Translator Disclaimer
14 March 2012 Comparison of directed self-assembly integrations
Author Affiliations +
Directed Self-Assembly (DSA) is gaining momentum as a means for extending optical lithography past its current limits. There are many forms of the technology, and it can be used for creating both line/space and hole patterns.1-3 As with any new technology, adoption of DSA faces several key challenges. These include creation of a new materials infrastructure, fabrication of new processing hardware, and the development of implementable integrations. Above all else, determining the lowest possible defect density remains the industry's most critical concern. Over the past year, our team, working at IMEC, has explored various integrations for making 12-14nm half-pitch line/space arrays. Both grapho- and chemo-epitaxy implementations have been investigated in order to discern which offers the best path to high volume manufacturing. This paper will discuss the manufacturing readiness of the various implementations by comparing the process margin for different DSA processing steps and defect density for the entirety of the flow. As part of this work, we will describe our method for using programmed defectivity on reticle to elucidate the mechanisms that drive self-assembly defectivity on wafer.
© (2012) COPYRIGHT Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE). Downloading of the abstract is permitted for personal use only.
Mark Somervell, Roel Gronheid, Joshua Hooge, Kathleen Nafus, Paulina Rincon Delgadillo, Chris Thode, Todd Younkin, Koichi Matsunaga, Ben Rathsack, Steven Scheer, and Paul Nealey "Comparison of directed self-assembly integrations", Proc. SPIE 8325, Advances in Resist Materials and Processing Technology XXIX, 83250G (14 March 2012);

Back to Top