* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Interferometric back focal plane microellipsometry
Silicon photonics wikipedia , lookup
Photoacoustic effect wikipedia , lookup
X-ray fluorescence wikipedia , lookup
Ultrafast laser spectroscopy wikipedia , lookup
Optical tweezers wikipedia , lookup
Chemical imaging wikipedia , lookup
Vibrational analysis with scanning probe microscopy wikipedia , lookup
Magnetic circular dichroism wikipedia , lookup
Diffraction topography wikipedia , lookup
Surface plasmon resonance microscopy wikipedia , lookup
Confocal microscopy wikipedia , lookup
Fourier optics wikipedia , lookup
Optical coherence tomography wikipedia , lookup
Rutherford backscattering spectrometry wikipedia , lookup
Nonimaging optics wikipedia , lookup
Photon scanning microscopy wikipedia , lookup
Dispersion staining wikipedia , lookup
Birefringence wikipedia , lookup
Refractive index wikipedia , lookup
Retroreflector wikipedia , lookup
Harold Hopkins (physicist) wikipedia , lookup
Ultraviolet–visible spectroscopy wikipedia , lookup
Phase-contrast X-ray imaging wikipedia , lookup
Optical aberration wikipedia , lookup
Nonlinear optics wikipedia , lookup
Interferometric back focal plane microellipsometry Gilbert D. Feke, Daniel P. Snow, Robert D. Grober, Peter J. de Groot, and Leslie Deck We present a technique for ellipsometric analysis of materials with high lateral resolution. A Michelsontype phase-shifting interferometer measures the phase distribution in the back focal plane of a high numerical aperture objective. Local measurements of the ellipsometric parameter delta are performed over the entire spectrum of angles of incidence. We show that delta is to leading order linearly proportional to the phase change on reflection of normally incident light. We furthermore invert the Fresnel reflection equations and derive expressions for the real and imaginary parts of the refractive index as functions of the phase change on reflection and the reflectivity at normal incidence, both of which are measurable with the same apparatus. Hence we accomplish local measurements of the refractive indices of our samples. Determination of the phase change on reflection permits correction of interferometric topography measurements of heterogeneous specimens. © 1998 Optical Society of America OCIS codes: 120.2130, 120.5050, 120.3180, 180.3170, 120.5700, 120.4530. 1. Introduction Precision topography-profiling optical interferometers are typically capable of subnanometer surface height resolution.1 Such interferometers cannot distinguish phase shifts that are due to sample topography from phase shifts that are due to local variations in the refractive index.2– 4 Phase change on reflection ~f0! can lead to height errors of as much as 30 nm.5 A scheme for measuring f0 would be desirable for correction of interferometric profilometry to obtain true topography. Optical ellipsometry is commonly used to determine the refractive index of a material.6 Conventional ellipsometers measure the ratio of the Fresnel reflection coefficients for a beam reflected at a single oblique angle. However, such ellipsometers are limited in their lateral resolution to approximately 20 mm, which is inadequate in the context of surface profiling. Furthermore, conventional ellipsometers operate at oblique incidence, whereas interferometric profilometers operate at normal incidence. Diffraction-limited resolution and geometric com- G. D. Feke, D. P. Snow, and R. D. Grober are with the Department of Applied Physics, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut 06520-8284. P. J. de Groot and L. Deck are with the Zygo Corporation, Laurel Brook Road, Middlefield, Connecticut 064550448. Received 15 July 1997; revised manuscript received 20 October 1997. 