Talk:Multiple patterning

Double or multiple patterning?

Today an anon moved multiple patterning to double patterning by cut and paste. Apparently, the move a while ago of double patterning to multiple patterning was by cut and paste too. That loses the history of the page. I now merged the history of the two pages so one can track its creation back from the beginning.

The next question is which title is more appropriate? I tend to incline towards double patterning, as that's where the technology is as of now (well, it is even not there yet). Comments? Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 05:34, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, double patterning is the more appropriate title. Going to multiple patterning is like trying to run before walking. The one which is practiced most widely is the double exposure, which uses one photoresist layer with two different exposures. There are no special tricks, because currently the two exposures are somewhat independent, e.g., one trims the other. The spacer technique is most likely already practiced by Micron for the IM Flash NAND products. If gate contacts are located close to diffusion contacts in Intel's 45 nm process, then they must use pattern accumulation for the contact layer as well.Guiding light (talk) 14:39, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Intel's double patterning is used in the gate layer to square off the ends.218.168.206.13 (talk) 12:30, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is time to re-open the question of whether to now use multiple patterning as the title, as double patterning is now more or less a mainstream technology, and triple patterning is already practiced for NAND flash.Guiding light (talk) 12:13, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For state of the art 2x nm NAND flash, the floating gate is double patterned in two dimensions. For upcoming 1x nm, it will be quadruple patterned in two dimensions while the periphery is double patterned in two dimensions. Multiple patterning is the more appropriate title now.59.115.247.101 (talk) 12:35, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fujifilm double development patterning

Fujifilm's approach as described in the linked article is very interesting. The photoresist is developed twice, once to remove the most heavily exposed regions, and a second time to remove the least exposed or unexposed regions. The intermediate exposure regions are left. Since these constitute the two edges of a line, the effect of double patterning is apparent, but there is a catch. Since exposure is a continuous function of position, the intermediate exposure region must exist in loops. There cannot be a "jump" from "intermediate" to "heavy" or "light". 218.168.206.13 (talk) 12:30, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deadlink

http://imec.be/wwwinter/mediacenter/en/SemiLitho_2007.shtml With kind regards, mlautenb —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.45.150.17 (talk) 13:02, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed, thanks. Guiding light (talk) 11:55, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Vegaswikian (talk) 06:37, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Double patterning → Multiple patterning — Multiple patterning is more timely, up-to-date version of double patterning. Guiding light (talk) 12:49, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

Support: As stated above and in the article, multiple patterning below 20 nm is in the very near future.59.115.247.101 (talk) 12:58, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support - if the article focus shifts to double patterning, sections have to be rewritten with this emphasis accordingly. How many mask patterns would be needed at most per layer?61.216.232.91 (talk) 15:34, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Any additional comments:Guiding light (talk) 12:49, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If ok to make the move, the article will have a new emphasis on multiple patterning. The double patterning example descriptions can be kept, and I will try to get more up to date references on the cost of combining multiple patterns. It is already known that currently electron beam lithography is already the most basic and extreme form of multiple patterning (each projected shape being a separate "mask" pattern), hence the most time-consuming and costly.Guiding light (talk) 06:32, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Multiple patterning. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110711005419/http://www.flashmemorysummit.com/English/Collaterals/Proceedings/2010/20100817_F2C_Tressler.pdf to http://www.flashmemorysummit.com/English/Collaterals/Proceedings/2010/20100817_F2C_Tressler.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:01, 18 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Too technical

I was curious on multiple patterning after reading a news article (http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/07/ibm-unveils-industrys-first-7nm-chip-moving-beyond-silicon/), so I came to Wikipedia. The first paragraph was rather clear. The table is trickier, but I happen to know what 193 refers to because of the news article. The second paragraph reads to me as gibberish, even though I've read in the past a bit about photolitography. By WP:TECHNICAL, in particular [1], that suggests that the lead section should be rephrased to be more understandable (or moved to a later part of the article). Similarly, the first three subsection titles are also too technical: "28-40 nm Half-pitch: Litho-Etch-Litho-Etch (LELE)", "20-28 nm Half-pitch: Self-Aligned Spacer", "Sub-20 nm Half-pitch: Beyond Double Patterning". They're probably part of some bigger section — "Implementation techniques"? "Phases"?. In comparison, "Industrial adoption" is a better section title.

--Blaisorblade (talk) 23:04, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the above. The article is impressively detailed, but if you're unfamiliar with the topic, even the introduction reads like gibberish. Please rewrite the intro almost entirely and run the revision by an 8th grader for approval. 2620:0:100E:30A:68E9:99C8:87F6:42A8 (talk) 17:37, 3 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Multiple patterning. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:50, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]