Comparison of submicron particle analysis by Auger electron spectroscopy, time-of-flight secondary ion mass spectrometry, and secondary electron microscopy with energy dispersive x-ray spectroscopy

Abstract

Articles you may be interested inErratum: "Comparison of the submicron particle analysis capabilities of Auger electron spectroscopy, time-offlight secondary ion mass spectrometry, and scanning electron microscopy with energy dispersive x-ray spectroscopy for particles deposited on silicon wafers with one micron thick oxide layers" [J.Comparison of the submicron particle analysis capabilities of Auger electron spectroscopy, time-of-flight secondary ion mass spectrometry, and scanning electron microscopy with energy dispersive x-ray spectroscopy for particles deposited on silicon wafers with 1 μm thick oxide layers Development of a multifunctional surface analysis system based on a nanometer scale scanning electron beam: Combination of ultrahigh vacuumscanning electron microscopy, scanning reflection electron microscopy, Auger electron spectroscopy, and xray photoelectron spectroscopy Rev.Timeofflight secondary ion mass spectrometry of insulators with pulsed charge compensation by lowenergy electrons J.Particulate contamination can result in a significant yield loss during semiconductor device fabrication. As device design rule dimensions decrease the critical defect size also decreases, resulting in the need to analyze smaller defects. Current manufacturing requirements include analysis of sub-0.5-m defects, with analysis of sub-0.1-m defects expected in the near future. This article investigates the particle analysis capabilities of Auger electron spectroscopy, time-of-flight secondary ion mass spectrometry, and energy dispersive x-ray spectroscopy during scanning electron microscopy ͑SEM/EDS͒. In order to evaluate each method carefully, a standard set of samples was prepared and analyzed. These samples consist of 0.5-, 0.3-, and 0.1-m Al and Al 2 O 3 deposited on 1-in. Si wafers. Although all the methods observed an Al signal, a semiquantitative gauge of capability based on the relative strengths of particle versus substrate signal is provided. The dependence of the sample-to-substrate signal on primary electron energy is examined for both EDS and Auger analyses. The ability to distinguish metallic Al particles from Al oxide particles for the three techniques is also discussed.

Monte Carlo Simulation of SEM and SAM Images

“…Fig. 29(a) shows a quantitative comparison on the AE line-scans over Al particles on a Si substrate between the calculation and an experiment (Childs et al, 1996), and Fig. 29(b) shows a comparison for 2D SAM images of Al particles, treated as three semi-spheres of different diameters in calculation, placed on a Si substrate surface; the same condition as in the experiment (a 20 keV primary electron beam and the CMA analyzer) was considered in the calculation.…”

“…However, the important mechanism of Auger signal contrast has not yet been discussed in detail. Furthermore, the interested specimens have been shifted from micrometer structure to nanometer structure (Childs et al, 1996) now with the instrumental improvement (Jacka, 2001;Prutton, 2000;Venables & Liu, 2005); it thus requires explanations for many effects appeared in the nano-systems. In this respect the image simulation can help us to comprehend the contrast formation mechanism and, therefore, is expected to play an important role for predicating the artifact and improving precision of elemental mapping by SAM.…”

High-resolution microcalorimeter energy-dispersive spectrometer for x-ray microanalysis and particle analysis

“…collected only from the surface layer of the particle and substrate. The resulting particle-to-substrate ratio for FEAuger is less dependent on the electron interaction volume (and thus beam energy) and can be greater than that of FE-SEM/EDS for smaller particles (5). A more complete understanding of the measured AI/Si ratios for x-ray and Auger particle analysis as a function of beam energy requires extensive modeling of the electron-beam/particlesubstrate interaction (5) and is beyond the scope of this paper.…”

“…This work was motivated by a SEMATECH project on detector development for particle analysis. As in previous particle analysis comparisons (5,6), uniform particles of the desired size (0.3 gm diameter and 0.1 gm diameter) and material (A1203, W, and TiO2) were selected using an electrostatic classification system and deposited on pieces of Si wafers under cleanroom conditions. These particles were then imaged and analyzed at NIST using SEM/microcalorimeter EDS.…”

“…The SEM/microcalorimeter EDS data consist of background-subtracted A1-Kct/Si-Kct integrated peak intensity ratios from individual particle analyses, while the FE-SEM/EDS and FE-Auger data are averages over several particles (5,6). The FE-Auger data were obtained using a whole-wafer field-emission scanning Auger system.…”