Metrology
Michael Friedmann
KLA-Tencor Corporation, Migdal Ha’Emek, Israel
INTRODUCTION
For all practical needs, light travels in a straight line. This
fact has been used to draw lines in agriculture or for city
planning projects, to keep track of time with solar clocks,
to measure height and angles in navigation and big con-
struction projects.
Modern engineering understands and uses nowadays
a much more impressive number of optical laws for ac-
curate measurement methods. The velocity of a speeding
car is measured using the Doppler frequency shift of re-
flected light. The distance to the moon was accurately
measured based on the finite and well-defined speed of
light. Light interference allows for precise surface shape
measurements in mechanical and optical workshops.
The semiconductor industry aggressively pushes fur-
ther the imagination of optical engineers with its demand
for fast and accurate measurements.
Thin film thickness is determined with Ångstrom ac-
curacy by measuring the spectrum and polarization of
reflected light.
By analyzing light diffraction on periodic structures,
engineers measure line widths five times thinner than the
wavelength with better than 1-nm accuracy.
The alignment of the tens of layers composing the ave-
rage microprocessor has to be better than a few tens of nano-
meters to produce a working device. Laser interferometers
are used to measure the position of the stage before print-
ing a new layer. Automatic optical microscopes are used
to measure the alignment error with nanometer precision.
The material presented has been organized in two sec-
tions. Classical optical metrology applications, such as
linear distance, angle, and velocity measurements, are
presented in ‘‘Classical Optical Metrology.’’
Whenever possible, optical methods are the preferred
choice for the demanding measurements, which keep the
microlithography process in control. Some of these cri-
tical measurements are presented in ‘‘Optical Metrology
in Microlithography.’’
CLASSICAL OPTICAL METROLOGY
Distance Measurements
Measuring distance implies comparison with a length
standard. The laws of optics provide a number of length
Encyclopedia of Optical Engineering
DOI: 10.1081/E-EOE 120009491
Copyright D 2003 by Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved.
M
measurement tools. Light travels in a straight line. The
light wavelength is well defined and can be made very
stable. The speed of light is a fundamental physical con-
stant. Metrology methods, in general, and length meas-
urements, in particular, take advantage of these simple
facts. Methods based on triangulation or time-of-flight are
used to measure distances from meters to thousands of
kilometers. Methods based on interferometry or Talbot
effect can measure distances from meters to nanometers.
An extensive description of length measurement methods
based on optical principles is given in Ref. [1].
Triangulation-based methods
Light property of traveling in a straight line and geom-
etry are the basics of triangulation-based length measure-
ment methods.
Stadia is one of the simplest optical length measure-
ment instruments. The main components of the stadia are
a telescope and a rotating mirror (Fig. 1). Suppose we
want to measure the distance, R, between two points. At
one point, we place the optical elements: the telescope,
the beam splitter, and the rotating mirror. At the other
point, we place a bar with a known length, W. The bar
is placed perpendicular to the direction of observation.
Using the rotating mirror, we measure the angle, y, sub-
tended by the bar. First, the mirror is rotated until the two
images of the bar observed through the telescope are su-
perimposed. Then the mirror is rotated until the two
opposite ends of the bar come together. The distance, R,
can be calculated using the following formula:
W
R ¼ ð1Þ
y
Many variations of this simple technique are currently
in use. Instead of using a reference bar, the length of
baseline B can be used. First, the mirror is rotated to bring
in coincidence an object at infinity. Then an object lo-
cated at the measurement point is brought to coincidence.
If y is the angle difference between the two mirror po-
sitions, the distance, R, is given by:
B
R ¼ ð2Þ
y
Instead of rotating the mirror, other range-compensating
techniques can be used.[1]
1307
1308 Metrology

Fig. 1 Stadia layout. (From Ref. [1].)

Time-of-flight methods
The speed of light is a fundamental constant. This makes
light propagation a tool for accurate distance measure-
ment. The meter itself is defined as the distance traveled
by light in 1/299,792,458 of a second.
Time-of-flight methods measure distance by counting
the time it takes light to travel to the targeted object and
back. The principle is simple. A sharp pulse of light is
sent toward the target. The time interval, Dt, taken by
light to travel to the target and back is measured elec-
tronically. The distance, D, is given by:
1 used to identify the position of the image.
D ¼ cDt ð3Þ
2 This method is used to measure the liquid level in
where c is the speed of light.
This method has been used in a famous experiment to
accurately measure the distance to the moon.[2]
In another method, the amplitude of the beam is
modulated at a frequency, o. The phase difference, Df,
between the outgoing and the returning beam is used
to calculate the distance, D:
cDf c2p
2D ¼ þn ð4Þ
o o
well-defined distances from the object, along the pro-
pagation direction.[3] This phenomenon can be used to
measure the distance between the grating and a reflecting
surface (Fig. 2) For plane wave illumination, the distance
between the grating object and the image is given by the
following formula:[4]
np2
d ¼ ð5Þ
2l
where n is the order of the self-image, p is the period of
the grating, and l is the wavelength of the illumination.
In a simplified setup, the Moiré pattern formed be-
tween the returning image and the grating object can be
containers.[5]
Interferometric measurements
Interferometric techniques are used to control position in
high-accuracy movement systems over a range of hun-
dreds of millimeters. The setup is based on a Michelson

where n is a positive integer. The ambiguity of the meas-

urement can be eliminated using two or more modulat-
ing frequencies.

Talbot effect

The Talbot effect can be observed when we illuminate a

grating object with coherent illumination. Images of the
grating object appear, with no need for imaging optics, at Fig. 2 Length measurement using Talbot effect.
