PROCESS PHYSICS DETERMINING 2-D
IMPURITY PROFILES IN VLSI DEVICES
P. B. Griffin and J. D. Plummer
Integrated Circuits Laboratory
Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
ABSTRACT
Physically robust diffusion models are required to simulate
two-dimensional (2D) impurity profiles in VLSI devices.
The accuracy of the initial dopant profiles severely limits
the predictive capability of2D device simulators. Histori-
cally, the most successful diffusion models havebeen based
on point defect mechanisms involvingeither vacancy or in-
terstitial assisted diffusion. It is clear that the local con-
centration of defects determines the local diffusion coeffi-
cient, so the ability to model the point defect kinetics is
essential for obtaining accurate 2D dopant profiles. We de-
scribe a series of kinetics experiments using 2D process test
structures, which, when coupled with a 2D diffusion solver
enable quantitative values for the generation, diffusion and
surface recombination kinetics of the point defects to be
obtained. The physical insight this workprovidesforms
the basis of the diffusionmodels in the new2D process
simulator SUPREM-IV [l].
INTRODUCTION
Accurate two-dimensional process modelling requires tech-
niques for calculating local (i.e. time and position depen-
dent) point-defect parameters, since it is clear that thelocal
concentration of these defects determines the local diffu-
sion coefficient. This implies a tight coupling between the
surface geometry and resulting impurity profiles in small
devices. Extracting these parameters requires 2D process
test structures which give experimental values for the local
enhancement in thediffusion coefficientunder inert and ox-
idizing stripes in both one and two dimensions. Based on
these results we show that a simple model with vertical and
lateral effective diffusion lengths is inadequate to predict
dopant profiles in small devices. In addition, the assump-
tion that the relaxation time for the point defects is short
enough that a steady-state distribution can be assumed is
shown to be in error. Instead, three time constants are re-
quired to determine the experimental 2D dopant profiles.
Hu’s formulation [2] consisting of generation, recombination
and diffusion fluxes is ideallysuited to this problem provid-
ing it is introduced with the necessary time constants. One
of these time constants is determined by the vertical oxida-
tion enhanced diffusion (OED) kinetics and corresponds to
a balance between two large interstitial fluxes, the gener-
ation flux and the recombination flux. Another time con-
20.2
522-IEDM 86
stant obtained from the 2D test structure determines the
steady-state value of the lateral decay length and is given
by the ratio of the diffusivity D,eff and the surface recom-
bination velocity K,. The third time constant involves the
time evolution of the 2D profile and models its approach to
steady-state.
EXPERIMENTAL
The test structure is shown in Figure 1 and consists of oxi-
dizing and inert stripes with widths ranging from 2 to 200
microns [3],[4]. Experimentally, it is found that narrow ox-
idizing stripes always exhibit the maximum OED diffusion
depth, suggesting that the oxidizing surface is insensitive
to the adjacent sink for interstitials. In the above formal-
ism, this corresponds to a balance of a large generation flux
proportional to (dXoz/dt)”2 and a large surface recombina-
tion velocity at the oxidizing surface. Figure 2 shows how
this model fits the experimental data in one dimension on
the inert and OED junction depths. The 2D parameters
are determined by considering the extent of the diffusion
enhancement under narrow inert stripes due to nearby ox-
idations. This enhancement depends exponentially on the
stripe width allowing a value for the effective lateral decay
length Ld to be obtained. The decay length is normalized to
the maximum OED, so that the only time dependance re-
maining is due to the diffusion limited approach to steady-
state. In Figure 3, the time evolution of Ld for the three
temperatures investigated is shown. Simulations using a 2D
diffusion solver of the time evolution of the excess intersti-
tial concentration at a particular stripe width are compared
with experimental values in Figure 4. This indicates that
a high value for the diffusivity enables a steady-state dis-
tribution to be obtained almost immediately and the L,,
shows almost no time dependence. Such a value forthe dif-
fusivity is suggested by gettering experiments [5], [6] and by
OED experiments in epilayers [7]. However, only one ratio
of D‘’f/I(z models the time evolution of the lateral pro-
file. This enables unique values for the effective diffusivity
and the surface recombination velocity to be obtained and
these are plotted in Figure 5. Values in this range for the
diffusivity have been suggested from diffusion experiments
[IO]and [I11and from stackingfault kinetics [12].
[4I,,[8],[9]
CH2381-2/86@000-0522 $1.00 O 1986 IEEE
 RESULTS and SIMULATION
The particular value of the interstitial diffusivity has im-
portant implications forprocessmodelling programs. If
the diffusivity is large, then a steady-state is set up almost
immediately and the numerical problem reduces to solving
a simple Laplace equation. A transient effect requires the
computer-intensive solution of a Poisson equation. In Fig-
