Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-c9gpj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-13T22:27:35.172Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Reverse Diode Leakage in Spike-Annealed Ultra-Shallowjunctions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 March 2011

Hans-Joachim L. Gossmann
Affiliation:
Agere Systems, Murray Hill, NJ
Tao Feng
Affiliation:
University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
Aditya Agarwal
Affiliation:
Axcelis Technologies, Beverly, MA
Peter Frisella
Affiliation:
Axcelis Technologies, Beverly, MA
Leonard M. Rubin
Affiliation:
Axcelis Technologies, Beverly, MA
Get access

Abstract

We have investigated diode leakage in junctions produced by ion-implantation of B with energies of 0.5 - 2 keV and doses of 2 × 1014 — 2 × 1015 cm2 into n-type wells of ∼1 × 1018 cm−3, after rapid-thermal anneals (RTA) in lamp-based and hot-wall furnaces. Junc- tions are as shallow as 30nm and were directly probed to avoid complications arising from metalization. The leakage current, Ilkg, was found to be independent of the implant dose at any reverse voltage (-1 and -5 V). This implies that the electrically active defects are sufficiently far removed and on the surface-side of the junction. In both systems, a spike anneal (no intentional dwell time at peak-temperature) resulted in higher Ilkg than a soak anneal (dwell time of several seconds at peak-temperature). However, for the same spike annealing recipe, the hot-wall RTA produces tighter distributions than the lamp-based RTA. The width of the distribution is a mea- sure of the temperature uniformity across the wafer. Best leakage currents are of the order 1 × 10−6 A/cm2, in good agreement with device simulations The shallowest junctions exhibit Ilkg ∼5 × 10−4 A/cm2, still well below the specification of even the low power transistor of a 100 nm technology.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2001

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Semiconductor Industry Association, The International Technology Roadmap for Semiconductors, SIA, San Jose, CA (1999). http://public.itrs.net/files/1999_SIA_Roadmap/Home.htmGoogle Scholar
2. Stolk, P. A., Gossmann, H.-J., Eaglesham, D. J., Jacobson, D. C., Rafferty, C. S., Gilmer, G. H., Jaraiz, M., Poate, J. M., Luftman, H. S., and Haynes, T. E., “Physical mechanisms of transient-enhanced dopant diffusion in ion-implanted silicon,” J. Appl. Phys. 81, 6031–50 (1997).Google Scholar
3. Gossmann, H.-J., Rafferty, C. S., and Keys, P. H., “Junctions for deep sub-100 nm mos: How far will ion implantation takeus?,” MRS Proc. in press (2000).Google Scholar
4. Keys, P. H., Gossmann, H.-J., Ng, K. K., and Rafferty, C. S., “Series resistance limits for 0.05 m). An improvement by just one order of magnitude, easily attainable for example by optimization of the temperature uniformity, would bring that down to well below the off-current of even the low power transistor (20 pA/ m MOSFETs,” Superlattices and Microstructures 27, 125–36 (1999).Google Scholar
5. Agarwal, A., Fiory, A. T., Gossmann, H.-J., Rafferty, C. S., and Frisella, P., “Ultra-shallow junction formation by spike annealing in a lamp-based or hot-walled rapid thermal annealing system: effect of ramp-up rate,” Mater.Sci. Semicond. Process. 1, 237–41 (1998).Google Scholar
6. Agarwal, A., Fiory, A. T., and Gossmann, H.-J., “Effect of ramp rates during rapid thermal annealing of ion implanted boron for formation of ultra-shallowjunctions,” J. Electron. Mater. 28, 1333–9 (1999).Google Scholar
7. Agarwal, A., Gossmann, H.-J., Eaglesham, D. J., Herner, S. B., Fiory, A. T., and Haynes, T. E., “Boron-enhanced diffusion of boron from ultralow-energy ion implantation,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 74, 2435–7 (1999).Google Scholar
8. Agarwal, A., Gossmann, H.-J., and Eaglesham, D. J., “Boron-enhanced diffusion of boron: Physical mechanisms,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 74, 2331–3 (1999).Google Scholar