Skip to main content Accessibility help

Estimating Step Heights from Top-Down SEM Images

  • Kerim Tugrul Arat (a1), Jens Bolten (a2), Aernout Christiaan Zonnevylle (a3), Pieter Kruit (a1) and Cornelis Wouter Hagen (a1)...


Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) is one of the most common inspection methods in the semiconductor industry and in research labs. To extract the height of structures using SEM images, various techniques have been used, such as tilting a sample, or modifying the SEM tool with extra sources and/or detectors. However, none of these techniques focused on extraction of height information directly from top-down images. In this work, using Monte Carlo simulations, we studied the relation between step height and the emission of secondary electrons (SEs) resulting from exposure with primary electrons at different energies. It is found that part of the SE signal, when scanning over a step edge, is determined by the step height rather than the geometry of the step edge. We present a way to quantify this, arriving at a method to determine the height of structures from top-down SEM images. The method is demonstrated on three different samples using two different SEM tools, and atomic force microscopy is used to measure the step height of the samples. The results obtained are in qualitative agreement with the results from the Monte Carlo simulations.


Corresponding author

*Author for correspondence: Kerim Tugrul Arat, E-mail:


Hide All
Eulitz, M & Reiss, G (2015). 3D reconstruction of SEM images by use of optical photogrammetry software. J Struct Biol 191, 190196. Available at
Faber, ET, Martinez-Martinez, D, Mansilla, C, Ocelík, V & De Hosson, JTM (2014). Calibration-free quantitative surface topography reconstruction in scanning electron microscopy. Ultramicroscopy 148, 3141. Available at
Fitting, HJ, Schreiber, E, Kuhr, JC & Von Czarnowski, A (2001). Attenuation and escape depths of low-energy electron emission. J Electron Spectrosc Relat Phenom 119, 3547.
Frase, CG, Gnieser, D & Bosse, H (2009). Model-based SEM for dimensional metrology tasks in semiconductor and mask industry. J Phys D: Appl Phys 42, 183001. Available at
Karabekov, A, Zoran, O, Rosenberg, Z & Eytan, G (2003). Using Monte Carlo simulation for accurate critical dimension metrology of super small isolated poly-lines. Scanning 25, 291296.
Kieft, E & Bosch, E (2008). Refinement of Monte Carlo simulations of electron–specimen interaction in low-voltage SEM. J Phys D: Appl Phys 41, 215310.
Marinello, F, Bariani, P, Savio, E, Horsewell, A & De Chiffre, L (2008). Critical factors in SEM 3D stereo microscopy. Meas Sci Technol 19, 065705. Available at
Orji, NG, Badaroglu, M, Barnes, BM, Beitia, C, Bunday, BD, Celano, U, Kline, RJ, Neisser, M, Obeng, Y & Vladar, AE (2018). Metrology for the next generation of semiconductor devices. Nat Electron 1, 532547. Available at
Postek, MT & Vladár, AE (2013). Does your SEM really tell the truth? How would you know? Part 1. Scanning 35, 355361.
Reimer, L (1998). Scanning Electron Microscopy, 2nd ed. Heidelberg: Springer.
Salvat, F, Jablonski, A & Powell, CJ (2005). ELSEPA—Dirac partial-wave calculation of elastic scattering of electrons and positrons by atoms, positive ions and molecules. Comput Phys Commun 165, 157190.
Schreiber, E & Fitting, HJ (2002). Monte Carlo simulation of secondary electron emission from the insulator SiO2. J Electron Spectrosc Relat Phenom 124, 2537. Available at
Shanklin, W (2016). 2D SEM images turn into 3D object models. CoRR abs/1602.0. Available at
Shimizu, R & Ze-Jun, D (1992). Monte Carlo modelling of electron–solid interactions. Rep Prog Phys 55, 487531.
Shishido, C, Tanaka, M & Osaki, M (2009). CD-bias reduction in CD-SEM line-width measurement for the 32-nm node and beyond using the model-based library method. Proc SPIE 7272, 72722C72722C-10. Available at
Solecky, E, Rasafar, A, Cantone, J, Bunday, B, Vaid, A, Patterson, O, Stamper, A, Wu, K, Buengener, R, Weng, W & Dai, X (2017). In-line E-beam metrology and defect inspection: Industry reflections, hybrid E-beam opportunities, recommendations and predictions. Proc SPIE, 10145, 101450R. Available at
Tafti, AP, Kirkpatrick, AB, Alavi, Z, Owen, HA & Yu, Z (2015). Recent advances in 3D SEM surface reconstruction. Micron 78, 5466. Available at
Tanaka, M, Villarrubia, JS & Vladár, AE (2005). Influence of focus variation on linewidth measurements. Proc SPIE 5752, 144155. Available at
Tondare, VN, Villarrubia, JS & Vladár, AE (2017). Three-dimensional (3D) Nanometrology based on Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) Stereophotogrammetry. Microsc Microanal 23, 967977. Available at
Verduin, T (2016). Quantum Noise Effects in e-Beam Lithography and Metrology. Delft: Delft University of Technology.
Verduin, T, Lokhorst, SR & Hagen, CW (2016). GPU accelerated Monte-Carlo simulation of SEM images for metrology. Proc SPIE 9778, 97780D. Available at
Villarrubia, JS, Vladár, AE & Postek, MT (2005 a). Scanning electron microscope dimensional metrology using a model-based library. Surf Interface Anal 37, 951958.
Villarrubia, JS, Vladár, AE & Postek, MT (2005 b). Simulation study of repeatability and bias in the critical dimension scanning electron microscope. J Micro Nanolithogr MEMS MOEMS 4, 033002. Available at


Type Description Title
Supplementary materials

Arat et al. supplementary material
Arat et al. supplementary material 1

 Word (9.2 MB)
9.2 MB


Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed