1. Date of download: 5/29/2016 Copyright © 2016 SPIE. All rights reserved. Setup for mask diffraction analysis. The upper bold arrow indicates the illumination direction. The lower bold arrows symbolize the directions of the resulting lowest diffraction orders. The sketched case presents the normal diffraction—direction of the incident light inside the plane of incidence (xz plane). In the more general conical case, the incidence direction has a nonzero y component as well. Figure Legend: From: Rigorous electromagnetic field mask modeling and related lithographic effects in the low k1 and ultrahigh numerical aperture regime J. Micro/Nanolith. MEMS MOEMS. 2007;6(3):031002-031002-16. doi:10.1117/1.2778447

2. Date of download: 5/29/2016 Copyright © 2016 SPIE. All rights reserved. Diffraction analysis for a standard MoSi-type AttPSM with dense lines/spaces for vertical incidence (φ=0). Left/upper: diffraction efficiency η of the zeroth order. Left/lower: diffraction efficiency η of the first order. Right/upper: fraction of polarization (FOP) for zero- and first-order WG results only. Right lower: phase difference between zero and first order. WG-xpol, WG-ypol: waveguide result for x- and y-polarized light, respectively. All simulation parameters as specified in Table. Figure Legend: From: Rigorous electromagnetic field mask modeling and related lithographic effects in the low k1 and ultrahigh numerical aperture regime J. Micro/Nanolith. MEMS MOEMS. 2007;6(3):031002-031002-16. doi:10.1117/1.2778447

3. Date of download: 5/29/2016 Copyright © 2016 SPIE. All rights reserved. Diffraction analysis for a single-layer AttPSM with dense lines/spaces for vertical incidence (φ=0) and variation of the refractive index n of the absorber layer. The extinction k and the thickness d of the absorber layer were varied together with n according to Eqs. with the reference values of the standard MoSi stack. Upper row: diffraction efficiencies η of the zero order and y/TE-, x/TM-polarization and resulting FOP values. Lower row: diffraction efficiencies η of the first order and y/TE-, x/TM-polarization and resulting FOP values. All simulation parameters as specified in Table. Figure Legend: From: Rigorous electromagnetic field mask modeling and related lithographic effects in the low k1 and ultrahigh numerical aperture regime J. Micro/Nanolith. MEMS MOEMS. 2007;6(3):031002-031002-16. doi:10.1117/1.2778447

4. Date of download: 5/29/2016 Copyright © 2016 SPIE. All rights reserved. Diffraction analysis for a bilayer AttPSM with dense lines/spaces for vertical incidence (φ=0) and variation of the refractive index n of the shifter layer. The extinction k and the thickness d of the shifter layer were varied together with n according to Eqs. with the reference values of the SiO2 layer in the Ta∕SiO2 stack from Table. Upper row: diffraction efficiencies η of the zero order and y/TE-, x/TM-polarization and resulting FOP values. Lower row: diffraction efficiencies η of the first order and y/TE-, x/TM-polarization and resulting FOP values. All simulation parameters as specified in Table. Figure Legend: From: Rigorous electromagnetic field mask modeling and related lithographic effects in the low k1 and ultrahigh numerical aperture regime J. Micro/Nanolith. MEMS MOEMS. 2007;6(3):031002-031002-16. doi:10.1117/1.2778447

5. Date of download: 5/29/2016 Copyright © 2016 SPIE. All rights reserved. Diffraction analysis for a bilayer AttPSM with dense lines/spaces for vertical incidence (φ=0) and variation of the extinction k of the absorber layer. The refractive index n and the thickness d of the absorber layer were varied together with k according to Eqs. with the reference values of the Ta layer in the Ta∕SiO2 stack from Table. Upper row: diffraction efficiencies η of the zero order and y/TE-, x/TM-polarization and resulting FOP values. Lower row: diffraction efficiencies η of the first order and y/TE-, x/TM-polarization and resulting FOP values. All simulation parameters as specified in Table. Figure Legend: From: Rigorous electromagnetic field mask modeling and related lithographic effects in the low k1 and ultrahigh numerical aperture regime J. Micro/Nanolith. MEMS MOEMS. 2007;6(3):031002-031002-16. doi:10.1117/1.2778447

6. Date of download: 5/29/2016 Copyright © 2016 SPIE. All rights reserved. Diffraction analysis for different mask stacks with dense lines/spaces variation of the incidence direction φ, normal diffraction or variation of the incidence direction in the xz plane of Fig.. Upper row: FOP values for zero diffraction order. Lower row: FOP values for zero diffraction order. All simulation parameters as specified in Table. Figure Legend: From: Rigorous electromagnetic field mask modeling and related lithographic effects in the low k1 and ultrahigh numerical aperture regime J. Micro/Nanolith. MEMS MOEMS. 2007;6(3):031002-031002-16. doi:10.1117/1.2778447