Metrology
Fig. 3 Interferometer for length measurement. (From Ref. [1].)
interferometer (Fig. 3). Corner cube retroreflectors make
the system insensitive to small lateral vibrations and ro-
tations of the moving arm. The position of the moving
cube is monitored, counting fringes with two detectors.
The two-detector configuration allows discriminating the
direction of movement.
Coherence probe microscopy (CPM), based on white-
light interferometry, is used to measure submicron height
steps with nanometer accuracy.[6–9] The basic setup of the
CPM technique is shown in Fig. 4. A Linnik interfero-
metric microscope is performing vertical scans at every
sampling point. The detector, which is optically conju-
gated to the observation plane, is measuring the coherence
signal. The height of the surface is measured by tracking
the maximum envelope or the phase of the signal.
Phase shift interferometry (PSI) is a classical method
for measuring surface topography.[10] The resolution of
the method is measured in nanometers. At the heart of the
method is an interferometer with a phase-shifting element
in one of the arms.
Fig. 4 CPM.
1309
The interferometer generates a number of n interfe-
rograms for each state of the phase shifter. The PSI al-
gorithm builds from the n images a complex-valued
synthetic image. For monochromatic illumination, the
M
absolute value of each pixel in the complex image re-
presents the reflectivity of the surface. The phase of each
pixel in the complex image is related directly to the to-
pography of the surface.
The theory and sources of error in PSI are well docu-
mented. The most common errors in PSI include mis-
calibrated and nonlinear phase shifters, detector nonlinea-
rities, detection quantization, vibration and air turbulence,
and frequency mixing.[11–17]
Angle Measurements
Angle measurements based on reflection are measuring
the angle between the normal directions of the surfaces
involved. An autocollimator, which is basically a tele-
scope with an illuminated reticle, can be used to assert
perpendicularity to a reflecting surface as shown in Fig. 5.
The working principle and the applications of the auto-
collimator are well described in Ref. [18]. Small devia-
tions from perpendicularity are measured directly by the
autocollimator. If x is the distance between the image of
the illuminated reticle and the center of the measurement
reticle and f is the focal length of the objective lens, then
the tilt angle, a, is given by:
x
a ¼ ð6Þ
2f
The resolution of commercial autocollimators is about 0.1
arc sec and the accuracy is around 1 arc sec.
1310
Fig. 5 Measuring small angles with the autocollimator.
A setup for the alignment of a mirror at a specific angle
from a reference surface is shown in Fig. 6. A precision
prism featuring the desired angle is set on the reference
surface as in Fig. 6a. An autocollimator is used to capture
the normal to the desired surface. Then the mirror as-
sembly replaces the precision prism as in Fig. 6b. The
position of the mirror is adjusted until the autocollimator
confirms the perpendicularity of the surface within the
given tolerances.
A method to measure small wedge angles for optical
flats is described in Fig. 7. First, the left surface of the flat
is aligned perpendicular to the axis of the reference auto-
collimator as in Fig. 7(a). The measurement autocolli-
mator provides the first reading, b1. Then the optical flat
is rotated 180° as in Fig. 7 (b) and the procedure is re-
peated. The second reading of the measurement autocol-
limator is b2. The wedge angle, a, is given by:
a ¼ ðb1  b2 Þ=2 ð7Þ
The same technique with slight variations can be used
to measure prismatic error for polygon prisms with any
number of faces.
Autocollimators together with polygon prisms are used
in the manufacturing of high-accuracy divided circles;[19]
they are also used in angle measurements.
Fig. 6 Alignment of a mirror at a given angle using a precision prism.
Metrology
Velocity Measurements
Speckle metrology
Laser speckle photography (LSP) is an optical method
used to measure displacement, rotation, and velocity of
moving objects or fluids. A thorough review of the evo-
lution of LSP together with the theory of speckle inter-
ferometry and data processing solutions are given in
Ref. [20].
In LSP, the moving object is illuminated by coherent
laser light. A camera records on the same frame two su-
perimposed images of the illuminated surface separated in
time by a small and known delay (Fig. 8). The recorded
image can be analyzed offline.
The amplitude of the Fourier transform of the recorded
image is a field modulated by a frequency proportional to
the displacement of the moving object. By measuring the
modulating frequency, the displacement and the velocity
of the object can be estimated.
In Ref. [21], the Fourier transform is performed op-
tically over the whole image and gives information on the
global displacement of the object.
Localized velocity information can be obtained by per-
forming a local Fourier transform. The localized Fourier
transform can be performed optically. For this, a narrow
Metrology 1311

Fig. 7 Optical flat wedge angle measurement.

laser beam analyzes the recorded image. A Fourier lens at
simple free-space propagation performs the Fourier trans-
form. The velocity at every point is calculated from the
spatial frequency of the fringes.
Doppler velocimetry
Electromagnetic radiation reflected by moving objects
undergoes a Doppler frequency shift. Measuring the fre-
quency shift is the basis of any laser Doppler velocime-
try method.
The method has been initially used to measure ve-
locity fields for fluids flow.[22–24] Variations of the
same principle are used to measure the velocity of solid
bodies.[25]
The link between the frequency shift, Df, and the ve-
locity, v, of the object in study is given by the following
equation:[22]
Df ¼ ðk2  k1 Þ  v ð8Þ
where k1 and k2 are the wave numbers of the incident
and the reflected radiation, respectively (Fig. 9).
The frequency shift is measured by combining the
scattered light with a reference beam. The frequency of
the reference beam is artificially shifted in order to gen-
erate a beating signal in combination with the scattered
beam. The beating signal is then demodulated by fast
electronics. An extensive review of the different setups
used for laser Doppler velocimetry, the detectors used in

Fig. 8 Laser speckle interferometry setup.

1312
Fig. 9 Optical Doppler effect. (From Ref. [1].)
demodulation, and the signal processing techniques is
given in Ref. [1].
