奈米探針量測技術近幾年來雖被廣泛應用在半導體界。但其量測數據的可靠性卻尚未被真正的証實。因此吾人用了一些實驗來探討其可靠性。在針尖的接觸阻抗可小於100歐姆，發現在微安培的等級其準確性及再現性分別高達94.71% 及 96.45% 。這樣的誤差上足以作為判斷故障分析及改善工廠製程的依據。
其次，本論文針對傳統所不容易被發現的問題，利用奈米探針量測技術來做故障分析。例如，因輕摻雜汲極(LDD，Lightly Doped Drain)部份沒有被摻雜而導致電流降低。此外吾人也推廣一些尚未發現的運用，如主動式V.C.，Butterfly Curve及電 容量測等。又試片在FIB挖洞後,如何再進行電性量測，也是首次在這篇論文中發表，目前正在申請專利中。另外我們也討論到當量測發現有異常的電流時，如何去推導出問題來自那一個位置，及運用何種PFA(Physical Failure Analysis)手法來找出故障機制。
最後，探討當製程進入45nm以下時，奈米探針量測中時電子束對電晶體量測的影響。經實驗結果，SEM的加速電壓至少需降到800V以下，才能降低PMOSFET電流衰減。但SEM影像的品質將會變差。幸好目前己有廠商提供500V的機型，相信此現像將得以被改善。

Nano-probing is one of the most technologies widely applied in semiconductor field. However, its reliability has not been evidenced yet. In this work, for the first one, we designed some experiments to study its reliability. Experiment results show that with the tip resistance less than 100 ohm, the accuracy and reproducibility of the nano-probing measurement (in μA range) are 94.71% and 96.45%, respectively. Thus It is good enough for failure analysis and FAB reference to improve process.
Next, we present the applications of a nano-probing technology in non-uniformly doping caused low on current in LDD (lightly doped drain) region, butterfly curve; capacitance measurement, and Nano-probing after X-S FIB. There analyses are difficultly implemented with traditional method, or even have not been reported yet. Furthermore, after the nano-probing measurement, how to figure out the failure location and how to apply PFA (physical failure analysis) to analyze the failure mechanism are also discussed.

Finally, during the nano-probing, the effects of the electron beam illumination on 45nm transistor are also investigated. The results indicate that as the acceleration voltage is down to 800V, the PMOS current degradation will be limited, but the image quality will become worse. Fortunately, the neon-probing system with 500V model is available now, thus solving the problem.

[1] Shuji Ikeda, Yasuko Yoshida, Koichiro Ishibashi, and Yasuhiro Mitsui, 」Failure Analysis of 6T SRAM on Low-Voltage and High-Frequency Operation」, IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ELECTRON DEVICES, VOL. 50, NO. 5, MAY 2003

[2] Yasuhiro Mitsui, Taskeshi Sunaoshi, Jon C. Lee, 「A study of electrical characteristic changes in MOSFET by electron beam irradiation」, ESREF 2009

[3] Chih-Chung Chang, Jian-Chang Lin, Wen-Sheng Wu, Chih-Ying Tasi, Ching-Lin Change, 「A Novel Technique of Device Measurement after Cross-Sectional FIB in Failure Analysis」, ISTFA 2009

[4] R. Rosenkranz, W. Werner, 「Comparison of Active and Passive Voltage Contrast for Failure Localization, ISTFA 2007

[5] Richard E.Stallcup II, Ph.D., and Zachary Cross, William 65nm Node SRAM Using a 7-point SEM Nanoprobing Technique」, ISTFA 2007

[6]N. Collaert, K.von Arnim, R. Rooyachers, T. Vandeweyer,」Low-voltage 6T FinFET SRAM cell with high SNM using HfSiON/TiN gate stack, fin widths down to 10nm and 30nm gate length」, 2008 IEEE

[7] Andrei Pavlov, Manoj Sachdev, Jose Pineda de Gyvez,
University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada
Philips Research Labs, Eindhoven, The Netherlands,」 AN SRAM WEAK CELL FAULT MODEL AND A DFT TECHNIQUE WITH A PROGRAMMABLE DETECTION THRESHOLD」,ITC 2004

[8] Fischer, Th.,Olbrich, A.,Georgakos, G.,Lemaitre, B.;,Schmitt-Landsiedel, D.」 Impact of process variations and long term degradation on 6T-SRAM cells」, Advances in Radio Science, Volume 5, 2007, pp.321-325

[9] Lawrence C Wwagner 「FAILURE ANALYSIS OF INTEGRATED CIRCUITS Tools and Techniques」.

[10]Solid state Electronic Devices,Ben G Streetman,Sanjay Kumar Banerjee.

[11] Chao-Chi Wu, Jon C. Lee, Jung-Hsiang Chuang, Tsung-Te Li,」 Single Device Characterization by Nano-probing to Identify Failure Root Cause」, ISTFA 2005

[12] Joseph Myers, Marsha Abramo, 「A Novel Approach for Enhancing Critical FIB Imaging for Failure Aanlysis and Circuit Edit Applications」, ISTFA 2004