Deblocking reaction of chemically amplified ArF positive resists

Activation Energies for Deprotection Reaction of Chemically Amplified Resists: A Study Using In-situ FT-IR Spectroscopy.

“…A similar finding was reported for the deprotection reactions of many types of CA resists [3][4][5][6][7][8].…”

“…[3,4]. Activation energies for the deprotection reactions of ethoxyethyl, tetrahydropyranyl and BOC units in KrF resists [3][4][5][6] and those for tertiary ester units in ArF resists [7,8] have been reported. However, the relationship between the activation energy and polymer structure was not fully discussed.…”

Deblocking reaction of chemically amplified positive DUV resists.

“…[6,11] Therefore, the reverse reaction of the deblocking reaction should be considered and we used the following equations [6,7]: Figure 3 shows the normalized blocking level as a function of PEB time at PEB temperature of 80 °C (polymer (a) resist and polymer (b) resist) and 100 °C (polymer (c) resist). The curves of all resists were saturated because of the reverse reaction of the deblocking reaction.…”

“…In particular, it is important to understand how the deblocking reaction in a positive resist system affects the resist's performance. In previous papers [6,7], we investigated the deblocking reaction mechanisms of chemically amplified KrF and ArF resists. We also evaluated the relationship between deblocking reaction and lithographic performance, especially post exposure delay (PED) stability and the line width difference between isolated line and dense line (iso.-dense bias).…”

“…We also evaluated the relationship between deblocking reaction and lithographic performance, especially post exposure delay (PED) stability and the line width difference between isolated line and dense line (iso.-dense bias). [6,7] In this paper, we analyze the deblocking reaction of three types of chemically amplified ArF resists which have different polymers: poly(carboxytetracyclododecyl methacrylate50-coethoxyethylcarboxytetracyclododecyl methacrylateS0) (poly(CITCDDMA50-ETETCDDMA50)), poly(carboxytetracyclododecyl methacrylate70-cotetrahydropyranylcarboxytetracyclododecyl methacrylate30) (poly (CTCDDMA70-THPTCDDMA30)) and poly(tricyclodecylacrylate~-co-tetrahydropyranylmethacrylate20-co-methacrylic acid20)(poly-(TCDAbO-THPMA20-X20)). We also evaluate the relationship between deblocking reaction and lithographic performance, especially the PED stability.…”