7. Date of download: 5/29/2016 Copyright © 2016 SPIE. All rights reserved. Diffraction analysis for different mask stacks with dense lines/spaces variation of the incidence direction φ, conical diffraction or variation of the incidence direction in the yz plane of Fig.. Upper row: FOP values for zero diffraction order. Lower row: FOP values for zero diffraction order. All simulation parameters as specified in Table. Figure Legend: From: Rigorous electromagnetic field mask modeling and related lithographic effects in the low k1 and ultrahigh numerical aperture regime J. Micro/Nanolith. MEMS MOEMS. 2007;6(3):031002-031002-16. doi:10.1117/1.2778447

8. Date of download: 5/29/2016 Copyright © 2016 SPIE. All rights reserved. Resist image cross sections for different model options and duty ratios versus the IPS value. Water immersion lithography with a target of 45nm, MoSi-standard stack, dipole illumination, and all other settings according to Tables. Figure Legend: From: Rigorous electromagnetic field mask modeling and related lithographic effects in the low k1 and ultrahigh numerical aperture regime J. Micro/Nanolith. MEMS MOEMS. 2007;6(3):031002-031002-16. doi:10.1117/1.2778447

9. Date of download: 5/29/2016 Copyright © 2016 SPIE. All rights reserved. Simulated process windows for different model options and duty ratios versus the IPS value. Water immersion lithography with a target of 45nm, MoSi-standard stack, dipole illumination, and all other settings according to Tables. Figure Legend: From: Rigorous electromagnetic field mask modeling and related lithographic effects in the low k1 and ultrahigh numerical aperture regime J. Micro/Nanolith. MEMS MOEMS. 2007;6(3):031002-031002-16. doi:10.1117/1.2778447

10. Date of download: 5/29/2016 Copyright © 2016 SPIE. All rights reserved. Simulated CD values and dose latitudes for different model options and duty ratios versus the IPS value. The dose latitude was extracted for a given DOF of 50nm. Water immersion lithography with a target of 45nm, MoSi-standard stack, dipole illumination, and all other settings according to Tables. Figure Legend: From: Rigorous electromagnetic field mask modeling and related lithographic effects in the low k1 and ultrahigh numerical aperture regime J. Micro/Nanolith. MEMS MOEMS. 2007;6(3):031002-031002-16. doi:10.1117/1.2778447

11. Date of download: 5/29/2016 Copyright © 2016 SPIE. All rights reserved. Simulated dose latitude sensitivities of dense (duty 1:1, left) and semidense (duty 1:2, right) lines for different model options and technology generations. The dose latitude was extracted for given DOF of 75, 50, and 25nm for dry, water, and oil immersion, respectively. MoSi-standard stack, dipole illumination, and all other settings according to Tables. Figure Legend: From: Rigorous electromagnetic field mask modeling and related lithographic effects in the low k1 and ultrahigh numerical aperture regime J. Micro/Nanolith. MEMS MOEMS. 2007;6(3):031002-031002-16. doi:10.1117/1.2778447

12. Date of download: 5/29/2016 Copyright © 2016 SPIE. All rights reserved. Simulated dose latitude sensitivities of dense (duty 1:1, left) and semidense (duty 1:2, right) lines for different illuminations and mask stacks. The dose latitude was extracted for given DOF of 50nm. Technology: water immersion, model WG NoHopkins, and all other settings according to Tables. Figure Legend: From: Rigorous electromagnetic field mask modeling and related lithographic effects in the low k1 and ultrahigh numerical aperture regime J. Micro/Nanolith. MEMS MOEMS. 2007;6(3):031002-031002-16. doi:10.1117/1.2778447

13. Date of download: 5/29/2016 Copyright © 2016 SPIE. All rights reserved. Simulated dose latitude sensitivities of dense (duty 1:1, left) and semidense (duty 1:2, right) lines for different technology generations and AttPSM mask stacks. The dose latitude was extracted for given DOF of 75, 50, and 25nm for dry, water, and oil immersion, respectively. Illumination: dipole, model: WG NoHopkins, and all other settings according to Tables. Figure Legend: From: Rigorous electromagnetic field mask modeling and related lithographic effects in the low k1 and ultrahigh numerical aperture regime J. Micro/Nanolith. MEMS MOEMS. 2007;6(3):031002-031002-16. doi:10.1117/1.2778447

