2014
DOI: 10.1016/j.polymer.2014.06.008
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Triphenylsulfonium salt methacrylate bound polymer resist for electron beam lithography

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
16
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
0
16
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Our research began with the attempted synthesis of triphenyl sulfonium 4 (Scheme ). According to the reported procedures, we assumed that triflyloxy sulfonium I , generated in situ by treating diphenyl sulfoxide 1a with Tf 2 O, would interact with nucleophilic N,N -dimethylaniline, delivering 4 as the expected product. To our surprise, in lieu of triphenyl sulfonium 4 , α-arylated acetonitrile 5aa was isolated in 20% yield.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Our research began with the attempted synthesis of triphenyl sulfonium 4 (Scheme ). According to the reported procedures, we assumed that triflyloxy sulfonium I , generated in situ by treating diphenyl sulfoxide 1a with Tf 2 O, would interact with nucleophilic N,N -dimethylaniline, delivering 4 as the expected product. To our surprise, in lieu of triphenyl sulfonium 4 , α-arylated acetonitrile 5aa was isolated in 20% yield.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this case too, the electrons in contact with the resist are modifying its solubility, permitting the selective removal of the exposed or non-exposed regions of the resist by subsequent etching in a solvent. The main advantage of this method relies on the maskless fabrication of sub-20 nm patterns in the horizontal plane [ 63 ] and of sub-10 nm patterns in the vertical plane [ 64 ] by employing a computer software that guides a finely focused beam of electrons over the patternable surface. Nonetheless, the best contrast and sensitivity of the material has to be considered when choosing the appropriate resist for high-aspect ratio patterns [ 65 ] and when aiming at sub-20 nm resolution on both positive and negative tones resists [ 66 ].…”
Section: Top–down Lithographic Methodologiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A comparison of these nanofabrication techniques is shown in Table 1. [11], and 58 nm/min [12] against different resists Slow 0.05 µm 3 /s in FIB deposition [13] Fast 15 wafers/h per imprint station [14] See Table 2 The biggest advantage of EBL and FIB is that they can pattern nanostructures with feature size in sub-5 nm and can process a wide range of materials, such as metals [8], alloys [15], hard and brittle ceramics and semiconductors [13], and polymers [16], making them extremely suitable techniques to process nanostructures with high precision [17]. However, the processing environment is harsh and requires vacuum operation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The processing speed of EBL is dependent on the type of electron beam resist. For example, the patterning speed of EBL can achieve 17 nm/min [10], 40 nm/min [11], and 58 nm/min [12] against SML resist, poly (GMA-co-MMA-co-TPSMA) resist, and IM-MFP 12-8 resist, respectively. Furthermore, FIB can be destructive and modify the electrical properties of the substrate surface via undesirable deposition of gallium ions.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%