MICRO-SCALE SHEET RESISTANCE MEASUREMENTS ON ULTRA SHALLOW JUNCTIONS

Similar documents
Beyond SRP: Quantitative carrier profiling with M4PP

High precision micro-scale Hall Effect characterization method using in-line micro four-point probes

MICRO-FOUR-POINT PROBES IN A UHV SCANNING ELECTRON MICROSCOPE FOR IN-SITU SURFACE-CONDUCTIVITY MEASUREMENTS

Measurement of Semiconductor Resistivity using a Four Point Probe

Device Models (PN Diode, MOSFET )

nmos IC Design Report Module: EEE 112

Device Models (PN Diode, MOSFET )

MOS Transistor Properties Review

The Devices. Jan M. Rabaey

Semilab Technologies for 450mm Wafer Metrology

Digital Integrated Circuits A Design Perspective. Jan M. Rabaey Anantha Chandrakasan Borivoje Nikolic. The Devices. July 30, Devices.

MOSFET: Introduction

Enhancing the Performance of Organic Thin-Film Transistor using a Buffer Layer

The Devices. Digital Integrated Circuits A Design Perspective. Jan M. Rabaey Anantha Chandrakasan Borivoje Nikolic. July 30, 2002

Nanometer-Scale Materials Contrast Imaging with a Near-Field Microwave Microscope

Nanoelectronics. Topics

Lecture 2. Introduction to semiconductors Structures and characteristics in semiconductors

Quiz #1 Practice Problem Set

Supplementary Figure S1. AFM images of GraNRs grown with standard growth process. Each of these pictures show GraNRs prepared independently,

Control of the fabrication process for the sensors of the CMS Silicon Strip Tracker. Anna Macchiolo. CMS Collaboration

Operation and Modeling of. The MOS Transistor. Second Edition. Yannis Tsividis Columbia University. New York Oxford OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS

L ECE 4211 UConn F. Jain Scaling Laws for NanoFETs Chapter 10 Logic Gate Scaling

b imaging by a double tip potential

Long Channel MOS Transistors

Electrical Characterization with SPM Application Modules

Chapter 4 Field-Effect Transistors

Semi-insulating SiC substrates for high frequency devices

Microscopy AND Microanalysis MICROSCOPY SOCIETY OF AMERICA 2006

Supporting Information for. Graphene conductance uniformity mapping

SEMICONDUCTOR MATERIAL AND PROCESS CHARACTERIZATION USING THREE PROBES

Institute for Electron Microscopy and Nanoanalysis Graz Centre for Electron Microscopy

The Devices. Digital Integrated Circuits A Design Perspective. Jan M. Rabaey Anantha Chandrakasan Borivoje Nikolic. July 30, 2002

Quantitative Scanning Capacitance Spectroscopy on GaAs and InAs Quantum Dots

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA College of Engineering Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences. EECS 130 Professor Ali Javey Fall 2006

OPTI510R: Photonics. Khanh Kieu College of Optical Sciences, University of Arizona Meinel building R.626

Supplementary Figures

Self-study problems and questions Processing and Device Technology, FFF110/FYSD13

DIFFUSION - Chapter 7

September 21, 2005, Wednesday

Lecture 0: Introduction

Stretching the Barriers An analysis of MOSFET Scaling. Presenters (in order) Zeinab Mousavi Stephanie Teich-McGoldrick Aseem Jain Jaspreet Wadhwa

Formation of Nanostructured Layers for Passivation of High Power Silicon Devices

Ion Implant Part 1. Saroj Kumar Patra, TFE4180 Semiconductor Manufacturing Technology. Norwegian University of Science and Technology ( NTNU )

Lecture 2. Introduction to semiconductors Structures and characteristics in semiconductors

Effects of Antimony Near SiO 2 /SiC Interfaces

Chapter 5 MOSFET Theory for Submicron Technology

Experimental and theoretical study of ultra-thin oxides

Electronic transport in low dimensional systems

arxiv:cond-mat/ v1 [cond-mat.mes-hall] 14 Jan 1999

Current mechanisms Exam January 27, 2012

A final review session will be offered on Thursday, May 10 from 10AM to 12noon in 521 Cory (the Hogan Room).