The main difference between the different methods
is the technique used to shift the frequency of the refer-
ence beam.
The most common, although expensive, method is
based on the use of Bragg cells.[26] Other methods use
Kerr cells[27] or Pockel cells.[28] Another method uses
stabilized double frequency lasers.[29,30]
OPTICAL METROLOGY
IN MICROLITHOGRAPHY
Thin Film Thickness
The structure of every microelectronic device is basically
a sandwich of tens of different layers. The electrical
characteristics and the thickness of each layer must be
kept within a tight window to produce a working device
with the designed performance.
Layers with a thickness between a few nanometers to
a few microns have to be measured with sub-Ångstrom
precision. For example, for a gate layer of 2-nm thick-
ness, the metrology precision (3s) has to be less than
0.0081 nm.[31]
Ellipsometry and reflectometry in different flavors are
the optical tools of choice for this task.
The potential ellipsometry has for thin film charac-
terization has been early recognized and thoroughly
investigated.[32–34]
A generalized setup, including a rotating polarizer/
analyzer ellipsometer first described in Ref. [35], is
shown in Fig. 10. Linearly polarized light is reflected by
the layered test structure. In some configurations, the
incident light passes through a compensator before it
Metrology
reaches the test structure. The reflected light, now
elliptically polarized, passes through an analyzer before
it reaches the detector. The reflectivity as a function of
polarization is measured. For each measurement point,
two ellipsometry parameters are generated: the amplitude
ratio, tan c, and the phase difference, D. The two
parameters are mathematically defined by:
rp
r ¼ tan ce jD ¼ ð9Þ
rs
where rp,s are the complex reflectivities for p and s
polarization, respectively.
A theoretical physical model[36] is used to link between
layer characteristics (refractive index, n; extinction index,
k; and thickness, t) and the measurements.
Matching the data to the model is a challenging task;
it has been approached in a number of ways.[37–44] Also,
the study of the systematic and random errors for ellip-
sometry measurements has been the subject of many
papers.[45–47]
A particular case of the setup described before is the
nulling ellipsometer.[33,34] In this configuration, a com-
pensating plate is introduced after the polarizer in the
incident arm of the ellipsometer. The retardation intro-
duced by the compensator at the working wavelength is
d = p/2. The polarizer and the analyzer azimuth angles are
modified until the detector registers minimum intensity.
Using the azimuth angles of the polarizer (yp) and ana-
lyzer (yA), the ellipsometry parameters can be calcu-
lated using:
c ¼ yA
D ¼ 270°  2yP ð10Þ
The number of measurements can be increased in order
to improve precision, accuracy, and general robustness
of the measurement. To this goal, many variations of
the concept described above have been designed.
Fig. 10 Generalized setup for ellipsometric measurement.
Metrology
In one version, the analyzer is rotated and the com-
pensator is fixed.[48] For each position of the analyzer, the
detector measures the intensity, ID, of the reflected light.
The signal measured is periodic and can be described as:
ID ¼ I0 ð1 þ a cosð2yA Þ þ b sinð2yA ÞÞ ð11Þ
The Fourier coefficients a and b are than used to calculate
the ellipsometric parameters tan c and cos D.
In another configuration, the polarizer and the analyzer
are fixed, and the compensator is rotated.[49]
The polarization modulation ellipsometer uses a com-
pensator for which the retardation can be modulated
in time.[50]
Spectroscopic ellipsometry is now the most advanced
ellipsometric technique. In spectroscopic ellipsometry,
the single detector is replaced by a spectrometer, and
broadband illumination source is used. For all that mat-
ters, a spectroscopic ellipsometer is equivalent with a few
hundred monochromatic ellipsometers, one for each re-
solved wavelength. The large amount of data provided
in parallel by a spectroscopic ellipsometer makes it the
tool of choice when measuring very thin layers (2 nm
and below).
Last but not least, the ellipsometer in its different
configurations is small and robust enough to be inserted
directly inside the process chamber, enabling in situ
process control.[51–55]
Critical Dimension (CD)
The minimum feature size printed on a layer in a mi-
crolithography step is called the CD of the layer. The CD
value of certain layers controls the performance of the
final device. For example, the CD of the gate layer for
a microprocessor device controls the operating speed.
Today, a typical minimum feature size is below 100
nm. The acceptable manufacturing tolerance is 10%. To
enable process control, the accuracy of the metrology tool
has to be better than 10% of the tolerance value. This
means that the measurement performance of the CD met-
rology tool has to be better than 1 nm.
Bright field microscopy and interferometric meth-
ods[56–58] were the tools of choice for CDs wider than 1
mm. When printed features got smaller than the optical
diffraction limit, scanning electronic microscopes (SEMs)
took over.
However, as it happened a number of times in the
history of optics, new optical methods have emerged
ready to complement the slow and expensive SEM.
CD measurement methods based on spectroscopic re-
flectometry and scatterometry are now already in use in
production facilities. These methods also provide data on
other important CD parameters such as height and side-
wall angle.
1313
There are basically two approaches to optical CD
measurements, spectroscopic reflectometry[59,60] and
variable angle scatterometry.[61–64]
The setup of the spectroscopic reflectometry is de-
M
scribed in Fig. 11. A linearly polarized, broadband spec-
trum light source is projected onto a grating target. The
grating is composed of lines with geometric character-
istics identical to the lines inside the device. The reflected
light is collected and analyzed by a spectrometer. The
measured signal is the reflectivity of the target as a func-
tion of wavelength. By using this technique, measurement
precision better than 1 Å for line width and 0.01° for
sidewall angle were reported.[59]
The setup of the variable angle scatterometry is de-
scribed in Fig. 12. The monochromatic linearly polarized
light source and the detector arms are rotated simulta-
neously, keeping angle y the same in both arms. The
measurement signal is reflectivity as a function of the
measurement angle. The analyzer controls the polariza-
tion of the reflected light. In some configurations, both s
and p polarizations can be measured simultaneously.