0003-6935y98y101796-07$15.00y0 © 1998 Optical Society of America 1796 APPLIED OPTICS y Vol. 37, No. 10 y 1 April 1998 patibility with interferometric profilometers may be achieved by using back focal plane microellipsometry,5,7–9 which measures the amplitude and phase distributions of the reflected light in the back focal plane of an objective lens. Specific to profilometry correction, previous work5 has addressed the measurement of f0 by interferometric measurement of the phase distribution only. This paper serves to develop and refine further the technique of interferometric back focal plane microellipsometry. The basic principles of this technique are described. We have derived an analytical expression that allows for direct determination of f0 from the phase information over the entire numerical aperture of the objective. We further invert the normal-incidence Fresnel reflection equations to express the refractive index in terms of f0 and the normal incidence reflectivity. An apparatus has been constructed to perform local measurements of both of these quantities. Results for several test specimens are in agreement with theoretical expectations. Experimental difficulties suffered by others in previous measurements of this type5 are not present in our results. Hence the accuracy of interferometric profilometry of heterogeneous specimens may therefore be improved to the point at which it is limited only by the accuracy in the measurement of f0. 2. Principle of Interferometric Back Focal Plane Microellipsometry Although interferometric back focal plane microellipsometry has been described previously,5 a review is Fig. 2. Theoretical reflected phase curves for aluminum ~n9 5 1.8 1 7.7i!. f0 and the average of fp and fs are roughly equal out to ui 5 50° ~NA 5 0.77!. Fig. 1. Principle of back focal plane microellipsometry. appropriate here. Figure 1 depicts a linearly polarized, collimated beam of light that is focused by the objective lens to a spot on the sample positioned in the front focal plane. In the object space of the lens, an angular spectrum of plane waves is incident upon the sample. The p and s polarizations are defined, respectively, to be parallel and perpendicular to the plane of incidence. The p- and s-polarized photons are therefore simultaneously incident upon the sample. In Fig. 1 the polarization direction of the input beam is along the x axis. Therefore the light is purely p-reflected along the x axis, and purely s-reflected along the y axis. The distribution of light in the back focal plane of the objective is the Fourier transform of the distribution in the front focal plane. Therefore, in the back focal plane, the plane-wave components incident upon the sample are spatially separated. Specifically, for a lens that obeys the sine condition,10 the angle of incidence ui ~measured from the normal! is related to the radial coordinate r in the back focal plane by sin ui 5 ~ryrmax!sin~umax!, (1) where rmax is the radius of the back aperture and sin~umax! is the numerical aperture ~NA! of the objective. Measurement of the amplitude and phase distributions in the back focal plane yields determination of the ellipsometric parameters. The phase distribution may be measured interferometrically by making the objective–sample system one arm of a Michelson interferometer. 3. Interrelations among Optical Quantities A. Phase Change on Reflection and the Ellipsometric Parameter d Consider linearly polarized light incident at an angle ui upon the surface of a material with complex refractive index n9 5 h 1 ik. The Fresnel equations giving the complex reflection coefficients for p- and s-polarized light are11 rp 5 tan~ui 2 ut! , tan~ui 1 ut! rs 5 2 sin~ui 2 ut! . sin~ui 1 ut! (2) The complex angle of transmission ut is given by Snell’s law, sin ui 5 n9 sin ut, (3) for an incident medium of unity refractive index ~air!. At normal incidence, the reflection coefficient is given by r0 5 n9 2 1 . n9 1 1 (4) The ellipsometric parameter d is defined as the difference of the phases of the p and s complex reflection coefficients: d ; fp 2 fs 5 arg~rp! 2 @arg~rs! 1 p#. (5) Here fs is defined so that d 5 0 at ui 5 0, which is consistent with the convention used by See et al.5 The phase change on reflection at normal incidence is given by f0 5 arg~r0!. (6) As shown in Fig. 2, f0 is to a good approximation the average of fp and fs out to a large NA. Hence f0 is the index-dependent phase error introduced into topography measurements. The