Lecture 2. Introduction to semiconductors Structures and characteristics in semiconductors. Fabrication of semiconductor sensor

Vapor Phase Doping with N-type Dopant into Silicon by Atmospheric Pressure Chemical Vapor Deposition

ABSTRACT I NTRODUCT ION

Section 12: Intro to Devices

Ch/ChE 140a Problem Set #3 2007/2008 SHOW ALL OF YOUR WORK! (190 Points Total) Due Thursday, February 28 th, 2008

Dopant Concentration Measurements by Scanning Force Microscopy

Supplementary Figure 1 Dark-field optical images of as prepared PMMA-assisted transferred CVD graphene films on silicon substrates (a) and the one

Supporting Information

Make sure the exam paper has 9 pages (including cover page) + 3 pages of data for reference

Advanced Topics In Solid State Devices EE290B. Will a New Milli-Volt Switch Replace the Transistor for Digital Applications?

Temperature Dependent Current-voltage Characteristics of P- type Crystalline Silicon Solar Cells Fabricated Using Screenprinting

Normally-Off GaN Field Effect Power Transistors: Device Design and Process Technology Development

Lecture #27. The Short Channel Effect (SCE)

Final Examination EE 130 December 16, 1997 Time allotted: 180 minutes

High-Precision Evaluation of Ultra-Shallow Impurity Profiles by Secondary Ion Mass Spectrometry

Lecture 04 Review of MOSFET

Single ion implantation for nanoelectronics and the application to biological systems. Iwao Ohdomari Waseda University Tokyo, Japan

Wafer Charging in Process Equipment and its Relationship to GMR Heads Charging Damage

The Devices: MOS Transistors

CMOS Transistors, Gates, and Wires

Terahertz sensing and imaging based on carbon nanotubes:

Electron Interferometer Formed with a Scanning Probe Tip and Quantum Point Contact Supplementary Information

EE410 vs. Advanced CMOS Structures

A 20 nm gate-length ultra-thin body p-mosfet with silicide source/drain

Monte Carlo simulation and experimental study of stopping power of lithography resist and its application in development of a CMOS/EE process

Ion Implantation. alternative to diffusion for the introduction of dopants essentially a physical process, rather than chemical advantages:

Vibration Studying of AFM Piezoelectric Microcantilever Subjected to Tip-Nanoparticle Interaction

2.76/2.760 Multiscale Systems Design & Manufacturing

Lecture 210 Physical Aspects of ICs (12/15/01) Page 210-1

Graphene photodetectors with ultra-broadband and high responsivity at room temperature

The drive to make devices smaller and faster

Spring Semester 2012 Final Exam

Instrumentation and Operation

Semiconductor Physics fall 2012 problems

Xing Sheng, 微纳光电子材料与器件工艺原理. Doping 掺杂. Xing Sheng 盛兴. Department of Electronic Engineering Tsinghua University

MOS Transistors. Prof. Krishna Saraswat. Department of Electrical Engineering Stanford University Stanford, CA

MOS Transistor I-V Characteristics and Parasitics

Digital Integrated Circuits A Design Perspective

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTION THROUGH SURFACE SUPERSTRUCTURES MEASURED BY MICROSCOPIC FOUR-POINT PROBES

Supplementary Figure 1 shows overall fabrication process and detailed illustrations are given

MOS Transistor Theory MOSFET Symbols Current Characteristics of MOSFET. MOS Symbols and Characteristics. nmos Enhancement Transistor

Chapter 12: Electrical Properties. RA l

Supporting Information

A HYDROGEN SENSITIVE Pd/GaN SCHOTTKY DIODE SENSOR

Modeling of the Substrate Current and Characterization of Traps in MOSFETs under Sub-Bandgap Photonic Excitation

EE115C Winter 2017 Digital Electronic Circuits. Lecture 3: MOS RC Model, CMOS Manufacturing

SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES Supplementary Note 1: Fabrication of Scanning Thermal Microscopy Probes

GHZ ELECTRICAL PROPERTIES OF CARBON NANOTUBES ON SILICON DIOXIDE MICRO BRIDGES

Semiconductor Detectors

Transcription:

