Figures 9(a) and 9(b) represent the CD error to print 22 nm L/S on wafer as functions of the phase defect volume and width, respectively. A4, A5, and A6 are not shown because these phase defects caused lines bridging defects on the wafer, as shown in Fig. 8(a). Judging the influence of different size phase defects in the same block on a printed CD, the larger phase defects caused greater CD errors. However, compared with phase defects between groups A, B, and C, there are relatively weak correlations between the phase defect size and CD error. For example, among the phase defects in blocks A and C, the phase defect in block C was the largest in volume and width but had the least influence on the wafer printed CD. On the other hand, as shown in Figs. 9(c) and 9(d), the CD errors caused by the phase defects in blocks A, B, and C were almost linear with respect to the defect depths and DSIs. Linear regression analysis showed strong correlations between the defect depth and CD error, and DSI and CD error. The coefficient of correlation values were 0.89 and 0.97, respectively, whereas the correlation factors between the phase defect volume and CD error, and the defect width and CD error were only 0.75 and 0.44, respectively. Such a strong correlation, especially between the DSI and CD error, allowed distinguishing the lithographic impacts caused by the phase defects A2 and B1 that had DSIs of 0.21 and 0.25, respectively, although the difference in the volume was negligibly small. These phase defects caused CD errors of and , respectively. As a result, the printed CD error had a strong correlation with DSI and defect depth rather than the phase defect volume and width.