goal of the present research is to devise a method for making local measurements of f0 for correction of topography measurements of heterogeneous specimens. f0 may be determined exactly, provided n9 is known, by means of Eqs. ~4! and ~6!. However, the ellipsometric determination of n9 requires measurements at one particular angle of incidence of both of the ellipsometric angles, d and c, the latter of which is defined as tan c ; urpuyursu. (7) The determination of c from urpu and ursu is complicated in a microellipsometer because the transmittance of the objective is a function of ui .9 The error in the measurement of f0 when the refractive index determined from d and the incorrect values for c are used has been shown5 to be typically ;5°. By simply plotting f0 versus d at ui 5 45° over a 1 April 1998 y Vol. 37, No. 10 y APPLIED OPTICS 1797 range of refractive indices, See et al. have reported5 an empirical linear relation between the two, f0 > 1.41d, (8) which is independent of c. The value of such a simple relation in the context of a topography-correcting measurement is directly evident. However, Eq. ~8! limits the measurement to a single angle of incidence, while the rest of the angular spectrum available in the microellipsometric measurement is disregarded. However, by using a series of approximations to the functional forms of both d~ui ! and f0 in appropriate limits, we have derived the analytical result d > f0~ui 2 1 ui 4y6!, (9) for arbitrary angle of incidence, where ui is in radians. Substituting ui 5 py4 into Eq. ~9! yields f0 5 1.47d, which is comparable with the empirical result of Eq. ~8!. Equation ~9! provides a computationally simple relation between d and f0 in terms of one known parameter ui . B. Refractive Index Expressed as a Function of f0 and the Normal-Incidence Reflectivity The reflectivity at normal incidence is given by R0 5 ur0u2. (10) h~R0, f0! and k~R0, f0! are found upon inversion of Eqs. ~6! and ~10! and are k~R0, f0! 5 F G 4R0 cos f0 1 2 ÎR 0~1 1 R0! sin f0, ~1 1 R0!2 sin2 f0 1 ~1 2 R0!2 cos2 f0 (11) h~f0, k! 5 ~2k cot f0 2 k2 1 1!1y2. (12a) Equation ~12a! is ill-behaved in the limit k 3 0 ~i.e., f0 3 0, cot f0 3 `!. In this case, an alternative expression may be used, h~R0, k! 5 1 1 R0 1 @4R0 2 k2~1 2 R0!2#1y2 , 1 2 R0 (12b) which is valid for k # ~h2 2 1!1y2. For k $ ~h2 2 1!1y2, a negative sign is required in front of the square root of Eq. ~12b! for calculation of h. To determine which inequality holds, h would need to be known ~at least roughly! beforehand. This condition is readily met for dielectric materials for which k is very small @the case where Eq. ~12b! is required# and h is typically not smaller than 1.5. In summary, by measuring d, we obtain f0, and by measuring R0 further, we obtain h and k. Equations ~9!, ~11!, and ~12! allow us to obviate the measurement of c in the determination of refractive index. 4. Apparatus A schematic of the optical system is shown in Fig. 3. The design is similar to that described by See et al.5 The output of a 670-nm wavelength multimode laser diode is coupled into a single-mode optical fiber, 1798 APPLIED OPTICS y Vol. 37, No. 10 y 1 April 1998 Fig. 3. Schematic of the interferometric back focal plane microellipsometer: NA, numerical aperture; PZT, piezoelectric transducer; BFP, back focal plane; PC, personal computer. which is used as a spatial filter. The polarization state of the photons is selected in the fiber with a BT&D MPC1000 fiber polarization controller. The fiber output is collimated by an achromatic lens. The collimated beam is split with a wedged plate beam splitter. One arm of the interferometer consists of the reference mirror, which is mounted on a tilt stage. The tilt stage is mounted on a flexure stage. Translation of the reference mirror is achieved by pushing the flexure stage with a piezoelectric transducer ~PZT!. The PZT is driven by a signal from a programmable function generator and is precalibrated to provide accurate, constant velocity motion ~linear scan!. The other arm of the interferometer consists of the objective lens and sample. The objective lens is a Zeiss