The reflectivity signal has to be mapped back to the
grating parameters: pitch, duty cycle, sidewall angle,
thickness, refraction, and extinction parameters for all the
layers involved. Computation of light diffraction by a
grating is a deterministic process and can be carried on in
a number of ways.[65–67] Retrieving the grating parame-
ters from the reflectivity signal is an inverse problem and,
therefore, a significantly more challenging task.
The usual approach is to build a theoretical library of
expected signals and compare the measurement results
with the signals in the library (Fig. 13). The signals are
built theoretically for all the expected values of the free
parameters. Methods using regression instead of library
search have also been reported.[68] In such a method, the
direct problem is calculated in real time, for every
iteration of the regression algorithm.
Layer Alignment Metrology
Placing multiple layers on top of each other within
reasonable alignment limits is a skill used, e.g., to print
colors on paper or fabric. The microlithography process in
the semiconductor industry raises the same challenges
faced by offset printing in typography and textile industry.
Offset color-printing misalignment generates unpleas-
ant effects to the eye. In the case of microelectronics
production, misaligned layers generate faulty devices. In
both cases, the immediate effect is a production yield drop.
A thorough review of alignment error metrology in the
semiconductor industry is given in Ref. [69]. Only the
optical techniques used to measure and control layer
misalignment are described here. The processed results of
the misalignment measurement are fed back to the
1314 Metrology

Fig. 11 Spectroscopic reflectometry setup for CD measurements.

projection tool in the form of offset, scale, and other the optical design has stringent specs for illumination
correctable parameters. uniformity and asymmetric aberrations, and the algo-
In microlithography, the margin of error is defined rithms are designed to take full advantage of the sym-
relative to the design rule, which is the typical dimension metry assumption.[71–74]
of the features printed on the layer. A rule of thumb The residual optical-related asymmetries, resulting
generally accepted by the semiconductor industry is that from imperfect illumination and optical assembly, are
the overlay (misalignment) budget is roughly one-third of partially calibrated by measuring the tool-induced shift
the design rule. For example, for 120-nm design rule, the (TIS). For this, the overlay target is measured twice; first
overlay budget is about 40 nm. To control the overlay at 0° and then rotated by 180°. TIS itself is defined as:
budget, the metrology tool has to be 10 times more
accurate, which brings us to a performance number of 4 OVL0 þ OVL180
TIS ¼ ð12Þ
nm. This value would suggest that the best tool would be 2
an electronic or an atomic force microscope; yet, again,
an optical solution is preferred due to speed and The calibrated overlay values (OVL) are given by:
measurement robustness. The industry’s standard overlay
OVLC ¼ OVL0  TIS ð13Þ
tool is a bright field, high-magnification microscope,
usually operating in the visible spectrum. New optical TIS calibration cannot eliminate all the sources of over-
approaches based on scatterometry are also mentioned in lay measurement errors.
literature.[70]
The usual approach to measure misalignment between
two layers is to print special marks on each layer and to
measure the distance between them after printing the
layers. An example of a typical mark is shown in Fig. 14.
To understand the complexity of the task this tool faces,
one has to consider the size of the marks which is
typically between 10 to 30 mm, the resolution limit of the
imaging optics which is more than 200 nm, and the
sampling rate defined by the CCD pixel size which is
roughly 100 nm. Despite these conditions, measurement
precision of less than 2 nm is currently demonstrated.
A priori knowledge about the overlay mark, the quality
of the optics, and the strength of the algorithms play a
crucial role in achieving the needed performance. The
basic assumption used by the measurement algorithms is Fig. 12 Variable angle scatterometry setup for CD
symmetry. The overlay mark is designed to be symmetric, measurement.
Metrology
Fig. 13 Scatterometry CD signal library for a process latitude of 50 nm in CD and 20 nm in resist thickness.
The asymmetry of the overlay mark generates a dif-
ferent kind of overlay error called wafer-induced shift
(WIS). A simple formula for overlay errors is given below:
OVL Error ¼ TIS þ WIS þ f ðTIS; WISÞ
Separating the effects of TIS and WIS is an ongoing
research process with no closed solution until now.[75–79]
Fig. 14 Overlay mark.
1315
The introduction of recognized overlay calibration
standards helps in sorting out the measurement uncer-
tainties introduced by TIS, WIS, and the measurement
algorithms. A lot of efforts have been invested lately,
ð14Þ mainly by NIST researchers, in this direction.[80–82]
CONCLUSION
There are many reasons optics is so involved in all
types of measurements. Light propagates in a straight
line with constant speed. The interaction between light
and light is well understood and explained by interfero-
metry laws. The interaction between light and matter is
governed by a plethora of physical laws from diffraction
to photoelectric effect.
Optical measurements are accurate and fast, but ne-
ver cheap. Most of all, optical measurement methods
are sophisticated and ingenious. Each one is a unique
technique, the result of a long research process or of a
sudden moment of inspiration.
REFERENCES
1. Malacara, H.Z.; Rodriguez-Vera, R. Optical Methods in
Metrology: Point Methods. In Handbook of Optical
1316
Engineering; Malacara, D., Thompson, B.J., Eds.; Marcel
Dekker, Inc.: New York, 2001; 427 – 491.
2. Faller, E.F.; Wampler, E.G. The lunar laser reflector. Sci.
Am. 1970, 223 (3), 38 – 47.
3. Patorski, K. Handbook of Moire Fringe Technique;
Elsevier: Amsterdam, 1993.
