Automatic Defect Detection: Instrument Comparison And Application

R. C. Bracken; S. A. Rizvi; A. E. Reeves

doi:10.1117/12.931877

28 July 1981 Automatic Defect Detection: Instrument Comparison And Application

R. C. Bracken, S. A. Rizvi, A. E. Reeves

Proceedings Volume 0275, Semiconductor Microlithography VI; (1981) https://doi.org/10.1117/12.931877
Event: 1981 Microlithography Conferences, 1981, San Jose, United States

Abstract

Two commercially available automatic mask inspection machines, the KLA and the NJS, were compared for sensitivity to both clear and opaque defects. The sensitivity comparison showed the KLA 100 at 2 units to be similar to the NJS 2MD1 at 60X. The KLA 100 at 1 unit is similar to the NJS 5MD23 at 1.5μm. At each sensitivity range, roughly comparable percentages of false calls were encountered for each machine. The matter of false calls (on false reports of a defect at a location) is not clear-cut. Machine adjustment with regard to light balance, focus and registration of the machine to the mask are extremely significant in this regard. Additionally, as design rules shrink, the presence of features on polygons that are near the size of the defect being sought create severe problems with regard to false calls. The correlation of visual sampling results to automatic inspection results showed two things: (1) individual plate sample results correlate poorly to the plate quality as it is determined by automatic inspection, (2) the average quality of the plates produced in a week shows a correlation of the automatic and the visual results that is much better than that of the individual plates. The mathematics of sampling has been examined. It has been folind that the visual quality vs. automatic inspection results can be constructed from models which predict the experimentally observed pattern.

Citation Download Citation

R. C. Bracken, S. A. Rizvi, and A. E. Reeves "Automatic Defect Detection: Instrument Comparison And Application", Proc. SPIE 0275, Semiconductor Microlithography VI, (28 July 1981); https://doi.org/10.1117/12.931877

ACCESS THE FULL ARTICLE

INSTITUTIONAL
Select your institution to access the SPIE Digital Library.

SELECT YOUR INSTITUTION

PERSONAL
Sign in with your SPIE account to access your personal subscriptions or to use specific features such as save to my library, sign up for alerts, save searches, etc.

PERSONAL SIGN IN

No SPIE Account? Create one

PURCHASE THIS CONTENT

SUBSCRIBE TO DIGITAL LIBRARY

50 downloads per 1-year subscription

Members: $195

Non-members: $335 ADD TO CART

25 downloads per 1 - year subscription

Members: $145

Non-members: $250 ADD TO CART

PURCHASE SINGLE ARTICLE

Includes PDF, HTML & Video, when available