Optical beam deflection imaging of the electron beam interaction volume in semiconductors

1993 ◽  
Vol 63 (5) ◽  
pp. 645-647 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Y. Chang ◽  
R. B. Givens ◽  
J. W. M. Spicer ◽  
R. Osiander ◽  
J. C. Murphy
Author(s):  
J.A. Small ◽  
J.T. Armstrong

In conventional microprobe analysis, the samples and standards have a controlled geometry, i.e. flat polished, and infinitely large with respect to the electron beam interaction volume. As a result, the measured x-ray intensities for the analyzed elements vary in a predictable manner with composition and the various elemental concentrations can be calculated from a choice of several analytical algorithms. Unlike conventional analysis, the quantitative analysis of particles with the electron probe presents a very difficult analytical challenge. Most particles are irregularly shaped and do not have controlled geometries. In addition, depending on their size, they may not be “infinitely” thick with respect to the electron beam. Because of the random sizes and shapes, the emitted x-ray intensity from particles may be greater than or less than the intensities from a flat conventional sample of the same composition. A diagram from Armstrong of the interaction between an electron beam and a particle is shown in Fig. 1 and illustrates the “particle” effects that make quantitative particle analysis so difficult.


Author(s):  
David Joy ◽  
James Pawley

The scanning electron microscope (SEM) builds up an image by sampling contiguous sub-volumes near the surface of the specimen. A fine electron beam selectively excites each sub-volume and then the intensity of some resulting signal is measured. The spatial resolution of images made using such a process is limited by at least three factors. Two of these determine the size of the interaction volume: the size of the electron probe and the extent to which detectable signal is excited from locations remote from the beam impact point. A third limitation emerges from the fact that the probing beam is composed of a finite number of discrete particles and therefore that the accuracy with which any detectable signal can be measured is limited by Poisson statistics applied to this number (or to the number of events actually detected if this is smaller).


2013 ◽  
Vol 84 (8) ◽  
pp. 083701 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eika Tsunemi ◽  
Kei Kobayashi ◽  
Noriaki Oyabu ◽  
Masaharu Hirose ◽  
Yoshiko Takenaka ◽  
...  

2007 ◽  
Vol 46 (8B) ◽  
pp. 5636-5638 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eika Tsunemi ◽  
Nobuo Satoh ◽  
Yuji Miyato ◽  
Kei Kobayashi ◽  
Kazumi Matsushige ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 62 (6) ◽  
pp. 3212-3221 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas Aaron Estep ◽  
Amir Nader Askarpour ◽  
Simeon Trendafilov ◽  
Gennady Shvets ◽  
Andrea Alu

1981 ◽  
Vol 64 (2) ◽  
pp. 101-107
Author(s):  
Yoshifusa Wada ◽  
Masatoshi Migitaka ◽  
Yasuhide Hisamoto ◽  
Koichiro Mizukami

2013 ◽  
Vol 84 (10) ◽  
pp. 105001 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Sriramshankar ◽  
R. Sri Muthu Mrinalini ◽  
G. R. Jayanth

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document