MICRO-SCALE SHEET RESISTANCE MEASUREMENTS ON ULTRA SHALLOW JUNCTIONS Christian L. Petersen, Rong Lin, Dirch H. Petersen, Peter F. Nielsen CAPRES A/S, Burnaby, BC, Canada CAPRES A/S, Lyngby, Denmark We report a new method for measuring sheet resistance on implanted wafers by using micro-fabricated four-point probes with a tip-to-tip spacing of a few microns. These microscopic probes have a contact force five orders of magnitude smaller than conventional probes, and can perform local non-destructive Ultra Shallow Junction (USJ) sheet resistance measurements on both blanket and patterned wafers. We demonstrate this new technique on laser annealed wafers, measuring micro-scale sheet resistance variations on wafers that appear homogeneous when mapped with conventional four-point probes. The microscopic four-point probes detect stitching effects caused by laser spot overlap/misalignment during the annealing process. Our findings indicate that such local sheet resistance inhomogeneities average out in conventional four-point measurements, and that new metrology is therefore needed to fully characterize USJ wafers activated by laser anneal and other diffusion-less methods. INTRODUCTION A transistor in a semiconductor circuit consists of two implanted regions, called the source and drain, connected electrically by a channel under a gate electrode. The Source Drain Extension (SDE) is a shallow implant that interfaces the channel under the gate with the deep source and drain. As transistors are made smaller, the SDE must be made extremely shallow to create a high performance device [1]. Such SDE implants are termed Ultra-Shallow Junctions (USJs). Historically, macroscopic four-point probes have been the standard for measuring active dose in implanted wafers. A macroscopic fourpoint probe is a millimeter-sized device with four spring-loaded transition metal needles in a single row. When the needles press against a surface, a current driven through the outer two pins generates a detectable voltage across the inner pins. This four-point measurement technique has been used to measure sheet resistance on semiconductors for many years [2]. However, macroscopic four-point probes perform poorly on USJ, as the spring-loaded needles tend to create surface damage and film penetration [3]. The macroscopic probes also require large homogenous areas for measurements without edge artifacts, making it necessary to measure sheet resistance on expensive sacrificial wafers. Several new technologies attempt to improve this conventional sheet resistance metrology, including macroscopic probes with low contact force [4] and capacitive non-contact probes [5]. While addressing the penetration issue, these new probes are even larger than the conventional fourpoint probes. This paper introduces an alternative technology, microscopic four-point probes [6, 7]. These probes are very small, non-destructive, and rely on the same principle as the conventional probes. In this way they offer a simple and straightforward solution to both size and penetration issues of conventional sheet resistance metrology. MICROSCOPIC FOUR-POINT PROBES The microscopic four-point probes are siliconbased MEMS devices with arrays of micron-scale cantilever electrodes, as shown in Fig. 1. The cantilevers extend from the edge of a probe support, and consist of SiO 2 with a thin metallic coating [7]. The cantilevers are typically 10-30 µm long and 500 nm - 2 µm wide. The smallest tip-to-tip

Implant Sheet resistance Substrate Four-point probe Figure 1: Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) image of a microscopic four-point probe. The cantilever electrodes are 2 µm wide and 25 µm long. The tip-to-tip spacing spacing is 10 µm, 100 smaller than that of a conventional probe. spacing achieved with this technology is currently 1 µm. Several types of these probes with different electrode spacing and properties are commercially available [8]. The use of MEMS processing makes geometric variations minimal. This is in contrast to the conventional four-point probes where such variations make probe to probe calibrations necessary. The microscopic four-point probes need more elaborate electrical and mechanical interfacing than conventional probes. For example, the typical current set-point is 10-50µA, several orders of magnitudes smaller than before. A high-precision current source and a high-impedance electrometer must therefore be in close proximity to the probe in order to minimize electrical noise. The mechanical stability and resolution of the measurement system is also important. Submicron resolution is needed to ensure repeatable results, as well as to allow the probe cantilevers to touch down onto a sample without damage to the surface. The contact force is determined by the cantilever deflection, and is typically five to six orders of magnitude smaller than that of a conventional probe. In fact, the probe cantilevers form an elastic contact to the sample surface, and electrical contact is established through the native oxide Probe electrode spacing Figure 2: Schematic of four-point probe measurements on an implanted semiconductor surface as a function of probe electrode spacing. by an electrical breakdown mechanism. PROBING LENGTH SCALE One of the benefits of using a microscopic fourpoint probe is the increased surface sensitivity, as illustrated schematically in Fig. 2 for an implanted sample. It is intuitively clear that a measurement performed with a limiting small electrode spacing will reflect only transport in the implanted layer, irrespective of the substrate condition. On the other hand, a measurement performed with large electrode spacing will represent the parallel combination of the implant and the substrate. The transition electrode spacing separating these two regimes depends on the resistance area product of the interface in between implant and substrate as well as the sheet resistance of the two regions. In a simple model of two semiinfinite sheets this transition electrode spacing is given by [9] RA λ =, (1) R implant + R substrate where RA is the resistance area product of the interface, R implant is the implant sheet resistance and R substrate is the substrate sheet resistance.

