KEYWORDS: Transistors, Device simulation, Back end of line, TCAD, Standards development, Process modeling, Performance modeling, Oscillators, New and emerging technologies, Multilayers
Technology evaluation of new nodes is becoming increasingly complex; where transistor performance was once the critical metric, technology evaluation currently requires more complex metrics such as AC power and area. We present a method to utilize Synopsys TCAD to generate HSPICE collateral from device and process simulation to enable circuit simulation. This workflow is automated to support generation of packaged standard cell library collateral, enabling early analysis of more complex circuits which utilize automated routing tools to create. This workflow enables a much more accurate and complete picture of technology performance in a faster way than traditional PDK-based workflows.
Fueled by higher bandwidth wireless communication and ubiquitous AI, the demand for more affordable and power efficient transistors is accelerating at a time when Dennard scaling is undeniably crawling to a halt. Escalating wafer and design cost are commonly identified as the primary culprits bringing Moore's law to its knees. However, a third component: the cost of making the wrong technology choice early in the development cycle, is equally responsible for slowing the progress of the semiconductor industry. The enormous complexity of leading edge technology nodes has been achieved incrementally over time by limiting each technology node to mostly small evolutionary steps. Forcing too much innovation in one technology node would have catastrophically disrupted the continuous learning curve. As we approach the fundamental device-physics and material-science limits of dimensional scaling, we are forced to look at far more disruptive device and interconnect innovations to achieve meaningful power-performance-area-cost (PPAC) improvement. For example, the complexity versus benefit tradeoffs of innovative 3-dimensional device architectures with non-standard power-distribution networks are so hard to quantify that rigorous yet efficient prototyping becomes indispensable even prior to committing foundry R&D resources. In this paper we present our work on developing a purpose-built suite of tools to vastly accelerate the quantitative pre-screening and optimization of technology options to help the industry maintain its relentless pace of PPAC scaling. We share several examples that demonstrate how we tune a candidate technology definition with this tool-suite. We also describe the important common technologies in successful Design Technology Co-Optimization (DTCO) flows including physical material and process modeling; electrical and circuit simulation; detailed design analysis and modification to reduce weak points; handling enormous datasets; silicon learning feedback loop and intuitive visualization.
Resolution enhancement techniques and OPC(Optical Proximity Correction) have been developed with empirical data points from general test patterns and some actual patterns extracted from full-chip design. Lithography simulation tools have been used for intensive process simulation to optimize RET solutions using sample patterns to cover whole full-chip patterns. However, as design complexity increases and mask manufacturing rules restrict process proximity correction coverage, post-RET/OPC data can generate fatal patterning failures at locations where the process window is marginal. Therefore, it is necessary to identify those patterns from full-chip layout to choose proper RET/OPC solutions. Previously, it was proven that model based full-chip verification tool is useful to capture potential fatal patterning failures before mask tape-out sign-off for sub-wavelength lithography processes. [1] In this paper, we extended the full-chip verification methodology to quantitative RET/OPC development using database error analysis. First, using GDS data containing design intent only and a single 90nm lithography process calibrated model, we performed full-chip verification for linearly scaled designs through 130nm, 90nm and 65nm node to take OPC directions. Second, a standard OPC recipe was applied for each design node followed by verification. And then, potential pattern failures at 65nm node were analyzed through lithography process window. Finally, RET/OPC solution was discussed for 65nm design.
Access to the requested content is limited to institutions that have purchased or subscribe to SPIE eBooks.
You are receiving this notice because your organization may not have SPIE eBooks access.*
*Shibboleth/Open Athens users─please
sign in
to access your institution's subscriptions.
To obtain this item, you may purchase the complete book in print or electronic format on
SPIE.org.
INSTITUTIONAL Select your institution to access the SPIE Digital Library.
PERSONAL Sign in with your SPIE account to access your personal subscriptions or to use specific features such as save to my library, sign up for alerts, save searches, etc.