Epiplan-Neofluar infinity-corrected microscope objective with NA 5 0.9 ~umax 5 64°!. The sample is mounted on a translation stage that allows for both lateral positioning and focusing of the sample. A computer-driven micropositioner is used to make fine adjustments to the sample focus. Two plano– convex lenses serve as the relay optics to image the back focal plane of the objective onto a CCD camera. A PC-based eight-bit frame-grabber acquires consecutive frames of video from the camera as the PZT ramps the position of the reference mirror. The consecutive frames record interferograms that contain the relevant phase information. It is straightforward to derive fdiff~V 5 0! 5 fdiff~V 5 p! 5 d, fdiff~V 5 py2! 5 fdiff~V 5 3py2! 5 2d. (17a) (17b) Therefore this measurement yields d~ui ! for 0 # ui # sin21 ~NA!. Another feature of the difference map is nodes along the diagonals: fdiff~V 5 mpy4! 5 0, Fig. 4. Subtraction of phase maps to obtain the difference map. By convention, the first phase map has input polarization along the x axis, and the second has input polarization along the y axis. 5. Method of Analysis A single interferogram is associated with each pixel position ~x, y! in the image of the back focal plane. Seven frames record each collection of interferograms. The velocity of the PZT ramp is matched with the frequency of the camera such that consecutive frames are shifted in phase by an increment of py2. We use a seven-frame phase-demodulation algorithm,12 m 5 1, 3, 5, 7. (18) From Fig. 4 we see that in principle it is possible to obtain d~ui ! from just one phase map. This would be accomplished by taking the difference between the horizontal and vertical line cuts. However, by taking two phase maps and subtracting one from the other, we subtract out any constant phase aberrations associated with the optical system. Normal-incidence reflectivity measurements are made with the same apparatus. The reference mirror is blocked so that the camera detects only the sample reflection. The intensity of the center pixel ~ui 5 0! is obtained from an average over several frames. A reference of known reflectivity is used to calibrate the measurements. 6. Results and Discussion tan f 5 7~I21 2 I1! 2 ~I23 2 I3! , 24~I22 2 I2! 1 8I0 (13) at each pixel position to construct the phase map from the interferograms. In Eq. ~13!, In is the measured intensity at each pixel in the nth frame. Two sets of interferogram data are recorded per d measurement: The first has input polarization orthogonal to that of the second. The difference in the two resulting phase maps is calculated to obtain a difference map, as illustrated in Fig. 4. The functional form of the difference map is obtained from the expressions for the field distribution in the back focal plane13: SD SD Y x2pol 5 Ex E Ey Y y2pol 5 Ex E Ey S S D D 5 E0 R1 1 R2 cos 2V , R2 sin 2V 2 5 E0 R2 sin 2V , 1 2 2 R 2 R cos 2V x2pol y2pol (14) where the incident beam is assumed to have amplitude E0, V is the azimuthal angle measured from the x axis, and R1 [ rp 1 rs exp~ip!, R2 [ rp 2 rs exp~ip!, which are functions of ui . Since the reference beam is purely x or y polarized, interference occurs between only the Ex and Ey components of the sample-reflected beam. Therefore the two-dimensional functional forms of the two phase maps are fx2pol 5 arg~Ex!x2pol, fy2pol 5 arg~Ey!y2pol. (15) The difference map is given by fdiff 5 fx2pol 2 fy2pol. (16) Three samples were examined: a silicon wafer, a thick aluminum film evaporated onto a glass microscope slide, and a thick gold film evaporated onto a silicon wafer. Resultant difference maps are shown in Fig. 5. In the Au and Al data, d increases and decreases along the horizontal and vertical directions, respectively, as expected from Eqs. ~17!, and the nodal lines along the diagonals as predicted in Eq. ~18! are clearly visible. The averages of the four d lines given in Eqs. ~17! from the difference maps of Fig. 5 are shown in Fig. 6. Averaging is done to reduce the measurement noise. The theoretical curves are generated from representative values as listed in the literature14 for the refractive indices at our operating wavelength. These theory curves are not adjustable by any free parameter; they are generated directly from the Fresnel formulas of Eq. ~2!. In addition, the data sets were fitted according to Eq. ~9!, with f0 as the sole free parameter. Table 1 lists the theoretical @from Eq. ~6!