Extreme Ultra-Violet Lithography (EUVL) keeps hurting my brain. Just when I can understand how it could be used in profitable commercial high-volume manufacturing (HVM) I hear something that seriously strains my brain. First it was the mirrors and mask in vacuum, then it was the resist and pellicle, then it was the source power and availability, and in each case scientists and engineers did amazing work and showed a way to HVM. Now we hear that EUVL might require fabs to park work-in-progress (WIP) lots of wafers behind a single critical tool with an idealistic 80% availability on a good day, and lots of downtime bad days. Horrors!
For “5nm-node” designs the maximum allowable edge placement-error (EPE) in patterning overlay is only 2nm. While the physics of ~13.5nm wavelength EUVL means that aberration in the reflecting mirrors appears as up to 3nm variation in the fidelity of projected patterns. This variation can be measured and compensated for at the physical mask level, but then each mask would only be good for one specific exposure tool. John Sturtevant—SPIE Fellow, and director of RET product development in the Design to Silicon Division at Mentor Graphics—briefly discussed this on February 26th during Nikon LithoVision held just before SPIE Advanced Lithography.
Sturtevant explained that the Zernike coefficients for EUV are inherently almost 1 order-of-magnitude higher than for DUV at 193nm wavelength, as detailed in the SemiMD article “Edge Placement Error Control in Multi-Patterning.” How the inherent physical sources of aberration must be tightened to avoid image distortion and contrast loss as they scale with wavelength was discussed by by Fenger et al. in 2013 in the article “Extreme ultraviolet lithography resist-based aberration metrology” (doi:10.1117/1.JMM.12.4.043001).
In an article published in the most recent issue of imec’s online magazine (http://magazine.imec.be/) titled “Chips must learn how to feel pain and how to cure themselves,” researchers Francky Chatthoor and Guido Groeseneken discuss how to build reliable “5nm-node” ICs out of inherently unreliable transistors. Variability in “zero time” and “over time” performance of individual transistors cannot be controlled below the “7nm-node” using traditional guard-banding in IC design.
“Maybe it means the end of the guard-band approach, but certainly not the end of scaling,” says Groeseneken in the article. “In our research group we measure and tried to understand reliability issues in scaled devices. In the 40nm technology, it is still possible to cope with the reliability issues of the devices and make a good system. But at 7nm, the unreliability of the devices risks to affect the whole system. And conventional design techniques can’t stop this from happening. New design paradigms are therefore urgently needed.” These researchers predict that industry will have to manufacture self-healing chips by the year 2025.
Self-healing chips could use the workload variation of the system for their benefit. Based on a deterministic predictor of the future, future slack is determined and used to compensate for the delay error and mitigate at peak load. (Source: imec)
The ultimate goal of imec and its academic partners is to develop a fully proactive parametric reliability mitigation technique with distributed monitors, a control system and actuators, fully preventing the consequence of delay faults and potentially also of functional faults. Said Catthour, “the secret to the solution lies in the work load variation of the system. Based on a deterministic predictor of the future, you determine future slack and use this to compensate for the delay error at peak load. Based on this info on the future, you change the scheduling order and the assignment of operations.” The Figure shows how self-healing chips can use future slack to compensate for delay error and mitigate at peak load.