Date of download: 9/18/2016 Copyright © 2016 SPIE. All rights reserved. Fin structure with thin films deposited on top. (a) Typical top-down CD-SEM fragment of image. (b) Typical X-SEM lateral image to clarify some of the profile details (note that the HK and IL are too thin to be clearly visible—the thick “spacer-like” layer is a sample preparation artifact and hence not present on the measured structure). Figure Legend: From: Hybrid metrology co-optimization of critical dimension scanning electron microscope and optical critical dimension J. Micro/Nanolith. MEMS MOEMS. 2014;13(4): doi: /1.JMM

Date of download: 9/18/2016 Copyright © 2016 SPIE. All rights reserved. OCD model of the fin indicating some of the parameters of interest. Some modeled profile details include two-trapezoid geometries for the fin and trench, double-patterning effects on the trench, and fin alignment. Figure Legend: From: Hybrid metrology co-optimization of critical dimension scanning electron microscope and optical critical dimension J. Micro/Nanolith. MEMS MOEMS. 2014;13(4): doi: /1.JMM

Date of download: 9/18/2016 Copyright © 2016 SPIE. All rights reserved. Schematics of hybrid metrology implementations (example using a server-based configuration). (a) Sequential hybridization; (b) co- optimization. Figure Legend: From: Hybrid metrology co-optimization of critical dimension scanning electron microscope and optical critical dimension J. Micro/Nanolith. MEMS MOEMS. 2014;13(4): doi: /1.JMM

Date of download: 9/18/2016 Copyright © 2016 SPIE. All rights reserved. Schematics of the CD-SEM image analysis with algorithm parameter C (threshold) indicated on the histogram. Figure Legend: From: Hybrid metrology co-optimization of critical dimension scanning electron microscope and optical critical dimension J. Micro/Nanolith. MEMS MOEMS. 2014;13(4): doi: /1.JMM

Date of download: 9/18/2016 Copyright © 2016 SPIE. All rights reserved. CD-SEM measurement of CD using different settings for algorithm parameters A and B for all six DOE wafers. All settings measure the same CD trend (great overlap, possibly slightly different noise levels between settings). Figure Legend: From: Hybrid metrology co-optimization of critical dimension scanning electron microscope and optical critical dimension J. Micro/Nanolith. MEMS MOEMS. 2014;13(4): doi: /1.JMM

Date of download: 9/18/2016 Copyright © 2016 SPIE. All rights reserved. CD extracted with CD-SEM using different settings for algorithm C. There is a quasi-constant offset depending on the threshold selected which suggests that either the fin profile is very similar for all measured points or that the algorithm is rather insensitive to profile. Figure Legend: From: Hybrid metrology co-optimization of critical dimension scanning electron microscope and optical critical dimension J. Micro/Nanolith. MEMS MOEMS. 2014;13(4): doi: /1.JMM

Date of download: 9/18/2016 Copyright © 2016 SPIE. All rights reserved. OCD measurements of CD along fin indicate the different profile between wafers. Figure Legend: From: Hybrid metrology co-optimization of critical dimension scanning electron microscope and optical critical dimension J. Micro/Nanolith. MEMS MOEMS. 2014;13(4): doi: /1.JMM

Date of download: 9/18/2016 Copyright © 2016 SPIE. All rights reserved. “Standard” OCD results for the parameters of interest, and comparison to reference (where available). Normalized TMU and R2 metrics are used to represent the quality of the correlation of the standard OCD HK thickness measurements to the reference measurements. Figure Legend: From: Hybrid metrology co-optimization of critical dimension scanning electron microscope and optical critical dimension J. Micro/Nanolith. MEMS MOEMS. 2014;13(4): doi: /1.JMM

Date of download: 9/18/2016 Copyright © 2016 SPIE. All rights reserved. Hybrid co-optimization results. The threshold of CD-SEM algorithm C is modulated using OCD profile details, which in turn are refined using the corrected CD data from the CD-SEM [algorithm parameter C=f(OCD SWA)]. Figure Legend: From: Hybrid metrology co-optimization of critical dimension scanning electron microscope and optical critical dimension J. Micro/Nanolith. MEMS MOEMS. 2014;13(4): doi: /1.JMM

Date of download: 9/18/2016 Copyright © 2016 SPIE. All rights reserved. Hybrid co-optimization results on IL DOE wafers. There is an improved response to the DOE conditions and less variation across wafer demonstrated by co-optimization HM versus non-HM. Figure Legend: From: Hybrid metrology co-optimization of critical dimension scanning electron microscope and optical critical dimension J. Micro/Nanolith. MEMS MOEMS. 2014;13(4): doi: /1.JMM

Date of download: 9/18/2016 Copyright © 2016 SPIE. All rights reserved. Flowchart for hybrid co-optimization setup. Figure Legend: From: Hybrid metrology co-optimization of critical dimension scanning electron microscope and optical critical dimension J. Micro/Nanolith. MEMS MOEMS. 2014;13(4): doi: /1.JMM

Date of download: 9/18/2016 Copyright © 2016 SPIE. All rights reserved. Flowchart for hybrid co-optimization in production. Figure Legend: From: Hybrid metrology co-optimization of critical dimension scanning electron microscope and optical critical dimension J. Micro/Nanolith. MEMS MOEMS. 2014;13(4): doi: /1.JMM