Paper
2 June 2000 Paradigm for selecting the optimum classifier in semiconductor automatic defect classification applications
Martin A. Hunt, James S. Goddard Jr., James A. Mullens, Regina K. Ferrell, Bobby R. Whitus, Ariel Ben-Porath
Author Affiliations +
Abstract
The automatic classification of defects found on semiconductor wafers using a scanning electron microscope (SEM) is a complex task that involves many steps. The process includes re- detecting the defect, measuring attributes of the defect, and automatically assigning a classification. In many cases, especially during product ramp-up, and when multiple products are manufactured in the same line, there are few training examples for an automatic defect classification (ADC) system. This condition presents a problem for traditional supervised parametric and nonparametric learning techniques. In this paper we investigate the attributes of several approaches to ADC and compare their performance under a variety of available training data scenarios. We have selected to characterize the attributes and performance of a traditional K-nearest neighbor classifier, probabilistic neural network (PNN), and rule-based classifier in the context of SEM ADC. The PNN classifier is a nonparametric supervised classifier that is built around a radial basis function (RBF) neural network architecture. A basic summary of the PNN will be presented along with the generic strengths and weakness described in the literature and observed with actual semiconductor defect data. The PNN classifier is able to manage conditions such as non-convex class distributions and single class multiple clusters in feature space. A rule-based classifier producing built-in core classes provided by the Applied Materials SEMVision tool will be characterized in the context of both few examples and no examples. An extensive set of fab generated data is used to characterize the performance of these ADC approaches. Typical data sets contain from 30 to greater than 200. The number of classes in the data set range from 4 to more than 12. The conclusions reached from this analysis indicate that the strengths of each method are evident under specific conditions that are related to different stages within the VLSI yield curve, and to the number of different products in the line.
© (2000) COPYRIGHT Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE). Downloading of the abstract is permitted for personal use only.
Martin A. Hunt, James S. Goddard Jr., James A. Mullens, Regina K. Ferrell, Bobby R. Whitus, and Ariel Ben-Porath "Paradigm for selecting the optimum classifier in semiconductor automatic defect classification applications", Proc. SPIE 3998, Metrology, Inspection, and Process Control for Microlithography XIV, (2 June 2000); https://doi.org/10.1117/12.386481
Advertisement
Advertisement
RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS
Get copyright permission  Get copyright permission on Copyright Marketplace
KEYWORDS
Semiconductors

Scanning electron microscopy

Neural networks

Semiconducting wafers

Defect detection

Electron microscopes

Manufacturing

Back to Top