2D Proximity Effect Correction

Results of the classic example, published in 1996. A structure was used that does not accidentally look like a field transistor (Fig. 1a), where parts A and C simulate source and drain, B is a gate, parts D and E are wires situated partly far from and partly very close to large pads.

Special experiments were performed to demonstrate necessity of proximity effect correction (PEC) and efficiency of the "simple compensation" as a an approach of the proximity correction.
Qualitative coincidence of experimental structures with result of simulations prove that:

1. Models of exposure and development implemented in NanoMaker are correct
2. Algorithms developed are working properly
3. Exposure control provided by NanoMaker provides expected result

Fig. 1a. A test structure simulates field transistor with 200 nm gate (B), D simulates a single wire.	Fig. 1b. According to "simple compensation" (NanoMaker proximity correction) different areas of the structure should be exposed with different time to provide submicron features.
Fig. 2a. Development simulation of the structure exposed uniformly shows (each point obtained 150 %) that the proximity effect does not allow to create the device.	Fig. 2b Development simulation of the structure exposed according to "simple compensation" shown on Fig.1b. promises a success in creation of the device.
Fig. 3a. Experiment with uniform exposure confirms prediction of exposure and development simulation.	Fig. 3b. e-beam lithography with exposure according to "simple compensation" allows one to create the designed structure with 200 nm features