Evaluation of permissible pixel positioning errors for displaying computer-generated holograms in projection photolithography

Koreshev S.N., Starovoitov S.O., Smorodinov D.S. Evaluation of permissible pixel positioning errors for displaying computer-generated holograms in projection photolithography. Scientific and Technical Journal of Information Technologies,

Mechanics and Optics, 2021, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 352–360 (in Russian). doi: 10.17586/2226-1494-2021-21-3-352-360

The authors carried out the estimation of the permissible positioning errors when displaying reflective phase holograms intended for application in holographic photolithography on solid media using electron-beam lithography devices. The work deals with the projection of holographic photolithography based on computer generated Fresnel holograms. The synthesis of holograms involved mathematical modeling of the physical processes of hologram recording and reconstruction using the following parameters: the characteristic size of the binary object is 20 × 20 nm or 80 × 80 nm, the wavelength of the radiation is 13.5 nm, the pixel size of the hologram is 20 × 20 nm, the distance between the planes of the object and the hologram is from 20.4 to 31.6 microns, the angle of incidence of the reference wave is 14º42′. For each of the three objects used in the modeling (namely, “Angles”, “Line grid target” and “Enlarged angles”), four computer-generated holograms were synthesized with different values for standard deviation of the pixel positioning error. The simulation of these errors was carried out by violating the equidistance of the points (pixels) on the hologram aperture. The holograms distorted in this way were subjected to the standard procedure of numerical reconstruction in virtual space. Comparison of the quality of the images obtained at different values of the positioning errors of the hologram pixels made it possible to evaluate their influence on the quality of the reconstructed image. It has been shown that the criterion used for estimating the permissible value of the positioning error in analog holography cannot be applied to synthesized holograms, because of the peculiar properties of interference fringes in discrete holograms. The results demonstrated a significant dependence of the permissible (in terms of image quality) pixel positioning errors on the object presentation method. The analysis revealed the impossibility of applying a single tolerance for pixel positioning errors to all possible synthesis conditions of computer-generated holograms and hence indicates the necessity of including a feature for estimating permissible hologram positioning errors into the software package for the synthesis and reconstruction of holograms. Based on the analysis of the technological parameters of modern electron-beam lithography devices, the authors confirmed the possibility of their use for manufacturing computer-generated holograms in modern high-resolution photolithography. Modeling the permissible positioning errors of computer-generated holograms by the proposed method allows evaluating the practical possibility of producing holograms with the required structure and high quality of the reconstructed image with a specific electron beam lithography device.

1. Maiden A., McWilliam R., Purvis A., Johnson S., Williams G.L., Seed N.L., Ivey P.A. Nonplanar photolithography with computer-generated holograms. Optics Letters, 2005, vol. 30, no. 11, pp. 1300–1302. doi: 10.1364/OL.30.001300

2. Naulleau P.P., Salmassi F., Cullikson E.M., Liddle J.A. Design and fabrication of a high-efficiency extreme-ultraviolet binary phase-only computer-generated hologram. Applied Optics, 2007, vol. 46, no. 14, pp. 2581–2585. doi: 10.1364/AO.46.002581

3. Cheng Y.-C., Isoyan A., Wallace J., Khan M. Cerrina F. Extreme ultraviolet holographic lithography: Initial results. Applied Physics Letters, 2007, vol. 90, no. 2, pp. 023116. doi: 10.1063/1.2430774

4. Bay C., Hübner N., Freeman J., Wilkinson T. Maskless photolithography via holographic optical projection. Optics Letters, 2010, vol. 35, no. 13, pp. 2230–2232. doi: 10.1364/OL.35.002230

5. Gusev A.I. Nanomaterials, Nanostructures, Nanotechnologies. Moscow, Fizmatlit Publ., 2007, 416 p. (in Russian)

6. Gao F., Zhu J., Huang Q., Zhang Y., Zeng Y., Gao F., Guo Y., Cui Z. Electron-beam lithography to improve quality of computer-generated hologram. Microelectronic Engineering, 2002, vol. 61-62, pp. 363–369. doi: 10.1016/S0167-9317(02)00570-1

7. Freese W., Kämpfe T., Rockstroh W., Kley E.B., Tünnermann A. Optimized electron beam writing strategy for fabricating computer-generated holograms based on an effective medium approach. Optics Express, 2011, vol. 19, no. 9, pp. 8684–8692. doi: 10.1364/OE.19.008684

8. Tamura H., Ishii Y. Computer-generated hologram fabricated by electron-beam lithography for noise reduction. Optical Review, 2012, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 50–57. doi: 10.1007/s10043-012-0012-z

9. Koreshev S.N. Holographic Optical Elements and Devices. St. Petersburg, NIU ITMO, 2013, 143 p. (in Russian)

10. Plebanovich V. Maskless lithography is a current requirement. Electronics: Science, Technology, Business, 2015, no. 7(147), pp. 112–118. (in Russian)

11. Koreshev S.N., Starovoitov S.O., Smorodinov D.S., Frolova M.A. Quality assessment of binary object images reconstructed by computer-generated holograms. Scientific and Technical Journal of Information Technologies, Mechanics and Optics, 2020, vol. 20, no. 3(127), pp. 327–334. (in Russian). doi: 10.17586/2226-1494-2020-20-3-327-334

12. Koreshev S.N., Smorodinov D.S., Starovoitov S.O., Frolova M.A. Influence of the structure of the object beam on the quality of images reconstructed using a synthesized Fresnel hologram-projector. Journal of Optical Technology, 2020, vol. 87, no. 7, pp. 417–421. doi: 10.1364/JOT.87.000417

13. Koreshev S.N., Smorodinov D.S., Nikanorov O.V. Influence of the discreteness of synthetic and digital holograms on their imaging properties. Computer Optics, vol. 40, no. 6, pp. 793–801. (in Russian). doi: 10.18287/2412-6179-2016-40-6-793-801

14. Aida Y. Development of the JBX-8100FS electron beam lithography system. Jeol News, 2018, vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 59–62.

15. Greibe T., Anhøj T.A., Johansen L.S., Han A. Quality control of JEOL JBX-9500FSZ e-beam lithography system in a multi-user laboratory. Microelectronic Engineering, 2016, vol. 155, pp. 25–28. doi: 10.1016/j.mee.2016.02.003

16. Koreshev S.N., Ratushnyǐ V.P. Polyfunctionality of relief-phase reflective holographic optical element. Journal of Optical Technology, 2001, vol. 68, no. 12, pp. 889–892. doi: 10.1364/JOT.68.000889

17. Jagoszewski E. The influence of the hologram surface curvature on the holographic imaging quality. Optik, 1985, vol. 69, no. 2, pp. 85–88.

18. Maréchal A., Françon M. Diffraction, structure des images: influece de la coherence de la lumiere. Paris, Éditions de la Revue d'optique théorique et instrumentale, 1960, 204 p. (in French)

19. Koreshev S.N. On construction of recording schemes for a holographic structure on the surface of the primary adaptive telescope mirror and on requirements for their geometrical parameters. Optics and Spectroscopy, 1994, vol. 76, no. 1, pp. 101–106.

20. Johnson S. Stephen Johnson on Digital Photography. USA, Sebastopol, CA, O’Reilly Media, Inc., 2006, 305 p.

21. Ezhova K.V. Image Modeling and Processing. St. Petersburg, NIU ITMO, 2011, 93 p. (in Russian)

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License