ure 6 we plot experimental values reported in the literature
for the interstitial diffusion coefficient. The value of Di is
scattered over several orders of magnitude and the activa-
tion energy ranges from about l e v to 4eV. However, two
trends can be noted in the data. First, the larger values of
Di are generally reported from gettering studies while the
lower values are from diffusion type experiments. Secondly,
in the diffusion studies, epilayers have the fastest diffusion
coefficients and float-zone and Czochralski material have
smaller diffusion coefficients. What is being measured is an
effective value and the differences described above must be
due to bulk recombination.
A simple model forthe effects of a recombination center
on the interstitials is to consider the following annihilation
reaction
I+TKB‘IT
The coupled equations for the traps and the interstitials
that must be solved are
aci
-= D;V2C;- ICBTC~
at
and
8T
--
at - -KBTC~
In this case the trapsare annihilated by the interstitials and
the diffusion front moves into the wafer like a shock wave
with an effective diffusivity Dierr much less than the actual
diffusivity D;.A plot of the profile of the interstitials as
they move into the wafer is shown in Figure 7, compared
to a simple error function profile with a diffusion coefficient
of A diffusion limited value was assumedfor K B im-
plying that the annihilation of interstitials is limited only
by the rate that they meet the traps. A trap density of
M 10’6/cm2 was used for the float-zone material. Czochral-
ski material is assumed to have a higher trap density which
slows the diffusion front even further. In epitaxial material
the trap density is assumed to bevery low and the intersti-
tials can move with the high diffusivity Di. These results
explain the trends in the diffusion data in the literature
noted above.
The recombination model outlined above also explains
the fact that gettering can proceed even at low tempera-
tures. Gettering is the process [13] whereby the back sur-
face of the wafer injects interstitials which kick-out certain
metallic impurities from substitutional sites to interstitial
sites. The metal atoms can then diffuseeasily to a sink,
usually on the back surface. High dose phosphorus diffu-
sions and ion-implant or mechanical damage are efficient
getters on the backside of a wafer. The reason that these
getter efficiently is because the supersaturation of intersti-
tials is so large (typically a factor of100 to 10,000) that
the traps in the bulk are rapidly annihilated and the in-
terstitials can diffuse quickly through the thickness of the
20.2
wafereven at low temperatures. This also explains why
backside oxidation does not getter metallic impurities. The
supersaturation is small enough that the trapssignificantly
slow down the diffusion front. In Figure 8, the effect of the
interstitial supersaturation on the diffusion front clearly in-
dicates this effect.
CONCLUSIONS
The results above indicate that twodimensional dopant
profiles can be rigorously modeledby coupling the local dif-
fusion enhancement to thelocal point-defect concentration.
In addition, theresolution of an apparent discrepancy in the
interstitial diffusion coefficientsobtained in these and other
experiments leads to a consistent model for the effects of
interstitials on relevant processes (oxidation enhanced dif-
fusion, gettering) in epitaxial, float-zone and Czochralski
material. The results also suggest that diffusionprofiles
can be controlled in both the lateral and vertical dimen-
sions by appropriate control of the surface and bulk pa-
rameters. Practical ‘diffusionengineering’for submicron
device structures should be possible with 2D profiles signif-
icantly different than the relatively uncontrolled profiles in
today’s devices.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The simulations in this chapter relied on SUPREM-IV code
written by Conor Rafferty and Mark Law and also on their
generous help. Sung Ahn and Paul Fahey provided many
useful discussions. This work was funded by DARPA and
VHSIC under contract number DAAL01-86-k-0101 and by
SRC under contract number 85-08-0062.
References
J.D. Plummer et al., “Process Simulators for Silicon
VLSI and HighSpeed GaAs Devices” Integrated
Circuits Laboratory, Stanford University, Stanford,
CA, July 1986.
S.M.Hu, “On interstitialand vacancy concentra-
tions in the presence of injection,” J . Appl. Phys.,
57, 1069, 1985.
A.M.Lin, R.W.Dutton and D.A.Antoniadis, “The
lateral effect of oxidation on boron diffusion in (100)
silicon ,” Appl. Phys. Lett., 35, 799, 1982.
K.Taniguchi and D.A.Antoniadis, “Lateral extent
of oxidation-enhanced diffusion of phosphorus in
(100) silicon,” Appl. Phys. Lett., 46, 10, 1985.
U.Goselle, “The Nature of Point Defects and Their
Influence on Diffusion Processes in Silicon at High
Temperatures”, Mat. Res. Soc. Symp.PTOC., Vol.
14, edited by S. Mahajan and J. Corbett, p. 45,
1983.
G.B.Bronner and J.D.Plummer, in Impurity Dif-
fusion and Gettering, (Materials Research Society
Proc., Vol36, North Holland, New York,1985),
edited by R.B.Fair and C.W.Pearce.
IEDM 86-523
 SUPREM-IV SIMULATION
[7]P.B.GrifEn,
P.M.Fahey, J.D.Plummer
and
R.W.Dutton, “Measurement of Silicon Interstitial
Diffusivity,” Appl. Phys. Lett., 47, 319, 1985.