# and experimental values for f0 for these samples. Good agreement ~to within a few degrees! is found between the literature and the experimental values for f0. Given that our present experimental accuracy is roughly 3° and that f0 may be as much as 30°, the possible improvement for the height resolution of interferometric topography measurements of heterogeneous samples is as much as a factor of 10. See et al. performed microellipsometric measurements on several materials and obtained d curves that were not in agreement with theory but were significantly offset from the theoretical models by a constant function.5 They attributed their anomalous results to multiple reflections occurring inside 1 April 1998 y Vol. 37, No. 10 y APPLIED OPTICS 1799 Fig. 6. Line-cut averages from Fig. 5. The data ~■! are fit ~- - - -! according to Eq. ~9!, and the results are compared with the theoretical curves ~—! from the literature values of the refractive indices. ther side of the front focal plane as set by the focusing micropositioner. The results are plotted in Fig. 7. The exact sample positions were determined from the interferometric data by measurement of the curvature incurred by each phase map as a result of defocus. Particularly, Schulz and Elssner have demonstrated15 that the phase difference between the object and reference rays in a reflected-light interference microscope is dependent on the distance H of the sample from focus and the angle of incidence ui as fdefocus 5 4p~Hyl!cos ui . (19) Table 1. Comparison of Values for f0 Sample Literature ~deg! Fit ~deg! Au Al Si 29.4 14.1 0.1 26.4 14.4 1.2 Fig. 5. Difference maps for gold, aluminum, and silicon. the objective lens. However, we do not find any evidence of such anomalies in our system. To explore the effect of sample defocus on the measurement of f0, difference maps of aluminum were recorded for many different sample positions on ei1800 APPLIED OPTICS y Vol. 37, No. 10 y 1 April 1998 Fig. 7. Measured f0 as a function of defocus. Table 2. Comparison of Values for Reflectivity and Refractive Index h 1 ik R0 Sample Literature Experimental Au Al Si 0.96 0.91 0.34 0.94 0.89 0.37 Literature Experimental 0.16 1 3.8i 1.8 1 7.7i 3.8 1 0.01i 0.29 1 4.2i 1.8 1 7.5i 4.1 1 0.16i With ui related to the radial coordinate r by Eq. ~1!, each of the phase maps depicted in Fig. 4 and expressed in Eq. ~16! takes on a curvature; i.e., the measured out-of-focus phase maps are given by ftotal, x2pol 5 fx2pol 1 fdefocus, ftotal, y2pol 5 fy2pol 1 fdefocus. (20) The sample position H is extracted by fitting the expression in Eq. ~19! to our measured phase maps. The results of Fig. 7 demonstrate that measurement of f0 is robust to within a few degrees throughout and beyond the depth of focus, which is approximately 20.3l to 10.3l for our objective. However, the results for negative values of defocus ~i.e., sample positions too close to the objective! are especially near the literature value, whereas the results for positive values are somewhat less than the literature value. The experimental values for f0 listed in Table 1 were combined with normal-incidence reflectivity measurements to obtain h and k, as listed in Table 2. Again, good agreement is found between the experimental results and the literature. In in Eq. ~13! may be written as S F DG Imax p 1 1 V cos f 1 n 11V 2 ( n S D S D DI Imax 2 196 1 49V 2 . 512V 2 (23) @Equation ~23! gives the variance averaged over all possible phases from 0 to 2p; the variance as a function of f varies only slightly from its average value.# A typical visibility in our interferograms is 0.1. The frame-to-frame standard deviation in pixel intensity DI was measured at 0.75 out of Imax 5 256 ~eight-bit digitization!. Insertion of these values into Eq. ~23! yields a standard deviation in phase Df 5 1°. This theoretical value for the phase noise was found to be in agreement with the experimentally measured Df, as obtained from taking the difference of two phasemaps recorded in identical conditions. 