuity (2)
Provisional Application 63157508 · Mar 5, 2021
Related Publication 20220281055A1 · Sep 8, 2022
References Cited (67)
US 5888120A · Doran · 1999 [cited by examiner]
US 6439964B1 · Prehbu et al. · 2002 [cited by applicant]
US 6540591B1 · Pasadyn et al. · 2003 [cited by applicant]
US 6544103B1 · Korovin · 2003 [cited by applicant]
US 6932671B1 · Korovin et al. · 2005 [cited by applicant]
US 7115017B1 · Laursen et al. · 2006 [cited by applicant]
US 8774958B2 · Zhang et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 9213340B2 · Zhang et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 9490186B2 · Benvegnu et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 10493590B2 · Zhang et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20020192966A1 · Shanmugasundram et al. · 2002 [cited by applicant]
US 20020193899A1 · Shanmugasundram et al. · 2002 [cited by applicant]
US 20040023606A1 · Wang et al. · 2004 [cited by applicant]
US 20050070205A1 · Korovin et al. · 2005 [cited by applicant]
US 20060009127A1 · Sakurai et al. · 2006 [cited by applicant]
US 20060106479A1 · de Roover · 2006 [cited by examiner]
US 20070102116A1 · Shanmugasundram et al. · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 20070224915A1 · David · 2007 [cited by examiner]
US 20070243795A1 · Kobayashi et al. · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 20080051009A1 · Wang et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20080119119A1 · Zuniga et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20080139087A1 · Togawa et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20100029177A1 · Kobayashi et al. · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 20100217430A1 · David et al. · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 20110256805A1 · David et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 20120034845A1 · Hu et al. · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 20120100781A1 · Zhang · 2012 [cited by examiner]
US 20120277897A1 · Zhang et al. · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 20130204424A1 · David et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 20130237128A1 · David et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 20130273812A1 · Qian et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 20130280827A1 · Benvegnu et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 20150224623A1 · Xu et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20150226680A1 · Turovets et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20160372388A1 · Benvegnu et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20180099374A1 · Shen et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20180150052A1 · Cherian et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20190271962A1 · Miyata · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20220281054A1 · Cherian et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20220281056A1 · Cherian et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
CN 1554118 · 2004 [cited by applicant]
CN 1602546 · 2005 [cited by applicant]
CN 100577361C · 2010 [cited by examiner]
CN 104583712 · 2015 [cited by applicant]
CN 105745743 · 2016 [cited by applicant]
CN 106062933 · 2016 [cited by applicant]
CN 107611049 · 2018 [cited by applicant]
CN 109844923 · 2019 [cited by applicant]
CN 110223936 · 2019 [cited by applicant]
CN 111863613 · 2020 [cited by applicant]
JP 2006043873 · 2006 [cited by applicant]
JP 2015168015 · 2015 [cited by applicant]
JP 2019102518 · 2019 [cited by applicant]
TW 200607604 · 2006 [cited by applicant]
TW 200822204 · 2008 [cited by applicant]
TW I322059 · 2010 [cited by applicant]
WO WO2008032753 · 2008 [cited by applicant]
WO WO2018132424 · 2018 [cited by applicant]
English translation of CN100577361C (Year: 2010). [cited by examiner]
Bae et al., “Effect of Retainer Pressure on Removal Profile and Stress Distribution in Oxide CMP,” International Conference on Planarization/CMP Technology, Fukuoka, Nov. 19-21, 2009, pp. 345-349. [cited by applicant]
International Search Report and Written Opinion in International Appln. No. PCT/US2022/018161, dated Jun. 14, 2022, 8 pages. [cited by applicant]
English translation of CN105745743A (Year: 2016), 20 pages. [cited by applicant]
Office Action in Taiwanese Appln. No. 111107946, dated Jun. 26, 2023, 20 pages (with English Summary and Search Report). [cited by applicant]
Vandebogert, “Method of Quadratic Interpolation,” University of South Carolina, Sep. 3, 2017, 22 pages. [cited by applicant]
Office Action in Chinese Appln. No. 202210212981.0, dated Jul. 28, 2023, 12 pages (with English translation). [cited by applicant]
Office Action in Japanese Appln. No. 2022-578963, dated Apr. 23, 2024, 6 pages (with English translation). [cited by applicant]
Notice of Allowance in Chinese Appln. No. 202210212981.0, dated Jul. 2, 2024, 9 pages (with English translation). [cited by applicant]