MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382049367 · doi:10.1117/12.2673076

Microscopic to macroscopic modelling of optical defect inspection system

2023· article· en· W4382049367 on OpenAlexaff
Yihao Chen, Ling Zhang, Han-Hsiang Cheng, Federico D. Gomez, Sandra Gely

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in Photolithography Techniques
Canadian institutionsAnsys (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultiphysicsZemaxWaferComputer scienceSemiconductor device fabricationAutomated optical inspectionMaterials scienceOpticsElectronic engineeringMechanical engineeringOptoelectronicsEngineeringArtificial intelligenceSoftwareFinite element methodPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Optical inspection systems allow faster detection of defects on semiconductor wafers than scanning electron microscopy (SEM) inspection systems. However, optical detection becomes more challenging as the structure feature size shrinks below the optical diffraction limit with the advancement of technology nodes in semiconductor manufacturing. To overcome this challenge and achieve optimal performance, the optical system must be tailored to the specific characteristics of the wafer sample which requires knowledge of the underlying microscopic and macroscopic optical phenomena. In this work, we proposed a multiphysics simulation workflow to model the microscopic light interaction with the wafer sample using Ansys Lumerical FDTD and the macroscopic optics of the inspection system using Ansys Zemax OpticStudio. The optimum optical system design with maximum defect signal strength could be achieved through defect image analysis. Together, FDTD and OpticStudio facilitate the design of complex optical inspection systems and reduce the cycle time for creating inspection recipes in the development of advanced technology nodes in semiconductor manufacturing.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.590
Threshold uncertainty score0.437

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.240 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvancements in Photolithography TechniquesFrench-language works237,207