14. Date of download: 5/29/2016 Copyright © 2016 SPIE. All rights reserved. Simulated dose latitude sensitivities of dense (duty 1:1, left) and semidense (duty 1:2, right) lines for different technology generations and binary mask stacks. The dose latitude was extracted for given DOF of 75, 50, and 25nm for dry, water, and oil immersion, respectively. Illumination: dipole, model: WG NoHopkins, and all other settings according to Tables. Figure Legend: From: Rigorous electromagnetic field mask modeling and related lithographic effects in the low k1 and ultrahigh numerical aperture regime J. Micro/Nanolith. MEMS MOEMS. 2007;6(3):031002-031002-16. doi:10.1117/1.2778447

15. Date of download: 5/29/2016 Copyright © 2016 SPIE. All rights reserved. Simulated CD sensitivities (upper row) and dose latitude sensitivities (lower row) of semidense (duty 1:2) lines for different technology generations and illuminations versus the refractive index n of a single absorber layer. The extinction k and the thickness d of the absorber layer were varied together with n according to equations with the reference values of the standard MoSi stack. The dose latitude was extracted for given DOF of 75, 50, and 25nm for dry, water, and oil immersion, respectively. Model: WG NoHopkins; all other settings according to Tables. Figure Legend: From: Rigorous electromagnetic field mask modeling and related lithographic effects in the low k1 and ultrahigh numerical aperture regime J. Micro/Nanolith. MEMS MOEMS. 2007;6(3):031002-031002-16. doi:10.1117/1.2778447

16. Date of download: 5/29/2016 Copyright © 2016 SPIE. All rights reserved. Simulated CD sensitivities (upper row) and dose latitude sensitivities (lower row) of semidense (duty 1:2) lines for different illuminations versus the refractive index n of the shifter layer (left) and the extinction k of the absorber layer (right) of a bilayer AttPSM. The extinction k and the thickness d of the absorber layer were varied together with n according to Eqs. with the reference values of the Ta∕SiO2 stack from Table. The dose latitude was extracted for given DOF of 50nm. Water immersion lithography, model: WG NoHopkins; all other settings according to Tables. Figure Legend: From: Rigorous electromagnetic field mask modeling and related lithographic effects in the low k1 and ultrahigh numerical aperture regime J. Micro/Nanolith. MEMS MOEMS. 2007;6(3):031002-031002-16. doi:10.1117/1.2778447

17. Date of download: 5/29/2016 Copyright © 2016 SPIE. All rights reserved. Simulated CD (focus) dependencies for different assist sizes. Technology generation dry—65-nm target, pitch=260nm (duty=1:3), 6% AttPSM, model: Kirchhoff, illumination CQuad, all other settings according to Tables. The ABEF values were computed with Eq.. Figure Legend: From: Rigorous electromagnetic field mask modeling and related lithographic effects in the low k1 and ultrahigh numerical aperture regime J. Micro/Nanolith. MEMS MOEMS. 2007;6(3):031002-031002-16. doi:10.1117/1.2778447

18. Date of download: 5/29/2016 Copyright © 2016 SPIE. All rights reserved. Simulated ABEF and SLmin values versus assist size for different technology generations and model options. Duty ratio 1:3, MoSi standard stack, illumination: CQuad, and all other settings according to Tables. Figure Legend: From: Rigorous electromagnetic field mask modeling and related lithographic effects in the low k1 and ultrahigh numerical aperture regime J. Micro/Nanolith. MEMS MOEMS. 2007;6(3):031002-031002-16. doi:10.1117/1.2778447

19. Date of download: 5/29/2016 Copyright © 2016 SPIE. All rights reserved. Simulated ABEF and SLmin values versus assist size for 6% AttPSM mask stacks. Duty ratio 1:4, illumination CQuad, and all other settings according to Tables. Figure Legend: From: Rigorous electromagnetic field mask modeling and related lithographic effects in the low k1 and ultrahigh numerical aperture regime J. Micro/Nanolith. MEMS MOEMS. 2007;6(3):031002-031002-16. doi:10.1117/1.2778447

20. Date of download: 5/29/2016 Copyright © 2016 SPIE. All rights reserved. Simulated process windows of semidense lines for different technology generations, model options, and mask stack. Duty ratio 1:2, illumination: dipole, and all other settings according to Tables. Figure Legend: From: Rigorous electromagnetic field mask modeling and related lithographic effects in the low k1 and ultrahigh numerical aperture regime J. Micro/Nanolith. MEMS MOEMS. 2007;6(3):031002-031002-16. doi:10.1117/1.2778447