[8]Y.S.Shin and C.K.Kim, “A Two-Dimensional

Model forthe Excess Interstitial Distribution in
Sili-
con During Thermal Oxidation,” IEEE Trans. Solid
State and Electron Devices, 30,1438, 1983.
[9]
E.Scheid and P.Chenevier,“1D
Simulation of
Oxidation-Retarded Diffusion in Silicon and Valid-
ity of the Physical Model,’’Phys. Stat.Sol., 93,523,
1986.
-LGO
TIME (hours)

[lo] S.Mizuo and H.Higuchi, “Effect of Back-Side Oxi-

dation of B and P Diffusion in Si Directly Masked
with Si3N4Films”, J . Electrochem. SOC.,129, 2292, 1.0, 1000

1983.
[ll]S.T.Ahn,J.D.Shott and W.Tiller, “Determination
of Modeling Parameters for 2D Dopant Diffusion
Using Silicon Membranes,” Proceedingsof the Elec-
trochemical Society Meeting,San Diego, CA, Octo-
ber 1986.
[12]K.Taniguchi,D.A.Antoniadis andY.Matsushita,
“Kinetics of Self-Interstitials generated a t the
SilSiOz interface,” Appl.Phys.Lett., 42, 961, TIME hours

1983.
1/00
[13] G.B.Bronner“PhysicalModeling of Gettering in
Silicon,” Technical Report No. G502-3Ph.D Disser-
tation, Department of Electrical Engineering, Stan-
ford University, Stanford, Ca , April 1986.

I I

1000

900

L STRIPE WIDTH
‘0 1 4 6 8 10 11 14

SQRT TIMEhours

Figure 1. A diagram of the Two-dimensional Process Test

Structure. By measuring the enhancement in the junction Lateral decay length of interstitials as a function
depth under narrow stripes the decay length of the inter- oftime at900, 1000 and 1100 C. The values were extracted
stitials can be calculated. from the 2-D process test structure described above.

20.2
524-IEDM 86
 1.0, 1100 c

0.0b
0 2 4 6 a i o i z i r
TIME hours

Figure 4. Result of 2D SUPREM-IV simulations for a 10 Figure 6. Literature values for the interstitialdiffusion coef-
micron stripe at 1100 C, for two different diffusion coeffi- ficient extracted from gettering and diffusion experiments.
cients. The experimental points are thecircles and the lines
are the computer simulations.

0 50 100 150 250

200 300 350
DISTANCE mlCrOnS

Figure 7. A comparison of a simple erfc profilewith a small

diffusivity with the solution of the coupled equations which
account for bulk recombination. The similarity of the pro-
files is such that distinguishing between them experimen-
tally is difficult.

Figure 5. Values of the effective interstitial diffusion coeffi-

cient and thesurface recombination velocity as a function of
temperature, extracted from the experimental results and
subsequent SUPREM-IV simulations.

3 5300205200105100 05 0 0 100
D I S T A N C E microns

Figure 8. The effect of a high interstitial supersaturation

on the evolution of the diffusion front in the presence of a
fixed number of interstitial traps.

20.2
IEDM 86--525