4. Malacara, D. Some properties of the near field of dif-
fraction gratings. Opt. Acta 1974, 21, 631 – 641.
5. Silva, A.A.; Rodriguez-Vera, R. Design of an optical level
using the Talbot effect. Proc. SPIE 1996, 2730, 423 – 426.
6. Matsui, K.; Kawata, S. Fringe-scanning White-light Micro-
scope for Surface Profile Measurement and Material Iden-
tification. In Intl. Symp. on Optical Fabrication, Testing,
and Surface Evaluation; Tsujiuchi, J., Ed.; Proc. SPIE,
SPIE – International Society for Optical Engineering:
Bellingham, Washington, 1992; Vol. 1720, 124 – 132.
7. Montgomery, P.C.; Fillard, J.-P. Peak Fringe Scanning
Microscopy: Submicron 3D Measurement of Semiconduc-
tor Components. In Interferometry: Techniques and
Analysis; Brown, G.M., Kwon, O.Y., Kujawinska, M.,
Reid, G.T., Eds.; Proc. SPIE, SPIE – International Society
for Optical Engineering: Bellingham, Washington, 1993;
Vol. 1755, 12 – 23.
8. Montgomery, P.C.; Lussert, J.-M.; Vabre, P.; Benhaddou,
D. Super-resolution 3D Optical Imaging of Semiconductors
Using Coherence Microscopy. In Three-Dimensional
Microscopy: Image Acquisition and Processing II; Wilson,
T., Cogswell, C.J., Eds.; Proc. SPIE, SPIE – International
Society for Optical Engineering: Bellingham, Washington,
1995; Vol. 2412; 88 – 94.
9. Neil, M.A.; Monteverde, R.J.; Kirkish, S.D. Coherence
Probe Metrology for Phase-shift Masks: Initial Results. In
12th Annual BACUS Symposium on Photomask Tech-
nology and Management; LaFrance, R.L., Landstrom, S.,
Eds.; Proc. SPIE, SPIE – International Society for Optical
Engineering: Bellingham, Washington, 1993; Vol. 1809,
120 – 127.
10. Creath, K. Phase-measurement of Interferometry Techni-
ques for Nondestructive Testing. In Second Intl. Conf. on
Photomechanics and Speckle Metrology: Moire Techni-
ques, Holographic Interferometry, Optical NDT, and
Applications to Fluid Mechanics; Chiang, F.-P., Ed.; Proc.
SPIE, SPIE – International Society for Optical Engineering:
Bellingham, Washington, 1991; Vol. 1554B, 701 – 707.
11. Creath, K. Phase-measurement Interferometry: Beware
These Errors. In Laser Interferometry IV: Computer-Aided
Interferometry; Pryputniewicz, R.J., Ed.; Proc. SPIE,
SPIE – International Society for Optical Engineering: Bel-
lingham, Washington, 1992; Vol. 1553, 213 – 220.
12. Schmit, J.; Creath, K.; Kujawinska, M. Spatial and Tem-
poral Phase-measurement Techniques: A Comparison of
Major Error Sources in One Dimension. In Interferometry:
Techniques and Analysis; Brown, G.M., Kwon, O.Y., Ku-
jawinska, M., Reid, G.T., Eds.; Proc. SPIE, SPIE – Inter-
national Society for Optical Engineering: Bellingham,
Washington, 1993; Vol. 1755, 202 – 211.
13. Creath, K.; Hariharan, P. Phase-shifting errors in inter-
ferometric tests with high-numerical-aperture reference
surfaces. Appl. Opt. 1994, 33 (1), 24.
Metrology
14. Creath, K.; Schmit, J. Errors in Spatial Phase-stepping
Techniques. In Interferometry ’94: New Techniques and
Analysis in Optical Measurements; Kujawinska, M.,
Patorski, K., Eds.; Proc. SPIE, SPIE – International Society
for Optical Engineering: Bellingham, Washington, 1994;
Vol. 2340, 170 – 176.
15. Groot, P.J.d. Derivation of algorithms for phase-shifting
interferometry using the concept of a data-sampling win-
dow. Appl. Opt. 1995, 34 (22), 4723.
16. Groot, P.J.d. Vibration in phase-shifting interferometry.
J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 1995, 12 (2), 354.
17. Schmit, J.; Creath, K. Fast Calculation of Phase in Spatial
n-point Phase-shifting Techniques. In Interferometry VII:
Techniques and Analysis; Kujawinska, M., Pryputniewicz,
R.J., Takeda, M., Eds.; Proc. SPIE, SPIE – International
Society for Optical Engineering: Bellingham, Washington,
1995; Vol. 2544, 102 – 111.
18. Hume, K.J. Metrology with Autocollimators; Hilger &
Watts Lts.: London, 1965.
19. Horne, D.F. Dividing, Ruling, and Mask-Making; Crane
Russak: New York, 1974.
20. Grant, I. Selected papers on particle image velocimetry.
SPIE Milestone Series; SPIE – International Society for
Optical Engineering: Bellingham, Washington, 1994; Vol.
MS 99.
21. Gasvik, K.J. Optical Metrology; John Wiley & Sons: New
York, 1987; 150 – 156.
22. Yeh, Y.; Cummins, Z. Localized fluid flow measurements
with an He – Ne laser spectrometer. Appl. Phys. Lett. 1964,
4, 176 – 178.
23. Foreman, J.W., Jr.; George, E.W.; Lewis, R.D. Measure-
ment of Localized Flow Velocities in Gases with a Laser
Doppler Flow Meter. In Selected Papers on Laser Doppler
Velocimetry; Adrian, R.J., Ed.; SPIE, SPIE – International
Society for Optical Engineering: Bellingham, Washington,
1993; Vol. MS 78; 8 – 10.