8. Conclusion Local measurements of d for various samples have been successfully achieved with an interferometric back focal plane microellipsometer. We have derived an analytic approximation that relates d for a given angle of incidence directly to the phase change on reflection at normal incidence. This measurement allows for refractive-index-dependent corrections to interferometric profilometry. Also, we have inverted the normal-incidence Fresnel reflection equations so that we may explicitly determine the refractive index from measurements of the normalincidence reflectivity and the phase change on reflection. References , (21) where Imax is the greatest possible pixel intensity in the interferogram, V is the visibility, and each frame is shifted by a phase increment of py2 as noted above. The coefficients of the In are chosen such that Eq. ~13! reduces to tan f. Phase-measurement errors due to distortions in the phase shift and low-frequency mechanical vibration have been discussed previously9 for the sevenframe algorithm. Errors may also be introduced by electronic camera noise,16 i.e., fluctuations in Imax. To determine the sensitivity of the seven-frame algorithm to camera noise, we calculate the phase variance as given by ~Df!2 5 ~DI!2 ^~Df!2&f 5 This research was supported in part by the Zygo Corporation. 7. Error Analysis In 5 where f is given by Eq. ~13! and Imax fluctuates randomly in each of the seven frames. Substitution of Eq. ~21! into Eq. ~13! and Eq. ~13! into Eq. ~22! yields 2 ]f , ]Imax,n (22) 1. L. Deck and P. de Groot, “High-speed noncontact profiler based on scanning white-light interferometry,” Appl. Opt. 33, 7334 – 7338 ~1994!. 2. Y. Li and F. E. Talke, “Limitations and corrections of optical profilometry in surface characterization of carbon coated magnetic recording disks,” ASME J. Tribol. 112, 670 – 677 ~1990!. 3. M. Smallen and J. J. K. Lee, “Pole tip recession measurements on thin film heads using optical profilometry with phase correction and atomic force microscopy,” ASME J. Tribol. 115, 382–386 ~1993!. 4. J. F. Biegen, “Determination of the phase change on reflection from two-beam interference,” Opt. Lett. 19, 1690 –1692 ~1995!. 5. C. W. See, M. G. Somekh, and R. D. Holmes, “Scanning optical microellipsometer for pure surface profiling,” Appl. Opt. 35, 6663– 6668 ~1996!. 6. R. M. A. Azzam and N. M. Bashara, Ellipsometry and Polarized Light ~North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1992!, Chap. 3, pp. 153–157. 7. A. Rosencwaig, J. Opsal, D. L. Willenborg, S. M. Kelso, and J. T. Fanton, “Beam profile reflectometry: a new technique for dielectric film measurements,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 60, 1301– 1303 ~1992!. 8. M. Pluta, Advanced Light Microscopy ~Polish Scientific Publishers, Warsaw, 1993!, Vol. 3, pp. 265–271. 1 April 1998 y Vol. 37, No. 10 y APPLIED OPTICS 1801 9. S. V. Shatalin, R. Juškaitis, J. B. Tan, and T. Wilson, “Reflection conoscopy and microellipsometry of isotropic thin film structures,” J. Microsc. 179, 241–252 ~1995!. 10. M. Born and E. Wolf, Principles of Optics, 6th ed. ~Pergamon, Oxford, UK, 1980!, Chap. 4, pp. 167–169. 11. Ref. 8, Chap. 1, pp. 36 – 41. 12. P. de Groot, “Derivation of algorithms for phase-shifting interferometry using the concept of a data-sampling window,” Appl. Opt. 34, 4723– 4730 ~1995!. 13. T. Wilson and R. Juškaitis, “On the extinction coefficient in 1802 APPLIED OPTICS y Vol. 37, No. 10 y 1 April 1998 confocal polarization microscopy,” J. Microsc. 179, 238 –240 ~1995!. 14. E. D. Palik, ed., Handbook of Optical Constants of Solids ~Academic, Orlando, Fla., 1985!. 15. G. Schulz and K.-E. Elssner, “Errors in phase-measurement interferometry with high numerical apertures,” Appl. Opt. 30, 4500 – 4506 ~1991!. 16. C. P. Brophy, “Effect of intensity error correlation on the computed phase of phase-shifting interferometry,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 7, 537–541 ~1990!.