Lithography Control and Optimization 71

Depth of Focus

To measure the size of a focus-exposure process win-

dow, the first step is to graphically represent errors in fo-
cus and exposure as a rectangle on the same plot as the
process window. The width of the rectangle represents the
built-in focus errors of the processes, and the height rep-
resents the built-in dose errors. The problem then becomes
one of finding the maximum rectangle that fits inside the
process window. However, there is no one answer to this
question. There are many possible rectangles of different
widths and heights that are “maximum,” i.e., they cannot
be made larger in either direction without extending be-
yond the process window. The result is a very important
trade-off between exposure latitude and depth of focus
(DOF).

If all focus and exposure errors were systematic, then the

proper graphical representation of those errors would be
a rectangle. If, however, the errors were randomly distrib-
uted, then a surface of constant probability of occurrence is
an ellipse.
Using either a rectangle for systematic errors or an ellipse
for random errors, the size of the errors that can be toler-
ated for a given process window can be determined. Tak-
ing the rectangle as an example, one can find the maxi-
mum rectangle that will fit inside the processes window.
Every maximum rectangle is determined and its height
72 Optical Lithography

Depth of Focus (cont’d)

(the exposure latitude) is plotted versus its width (depth

of focus, DOF). Likewise, assuming random errors in focus
and exposure, every maximum ellipse that fits inside the
processes window can be determined. The horizontal width
of the ellipse would represent a 3σ error in focus, while the
vertical height of the ellipse would give a 3σ error in expo-
sure. A plot of the height versus the width of this family
of maximal error shapes gives the exposure latitude versus
DOF curve.

The exposure latitude versus DOF curve provides the most

concise representation of the coupled effects of focus and
exposure on the lithography process. Each point on the ex-
posure latitude vs. DOF curve is one possible operating
point for the process. The user must decide how to balance
the trade-off between DOF and exposure latitude. One ap-
proach is to define a minimum acceptable exposure latitude
and then operate at this point. This has the effect of max-
imizing the DOF of the process. In fact, this approach al-
lows for the definition of a single value for the DOF of a
given feature for a given process. The depth of focus of
a feature can be defined as the range of focus that keeps
the resist profile of a given feature within all specifications
(linewidth, sidewall angle, and resist loss) over a specified
exposure range.
Lithography Control and Optimization 73

Resolution

Resolution is the smallest feature that you are able to

print (with a given process, tool set, etc.) with sufficient
quality. For a production engineer, the manufacturable res-
olution is the smallest feature size that provides adequate
yield for a device designed to work at that size.
In practice, process variations
limit resolution since smaller
features have inherently less
process latitude. It is common
to use focus and exposure dose
as representative process vari-
ables, so that resolution is de-
fined as the smallest feature of
a given type that can be printed
with a specified depth of fo-
cus.
For contact holes, the point
spread function of the lens
forms a good measure of resolu-
tion. For dense lines and spaces, the smallest pitch is lim-
ited by how many diffraction orders can pass through
the lens (and thus is limited by λ/NA). For an isolated fea-
ture, there is no hard resolution cut-off. Instead, linewidth
control is the limiter.
74 Optical Lithography

Rayleigh Criteria: Resolution

The easiest (though not the only)

way to derive the Rayleigh res-
olution criterion is with the
imaging of equal lines and spaces.
For a pitch p, the diffraction pat-
tern will be discrete diffraction
orders at spatial frequencies
that are multiples of 1/p. The
lens allows a portion of the dif-
fraction pattern to pass through
and be used to form the im-
age. The largest spatial frequency
that can make it through the lens
is NA/λ.
In order to form an image, at least two diffraction orders
must go through the lens. Assuming coherent illumination,
this means the zero order and the two first orders must
go through the lens. The smallest pitch that allows this to
happen would put the first diffraction orders exactly at the
edge of the lens:
1 NA
=
pmin λ
For equal lines and spaces, the resolution is one half of this
minimum pitch:
pmin λ
R= = 0.5
2 NA
Since the above criterion for resolution is fairly specific
(equal lines and spaces with coherent illumination), it is
common in lithography applications to generalize some-
what and simply say that resolution is directly proportional
to λ/NA, using k1 as the proportionality factor:
λ
R = k1
NA
Lithography Control and Optimization 75

Rayleigh Criteria: Depth of Focus

Defocusing of a wafer is equivalent to causing an aberra-

tion—an error in curvature of the actual wavefront relative
to the desired wavefront. The distance from the desired to
the “defocused” wavefront is called the optical path dif-
ference (OPD). Describing the position within the exit
pupil by an angle θ, the optical path difference is
 
1 sin4 θ sin6 θ
OPD = δ(1 − cos θ) = δ sin2 θ + + + ···
2 4 8
The diffraction pattern of an array of small lines and spaces
is a set of discrete diffraction orders, points of light enter-
ing the lens spaced regularly depending only on the wave-
length of the light λ and the pitch p of the mask pattern.
The angle of the first diffracted order is sin θ = λ/p.
For small lens numerical apertures, the largest angles go-
ing through the lens are also quite small and the higher-
order terms in the Taylor series for OPD can be ignored.
1
OPD ≈ δ sin2 θ
2
If the OPD were set to a quarter of the wavelength, the
zero and first diffracted orders would be exactly 90◦ out
of phase with each other. At this much OPD, the zero or-
der would not interfere with the first orders and no pattern
would be formed. The true amount of tolerable OPD must
be less than this amount (as indicated by the factor k2 ).
λ
OPDmax = k2 , where k2 < 1. Thus,
4
λ λ
DOF = 2δmax = k2 2
= k2
sin θ NA2
where the last expression on the right applies only at the
resolution limit, so that the first diffracted orders are at
the edge of the lens. Note that this Rayleigh DOF crite-
rion applies only to low numerical apertures when imaging
dense patterns at the resolution limit.
76 Optical Lithography

Mask Error Enhancement Factor (MEEF)

For “linear” imaging, mask critical dimension (CD) errors

translate directly into wafer CD errors (taking into account
the reduction factor of the imaging tool). If, however, the
features of interest are near the edge of the linear reso-
lution limit, the assumption of linear imaging falls apart.
Near the resolution limit, small errors in the mask dimen-
sion can cause large errors in the final resist CD. This am-
plification of mask errors is characterized by the mask er-
ror enhancement factor (MEEF). The MEEF is defined
as the change in resist CD per unit change in mask CD:
∂CDresist
MEEF =
∂CDmask
where again the mask CD is in wafer dimensions. Regions
where the MEEF is significantly greater than 1 are regions
where mask error may come to dominate CD control on the
wafer.

Optical proximity correction techniques allow us to lower

the linear resolution, but without improving the MEEF.
Lithography Control and Optimization 77

Resolution Enhancement Technologies

Attempts to improve the process window by optical means

(sometimes called optical “tricks”) include:
• Optimization of the mask
pattern shape (optical prox-
imity correction, OPC)
• Optimization of the angles
of light illuminating the
mask (off-axis illumination,
OAI)
• Adding phase information
to the mask (phase-shift
masks, PSM)
• Control of the polarization
of the illumination

Collectively, these optical approaches are known as reso-

lution enhancement technologies (RETs). While some
techniques improve feature resolution at the expense of
pitch resolution, many of the RET approaches can improve
pitch resolution and increase the process window simulta-
neously. However, the most promising RETs (especially the
best PSMs techniques) require a revolution in chip layout
design that has yet to occur.