Sheet Resistance [Ω/sq] 10 4 11nm 50nm 70nm 10 3 1 10 1 10 2 10 3 10 4 Probe electrode spacing [µm] Figure 3: Four-point measurements as a function of electrode spacing on 11 nm, 50 nm and 70 nm deep profiles. R substrate is related to the substrate resistivity ρ through R substrate = ρ/t, where t is the thickness of the substrate. In the case of Ultra Shallow Junctions, the interface is effectively a diode type barrier with a strongly non-linear behavior. The current density through the barrier can be expressed J = J s (e qv/kt 1), (2) where V is the potential across the interface and J s the saturation current density. If the potential across the interface is much smaller than the thermal voltage at 300 K, kt/q = 25.9 mv, this expression reduces to J = V J sq kt. (3) This is a valid approximation on USJ implants when measurements are performed at a current set-point of a few µa, leading to a potential drop on the order of a few mv between the inner electrodes (since typical USJ sheet resistance lies in a narrow range of 500-2000 Ω/sq). The potential across the barrier will only be a fraction of this inner electrode potential. In this regime, the resistance-area product RA for the barrier is RA = kt J s q. (4) R 4pp / R implant 1.1 1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 s=2mm s=10µm s=100µm s=1mm 0.4 10-7 10-6 10-5 10-4 10-3 10-2 Junction leakage [A/cm 2 ] Figure 4: Ratio of measured sheet resistance to actual sheet resistance for probes with electrode spacing 10 µm, 100 µm, 1 mm and 2 mm, as function of junction leakage current density. Typical leakage current densities are in the range of 10 7 to 10 3 A/cm 2. Inserting values in Eq. 4 and Eq. 1 then shows that USJ samples have a transition probe electrode spacing on the order of millimeters. Higher leakage current lead to smaller transition electrode spacing. High leakage current densities are common in USJ samples annealed by diffusion-less technologies such as laser anneal, and in samples with high substrate doping (either bulk or halo). Fig. 3 shows measurements on three semiconductor samples with profiles of 11 nm (diamond bullets), 50 nm (square bullets) and 70 nm (circle bullets) respectively. The microscopic fourpoint probe measurements were performed using micro-fabricated probes at probe spacing ranging from 3 to 300 µm. The macroscopic measurement was performed with a conventional needle probe. The current set-point was 50 µa. For all three samples, the measured sheet resistance forms a plateau at the smallest electrode spacing, and drops significantly at larger electrode spacing. This is as expected from Fig. 2. In the semi-infinite sheet approximation considered here, the measured sheet resistance of a

probe with spacing s is given by R 4pp = R implant R substrate R implant + R substrate 1 2π (5) ( 2R implant (K 0 ( s R substrate λ ) K 0( 2s λ )) + log 4), where K 0 is the modified Bessel function of the second kind of order zero. The substrate sheet resistance was R substrate = 15 Ω/sq. A fit of the data in Fig. 3 to Eq. 5 then leads to R implant = 30.3 10 3 Ω/sq and λ = 0.55 mm for the 11 nm sample, R implant = 3006 Ω/sq and λ = 1.92 mm for the 50 nm sample and R implant = 1847 Ω/sq and λ = 5.66 mm for the 70 nm sample. The fitted theoretical predictions are shown as solid lines in Fig. 3. Eq. 4 and Eq. 5 can be used to calculate the deviation in measured sheet resistance for different probe spacing as a function of junction leakage. This is illustrated in Fig. 4 for R implant = R substrate = 1000 Ω/sq. The figure shows the ratio of measured sheet resistance to actual sheet resistance. It is clear that a conventional millimeter sized four-point probe measures significantly lower than the actual value at current leakage densities above 10 5 A/cm 2. On the other hand, a microscopic probe with 10µm spacing is seen to remain accurate in the entire range considered. MICROSCOPIC MAPPING The closely spaced pins of the microscopic four-point probe make it possible to image sheet resistance at high resolution. This enables detection of local features that average out when conventional large probes are used. An example of such micro-scale features is shown in Fig. 5. This figure shows local sheet resistance measurements in an implanted wafer activated by laser anneal. The periodic sheet resistance variations are due to a laser spot stitching effect. The periodic variations, although dramatic, are invisible in a conventional four-point probe wafer map. The measurement in Fig. 5 has a period of about 20 µm. Many other laser annealed samples Sheet resistance [Ω/sq] 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 position [µm] Figure 5: Micro-scale sheet resistance line scan on a laser annealed implanted wafer. The probe spacing was 3.0 µm. have been measured, and they all exhibit microscale features. The period varies depending on the particularities of the different laser anneal tools used. Similar micro-scale sheet resistance variations are likely to be present in other types of advanced USJ activation methods as well, due to interference and pattern effects. It is critically important to control these microscale sheet resistance artifacts, and metrology is needed to visualize them. Micro-scale four-point probes offer a straightforward solution. SHEET RESISTANCE ON PRODUCT WAFERS Blanket test wafers are an increasing problem in semiconductor manufacturing as the wafers are becoming prohibitively expensive. Blanket wafers for four-point probe testing in the implant/anneal cycle alone already costs semiconductor fabs millions of dollars per year. Microscopic four-point probes make it possible to measure sheet resistance on product wafers. A four-point probe needs a homogenous surface area much wider than the probe spacing in order