24. Foreman, J.W., Jr.; Lewis, R.D.; Thornton, J.R.; Watson,
H.J. Laser Doppler Velocimeter for Measurement of
Localized Flow Velocities in Liquids. In Selected Papers
on Laser Doppler Velocimetry; Adrian, R.J., Ed.; SPIE,
SPIE – International Society for Optical Engineering: Bel-
lingham, Washington, 1993; Vol. MS 78.
25. Drain, L.E. The Laser Doppler Technique; John Wiley &
Sons: Chicester, 1980.
26. Crosswy, F.L.; Hornkohl, J.O. Rev. Sci. Instrum. 1973, 44,
1324.
27. Drain, L.E.; Moss, B.C. The frequency shifting of laser
light by electro-optic techniques. Opto-Electronics 1972,
4, 429.
28. Rizzo, J.E.; Halliwel, N.A. Multicomponent frequency
shifting self-aligning laser velocimeters. Rev. Sci. Instrum.
1978, 49, 1180 – 1185.
29. Doebelin, E.O. Measurement Systems, Application and
Design, 4th Ed.; McGraw-Hill International Editions:
Singapore.
30. Müller, J.; Chour, M. Two-frequency laser interferometric
path measuring system for extreme velocities and high
accuracy. Int. J. Optoelectron. 1993, 8, 647 – 654.
31. Hayzelden, C. Gate Dielectric Metrology. In Handbook of
Metrology
Silicon Semiconductor Metrology; Diebold, A.C., Ed.;
Marcel Dekker: New York, 2001; 17 – 48.
32. Sirohi, R.S. Monitoring of thin film thickness by ellip-
sometry. Appl. Opt. 1969, 8 (2), 483.
33. Azzam, R.M.A.; Bashara, N.M. Ellipsometry and Polar-
ized Light; North-Holland: Amsterdam, 1987.
34. Tompkins, H.G.; Gahan, W.A. Spectroscopic Ellipsometry
and Reflectometry; Wiley: New York, 1999.
35. Aspnes, D.E.; Studna, A.A. High precision scanning ellip-
someter. Appl. Opt. 1975, 14 (1), 220 – 228.
36. Diebold, A.C.; Chism, W.W.; Dziura, T.G.; Kanan, A.
Metrology for On-chip Interconnect Dielectrics. In Hand-
book of Silicon Semiconductor Metrology; Diebold, A.C.,
Ed.; Marcel Dekker: New York, 2001; 149 – 166.
37. Holmes, D.A. On the calculation of thin film refractive
index and thickness by ellipsometry. Appl. Opt. 1967, 6
(1), 168.
38. Vedam, K.; Rai, R.; Lukes, F.; Srinivasan, R. Simultaneous
and independent determination of the refractive index and
the thickness of thin films by ellipsometry. J. Opt. Soc.
Am. A 1968, 58 (4), 526.
39. Loescher, D.H.; Detry, R.J.; Clauser, M.J. Least-squares
analysis of the film-substrate problem in ellipsometry. J.
Opt. Soc. Am. A 1971, 61 (9), 1230.
40. Ibrahim, M.M.; Bashara, N.M. Parameter-correlation and
computational considerations in multiple-angle ellipsome-
try. J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 1971, 61 (12), 1622.
41. Elshazly-Zaghloul, M.; Azzam, R.M.A. Inversion of the
nonlinear equations of reflection ellipsometry for uniaxial
crystals in symmetrical orientations. J. Opt. Soc. Am. A
1980, 70 (7), 880.
42. Yoriume, Y. Method for numerical inversion of the el-
lipsometry equation for transparent films. J. Opt. Soc. Am.
A 1983, 73 (7), 888.
43. Bosch, S.; Monzonis, F. General inversion method for
single-wavelength ellipsometry of samples with an arbit-
rary number of layers. J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 1995, 12 (6),
1375.
44. Bosch, S.; Perez, J.; Canillas, A. Numerical algorithm for
spectroscopic ellipsometry of thick transparent films. Appl.
Opt. 1998, 37 (7), 1177.
45. Aspnes, D.E. Measurement and correction of first order
errors in ellipsometry. J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 1971, 61 (8),
1077.
46. Nijs, J.M.M.d.; Silfhout, A.v. Systematic and random
errors in rotating-analyzer ellipsometry. J. Opt. Soc. Am. A
1988, 5 (6), 773.
47. Nguyen, N.V.; Pudliner, B.S.; An, I.; Collins, R.W. Error
correction for calibration and data reduction in rotating-
polarizer ellipsometry: Applications to a novel multichan-
nel ellipsometer. J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 1991, 8 (6), 919.
48. Chindaudom, P.; Vedam, K. Determination of the optical
function n(lambda) of vitreous silica by spectroscopic el-
lipsometry with an achromatic compensator. Appl. Opt.
1993, 32 (31), 6391 – 6397.
49. Hauge, P.S.; Dill, F.H. A rotating compensator {Fourier}
ellipsometer. Opt. Commun. 1975, 14 (4), 431.
50. Jasperson, S.N.; Schnatterly, S.E. An improved method for
high reflectivity ellipsometry based upon a new polariza-
1317
tion modulation technique. Rev. Sci. Instrum. 1969, 40 (6),
761 – 767.
51. Andrews, J.W.; Hu, Y.Z.; Irene, E.A. In-situ Spectroscopic
Ellipsometry Investigation of Ion Beam Damage: A
M
Kinetic Study. In Multichamber and In-situ Processing of
Electronic Materials; Freund, R.S., Ed.; Proc. SPIE,
SPIE – International Society for Optical Engineering:
Bellingham, Washington, 1990; Vol. 1188, 162 – 173.
