Yer, it was a good video, but one notion that I still don’t truly understand is does Inverse Lithography Technology (ILT) improve the final printed resolution on the photoresist, or is it simply used to reduce dimensional errors, and fostering uniformity associated with using higher numerical aperture exposures.
For instance, could it allow 8nm NA-EUV to reach lower critical dimensions such as 6nm.
I mean one could argue, if the error is to big, you are NOT actually printing at the state size. So reducing error is what allows to print at these smaller size.
While that’s accurate, my primary interest revolves around whether it has any inherent properties that might enable it to enhance the final resolution beyond what the Lithography source can achieve.
Yer, it was a good video, but one notion that I still don’t truly understand is does Inverse Lithography Technology (ILT) improve the final printed resolution on the photoresist, or is it simply used to reduce dimensional errors, and fostering uniformity associated with using higher numerical aperture exposures.
For instance, could it allow 8nm NA-EUV to reach lower critical dimensions such as 6nm.
I mean one could argue, if the error is to big, you are NOT actually printing at the state size. So reducing error is what allows to print at these smaller size.
While that’s accurate, my primary interest revolves around whether it has any inherent properties that might enable it to enhance the final resolution beyond what the Lithography source can achieve.