Experimental investigation on the influence of instrument settings on pixel size and nonlinearity in SEM image formation

Proceedings of the 10th International Conference of the European Society for Precision Engineering and Nanotechnology, EUSPEN 2010

Volumn 1, Issue , 2010, Pages 192-195

  Carli, L ^a   Genta, G ^b   Cantatore, A ^a   Barbato, G ^b   De Chiffre, L ^a   Levi, R ^b  

^a TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF DENMARK   (Denmark)

^b POLITECNICO DI TORINO   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

PIXELS; SCANNING ELECTRON MICROSCOPY;

ACCELERATING VOLTAGES; DESIGNED EXPERIMENTS; EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATIONS; IMAGE FORMATION PROCESS; OUTPUT PARAMETERS; PIXEL SIZE; SILICON GRATINGS; SPOT SIZES;

PRECISION ENGINEERING;

EID: 79951899665     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (6)

1. Hocking R. R., The analysis and selection of variables in linear regression, Biometrics 32, pp. 1-49, 1976.
2. Yates F., The design and analysis of factorial experiments, Tech. Comm. 35, Imp. Bur. Soil Sci., 1937.
3. Davies O. L., The design and analysis of industrial experiments, Oliver & Boyd, 1954.
4. A Guide to Scanning Electron Microscope Observation, JEOL USA, 2006.
5. Marinello F., Bariani P., Savio E., Horsewell A., De Chiffre L., Critical factors in SEM 3D reconstruction, Proc. of the 7th euspen Int. Conference, Bremen, pp. 238-241, 2007.
6. Scanning Probe Image Processor v5.0.4, Image Metrology A/S, http://www.imagemet.com.