52. Drevillon, B. In-situ Analysis of the Growth of Semi-
conductor Materials by Phase-modulated Ellipsometry
from UV to IR. In Surface and Interface Analysis of
Microelectronic Materials Processing and Growth; Bril-
lson, L.J., Pollak, F.H., Eds.; Proc. SPIE, SPIE – Inter-
national Society for Optical Engineering: Bellingham,
Washington, 1990; Vol. 1186, 110 – 121.
53. Henck, S.A.; Duncan, W.M.; Loewenstein, L.M.; Kuehne,
J. In-situ Spectral Ellipsometry for Real-time Thickness
Measurement and Control. In Advanced Techniques for
Integrated Circuit Processing II; Bondur, J.A., Castleman,
G., Harriott, L.R., Turner, T.R., Eds.; Proc. SPIE, SPIE –
International Society for Optical Engineering: Bellingham,
Washington, 1993; Vol. 1803, 299 – 308.
54. Maung, S.; Henck, S.A.; Duncan, W.M.; Mahlum, D.;
Sheng, C. Software Integration of In-situ Spectroscopic
Ellipsometry. In Microelectronic Processes, Sensors, and
Controls; Bondur, J.A., Elliott, K., Hauser, J.R., Kwong,
D.-L., Ray, A.K., Eds.; Proc SPIE, SPIE – International
Society for Optical Engineering: Bellingham, Washington,
1994; Vol. 2091, 404 – 417.
55. Boudreau, M.G.; Wallace, S.G.; Balcaitis, G.; Murugkar,
S.; Haugen, H.K.; Mascher, P. Application of in situ
ellipsometry in the fabrication of thin-film optical coatings
on semiconductors. Appl. Opt. 2000, 39 (6), 1053.
56. Nyyssonen, D. Line width measurement with an optical
microscope: The effect of operating conditions on the
image profile. Appl. Opt. 1977, 16, 2223 – 2230.
57. Nyyssonen, D.; Robert, D. Larrabee submicrometer
linewidth metrology in the optical microscope. J. Res.
Natl. Bur. Stand. 1987, 92, 187 – 204.
58. Nyyssonen, D.; Seligson, J.L.; Mazor, I. Phase Image
Metrology with a Modified Coherence Probe Microscope.
In Integrated Circuit Metrology, Inspection, and Process
Control VII; Postek, M.T., Ed.; Proc. SPIE, SPIE –
International Society for Optical Engineering: Bellingham,
Washington, 1993; Vol. 1926, 299 – 310.
59. Allgair, J.; Benoit, D.C.; Drew, M.; Hershey, R.R.; Li,
L.C.; Herrera, P.; Whitney, U.K.; Guevremont, M.; Levy,
A.; Lakkapragada, S. Implementation of Spectroscopic
Critical Dimension (SCDTM) for Gate CD Control and
Stepper Characterization. In Metrology, Inspection, and
Process Control for Microlithography XV; Sullivan, N.T.,
Ed.; Proc. SPIE, SPIE – International Society for Optical
Engineering: Bellingham, Washington, 2001; Vol. 4344,
462 – 471.
60. Allgair, J.; Benoit, D.C.; Hershey, R.R.; Litt, L.C.;
Abdulhalim, I.S.; Braymer, B.; Faeyrman, M.; Robinson,
J.C.; Whitney, U.K.; Xu, Y.; Zalicki, P.; Seligson, J.L.
Manufacturing Considerations for Implementation of
Scatterometry for Process Monitoring. In Metrology,
1318
Inspection, and Process Control for Microlithography
XIV; Sullivan, N.T., Ed.; Proc. SPIE, SPIE – International
Society for Optical Engineering: Bellingham, Washing-
ton, 2000; Vol. 3998, 125 – 134.
61. Minhas, B.K.; Coulombe, S.A.; Naqvi, S.S.H.; McNeil,
J.R. Ellipsometric-Scatterometry for the metrology of sub-
0.1 mm linewidth structures. Appl. Opt. 1998, 37 (22),
5112 – 5115.
62. Naqvi, S.S.H.; McNeil, J.R.; Krukar, R.H.; Hatab, Z.R.
Grating Parameter Estimation Using Scatterometry. In
Miniature and Micro-Optics and Micromechanics; Galla-
gher, N.C., Roychoudhuri, C.S., Eds.; Proc. SPIE, SPIE –
International Society for Optical Engineering: Bellingham,
Washington, 1993; Vol. 1992, 170 – 180.
63. Logofatu, P.C.; McNeil, J.R. Sensitivity Analysis of Fit-
ting for Scatterometry. In Metrology, Inspection, and
Process Control for Microlithography XIII; Singh, B., Ed.;
Proc. SPIE, SPIE – International Society for Optical Engi-
neering: Bellingham, Washington, 1999; Vol. 3677, 177 –
183.
64. Raymond, C.J.; Littau, M.E.; Markle, R.J.; Purdy, M.A.
Scatterometry for Shallow Trench Isolation (STI) Process
Metrology. In Metrology, Inspection, and Process Control
for Microlithography XV; Sullivan, N.T., Ed.; Proc. SPIE,
SPIE – International Society for Optical Engineering: Bel-
lingham, Washington, 2001; Vol. 4344, 716 – 725.
65. Moharam, M.G.; Gaylord, T.K. Rigorous coupled-wave
analysis of planar-grating diffraction. J. Opt. Soc. Am. A
1981, 71 (7), 811 – 818.
66. Moharam, M.G.; Gaylord, T.K. Three-dimensional vector
coupled-wave analysis of planar-grating diffraction. J. Opt.
Soc. Am. A 1983, 73 (9), 1105.