Correction factor 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 d s 0 10 20 30 40 d/s Figure 6: The four-point probe geometric correction factor as function of the ratio between sample width d and electrode spacing s for a probe centered on a square sample. The dotted line represents the limit of an infinite sheet (d ). to make a measurement without geometry artifacts. This is illustrated in Fig. 6. The geometric error is less than 1% only when the ratio of spacing to sample width is larger than 30. This means that a conventional four-point probe needs an area at least 3 cm wide in order to make good measurements. On the other hand, a microscopic probe with 1 µm spacing is able to make an accurate measurement in a area of just 30 µm in width. It is thus possible to perform accurate measurements in a box the size of a typical bonding pad, and sheet resistance probing can be moved from blanket wafers to product wafer scribe lines or test dies. In addition to eliminating test wafers, moving sheet resistance metrology onto the product wafers can improve measurement accuracy and thus potentially improve process control and qualification. CONCLUSION We have demonstrated how microscopic fourpoint probes can improve conventional sheet resistance metrology on USJ. The microscopic probes do not penetrate the extremely thin junctions, and the small electrode spacing ensures that the measurements reflect only transport in the implanted layer, irrespective of the substrate doping and junction leakage. Conventional four-point probes have been shown to measure values that are too low if the junction leakage is high. This effect is present even when no penetration occur. High junction leakage is known to appear when activation is done by diffusion-less methods such as laser anneal. We have shown how microscopic four-point probes can be used to resolve local sheet resistance variations which average out in conventional four-point probing. This is of particular importance where local variations appear due to inhomogeneous annealing processes. Finally, we have shown how it is possible to make accurate sheet resistance measurements without geometric corrections using microscopic four-point probes centered in boxes as small as 30 µm square. This makes it possible for the first time to perform true sheet resistance measurements on product wafers. In this way, microscopic four-point probes offer a powerful method for USJ sheet resistance characterization, that address all of the shortcomings of the conventional technology. The authors thank Wilfried Vandervorst and Trudo Clarysse from IMEC for provision of samples. REFERENCES [1] International technology roadmap for semiconductors. [Online]. Available: www.itrs.net [2] F. M. Smits, Bell Sys. Tech. J., vol. 37, p. 711, 1958. [3] T. Clarysse, A. Moussa, F. Leys, R. Loo, W. Vandervorst, B. M. C., R. J. Hillard, V. N. Faifer, M. I. Current, R. Lin, and D. H. Petersen, Mat. Res. Soc. Proc., vol. 912, p. C5.7, 2006. [4] R. J. Hillard, R. G. Mazur, W. J. Alexander, C. Win Ye, M. C. Benjamin, and J. O. Bor-

land, Mat. Res. Soc. Proc., vol. 810, p. C11.6, 2004. [5] V. N. Faifer, M. I. Current, T. M. H. Wong, and V. V. Souchkov, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B, vol. 24, p. 414, 2006. [6] C. L. Petersen, F. Grey, I. Shiraki, and S. Hasegawa, Appl. Phys. Lett., vol. 77, p. 3782, 2000. [7] C. L. Petersen, T. M. Hansen, P. Bøggild, A. Boisen, O. Hansen, T. Hassenkam, and F. Grey, Sensors and Actuators A, vol. 96, p. 53, 2002. [8] [Online]. Available: www.capres.com [9] D. C. Worledge and P. L. Trouilloud, Appl. Phys. Lett., vol. 83, p. 84, 2003.