67. Moharam, M.G.; Gaylord, T.K.; Sincerbox, G.T.; Werlich,
H.; Yung, B. Diffraction characteristics of photoresist
surface-relief gratings. Appl. Opt. 1984, 23 (18), 3214 –
3220.
68. Raymond, C.J. Scatterometry for Semiconductor Tech-
nology. In Handbook of Silicon Semiconductor Metrology;
Diebold, A.C., Ed.; Marcel Dekker: New York, 2001;
477 – 514.
69. Starikov, A. Metrology of Image Placement. In Handbook
of Silicon Semiconductor Metrology; Diebold, A.C., Ed.;
Marcel Dekker: New York, 2001; 411 – 476.
70. Bischoff, J.; Brunner, R.; Bauer, J.J.; Haak, U. Light-
diffraction-based Overlay Measurement. In Metrology,
Inspection, and Process Control for Microlithography XV;
Sullivan, N.T., Ed.; Proc. SPIE, SPIE – International So-
ciety for Optical Engineering: Bellingham, Washington,
2001; Vol. 4344, 222 – 233.
71. Silver, R.M.; Jun, J.-S.J.; Kornegay, E.; Morton, R.D.
Comparison of Edge Detection Methods Using a Prototype
Overlay Calibration Artifact. In Metrology, Inspection, and
Process Control for Microlithography XV; Sullivan, N.T.,
Ed.; Proc. SPIE, SPIE – International Society for Optical
Engineering: Bellingham, Washington, 2001; Vol. 4344,
515 – 529.
72. Nakajima, S.; Kanaya, Y.; Takahashi, A.; Yoshida, K.;
Mizutani, H. Improving the Measurement Algorithm for
Alignment. In Metrology, Inspection, and Process Control
for Microlithography XV; Sullivan, N.T., Ed.; Proc. SPIE,
Metrology
SPIE – International Society for Optical Engineering: Bel-
lingham, Washington, 2001; Vol. 4344, 572 – 582.
73. Douglas, S.C. Frequency-domain Subpixel Position
Estimation Algorithm for Overlay Measurement. In
Integrated Circuit Metrology, Inspection, and Process
Control VII; Postek, M.T., Ed.; Proc. SPIE, SPIE –
International Society for Optical Engineering: Bellingham,
Washington, 1993; Vol. 1926, 402 – 411.
74. Fox, S.H.; Silver, R.M.; Kornegay, E.; Dagenais, M. Focus
and Edge Detection Algorithms and Their Relevance to
the Development of an Optical Overlay Calibration Stand-
ard. In Metrology, Inspection, and Process Control for
Microlithography XIII; Singh, B., Ed.; Proc. SPIE, SPIE –
International Society for Optical Engineering: Bellingham,
Washington, 1999; Vol. 3677, 95 – 106.
75. Starikov, A.; Coleman, D.J.; Larson, P.J.; Lopata, A.D.;
Muth, W.A. Accuracy of overlay measurements: Tool and
mark asymmetry effects. Opt. Eng. 1992, 31 (06), 1298 –
1310.
76. Yang, J.-S.; Lee, S.B.; Oh, S.-C.; Huh, H.; Han, S.-B.
Novel Design of WIS-Free Overlay Measurement Mark.
Metrology, Inspection, and Process Control for Micro-
lithography XIV; Sullivan, N.T., Ed.; Proc. SPIE, SPIE –
International Society for Optical Engineering: Bellingham,
Washington, 2000; Vol. 3998, 764 – 772.
77. Wong, A.S. Characterization of Wafer-induced Shift on
Overlay Target Using Post-etch Artifact Wafers. In
Metrology, Inspection, and Process Control for Micro-
lithography XIV; Sullivan, N.T., Ed.; Proc. SPIE, SPIE –
International Society for Optical Engineering: Bellingham,
Washington, 2000; Vol. 3998, 749 – 755.
78. Kanda, T.; Mishima, K.; Murakami, E.; Ina, H. Alignment
Sensor Corrections for Tool-induced Shift (TIS). In
Optical Microlithography X; Fuller, G.E., Ed.; Proc. SPIE,
SPIE – International Society for Optical Engineering:
Bellingham, Washington, Vol. 3051, 846 – 855.
79. Preil, M.E.; Plambeck, B.F.; Uziel, Y.; Zhou, H.; Melvin,
M.W. Improving the Accuracy of Overlay Measurements
Through Reduction in Tool- and Wafer-induced Shifts. In
Metrology, Inspection, and Process Control for Micro-
lithography XI; Jones, S.K., Ed.; Proc. SPIE, SPIE –
International Society for Optical Engineering: Bellingham,
Washington, 1997; Vol. 3050, 123 – 134.
80. Silver, R.M.; Potzick, J.E.; Larrabee, R.D. Overlay Meas-
urements and Standards. In Integrated Circuit Metrology,
Inspection, and Process Control IX; Bennett, M.H., Ed.;
Proc. SPIE, SPIE – International Society for Optical Engi-
neering: Bellingham, Washington, 1995; Vol. 2439, 262 –
272.
81. Silver, R.M.; Potzick, J.E.; Scire, F.; Evans, C.J.;
McGlauflin, M.; Kornegay, E.; Larrabee, R.D. Method to
Characterize Overlay Tool Misalignments and Distortions.
In Metrology, Inspection, and Process Control for
Microlithography XI; Jones, S.K., Ed.; Proc. SPIE,
SPIE – International Society for Optical Engineering:
Bellingham, Washington, 1997; Vol. 3050, 143 – 155.
82. Silver, R.M.; Potzick, J.E.; Scire, F.; Larrabee, R.D. High-
accuracy Overlay Measurements. In Metrology, Inspec-
tion, and Process Control for Microlithography X; Jones,
S.K., Ed.; Proc. SPIE, 1996; Vol. 2725, 320 – 330.