Artificial re-judgment method and system for wafer

Abstract

The invention discloses an artificial re-judgment method and system for a wafer, and relates to the field of semiconductors, and the method comprises the steps: collecting defect data from different types of equipment through a plurality of preset interface protocols; performing standardized analysis on the collected defect data file, extracting production information and storing the production information in a database to generate a standardized re-judgment task; dynamically configuring a defect judgment rule associated with the current state based on the production information of the wafer; a re-judgment mode is selected and executed, and the re-judgment mode comprises an online re-judgment mode and an offline re-judgment mode; according to the method, all wafers in the same batch are subjected to collaborative re-judgment, and after it is confirmed that all the wafers in the same batch are subjected to re-judgment, it is marked that batch re-judgment is completed, meanwhile, the invention further discloses a system used for achieving the method, and the method supports multi-protocol compatible collection, adapts to different equipment interfaces and is high in practicability. And a triple verification mechanism is adopted to trigger the display of defect codes, so that the data integrity and real-time performance are ensured.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention belongs to the field of semiconductor technology, and in particular relates to a method and system for manual re-inspection of wafers. Background Technology

[0002] In the semiconductor manufacturing process, wafer defect detection is a key step in ensuring product quality.

[0003] Traditional defect re-inspection systems suffer from the following problems: the defect data acquisition method is singular and cannot be compatible with different types of inspection equipment; at the same time, the defect judgment rules are fixed and cannot adapt to the specific needs of different sites and film layers; during the re-inspection process, they rely heavily on the existing MES system, and when the MES fails, the entire re-inspection process will come to a standstill. Thus, the lack of an effective batch re-inspection status monitoring mechanism easily leads to missed judgments, affecting production efficiency and product quality. Based on the above reasons, this invention designs a manual re-inspection method and system for wafers. Summary of the Invention

[0004] The purpose of this invention is to solve the problems in the prior art, and to propose a method and system for manual re-inspection of wafers.

[0005] In a first aspect, the present invention discloses a method and system for manual re-inspection of wafers, comprising the following steps: Defect data is collected from different types of devices through a variety of preset interface protocols; The collected defect data files are parsed in a standardized manner to extract production information and store it in the database to generate standardized review tasks; Based on wafer production information, dynamically configure defect judgment rules associated with the current state; Select and execute the review mode, wherein the review mode includes online review mode and offline review mode; All wafers within the same batch are re-evaluated collaboratively, and the batch re-evaluation is marked as complete after confirming that all wafers in the batch have completed the re-evaluation.

[0006] In the above method, defect data files are collected through various preset interface protocols, including: Obtain newly added defect data files through the shared folder specified by the monitoring and detection equipment; and / or, Receive defect data files actively uploaded by the detection equipment via file transfer protocol; The defect data files obtained through the above methods will be uniformly transferred to a predefined central storage directory.

[0007] In the above method, configuring the defect determination rules includes: Establish a defect code library and associate defect codes with specific production site identifiers and membrane layer identifiers; When performing a re-evaluation operation, the system automatically matches the site and film layer information of the current wafer and calls the set of defect codes bound to it from the defect code library for use.

[0008] In the above method, a triple verification mechanism is performed before displaying the defective code set: Verify that the captured site information is consistent with the pre-configured re-judgment sites; Verify that the defect data files for the corresponding site have been parsed and stored in the database; Verify that the database is accessible. The system will only display the corresponding set of defect codes when all verification conditions are met.

[0009] In the above methods, the ways to select the re-judgment mode include: Online review mode: When the manufacturing execution system receives accounting information at the review station, the online review process is automatically triggered and started; Offline review mode: When the manufacturing execution system has no posting information, system failure, or is processing non-standard wafers, the offline review process is directly started based on the parsed defect data.

[0010] In the above method, the collaborative review of all wafers within the same batch includes: It supports multiple operators to perform parallel re-judgment operations on different wafers in the same batch at the same time. The system monitors and updates the re-judgment status of each wafer in real time.

[0011] The conditions for the completion of the batch re-judgment are: The system uses logical operations to confirm that the re-judgment status of each wafer in the batch is in a completed state.

[0012] The above method further includes a yield closed-loop feedback step: After the re-evaluation operation is completed, the system automatically calculates the wafer yield based on the re-evaluation results; The yield data is written back to the production management system to form a closed loop of quality control.

[0013] Secondly, the present invention also provides a manual re-inspection system for wafers, used to implement the above method, the system comprising: The data acquisition module is used to collect defect data from the device through various interface protocols; The parsing and storage module is used to standardize and parse defect data and store it in the database; The rules management module is used to dynamically configure defect judgment rules based on production status; The review and execution module supports both online and offline review modes; The collaborative monitoring module is used to manage batch collaborative review and determine the batch completion status.

[0014] The system also includes a yield feedback module, which automatically calculates the yield based on the re-judgment results and sends it back to the production system.

[0015] The beneficial effects of this invention are as follows: 1. This invention solves the equipment compatibility problem by setting up multi-protocol data acquisition and improves the accuracy of re-judgment by adopting dynamic rule configuration. In particular, the dual-dimensional association between the site and the film layer is maintained online in real time, so that the re-judgment interface dynamically matches the site and film layer of the current wafer. A triple verification mechanism is used to trigger the display of defect codes to ensure data integrity and real-time performance.

[0016] 2. This solution is designed with dual-mode review, including online mode and offline mode. The offline mode solves the problem of MES dependency. By accessing local defect data, it solves the problem of review interruption caused by MES failure in traditional solutions, thus ensuring production continuity. Attached Figure Description

[0017] Figure 1 This is a flowchart of a manual re-inspection method for wafers disclosed in this invention; Figure 2 This is a flowchart illustrating the workflow of manually reviewing wafers according to the present invention, which uses a shared folder to transfer defect files. Figure 3 This is a flowchart illustrating the workflow of uploading defect files using the FTP protocol in a manual wafer re-inspection method disclosed in this invention. Figure 4 This is a schematic diagram illustrating how different defect codes are maintained based on the site and film layer in a manual re-inspection method for wafers disclosed in this invention. Figure 5 This is a schematic diagram of real-time data acquisition in the online review mode of a manual wafer review method disclosed in this invention; Figure 6 This is a schematic diagram of the triple determination of defect codes in the online review mode of a manual review method for wafers disclosed in this invention; Figure 7 This is a schematic diagram illustrating the collaborative review process used in a manual review method for wafers disclosed in this invention. Detailed Implementation

[0018] To facilitate understanding of this application and to make the aforementioned objectives, features, and advantages of this application more apparent, a detailed description of specific embodiments of this application is provided below in conjunction with the accompanying drawings. Numerous specific details are set forth in the following description to provide a thorough understanding of this application, and preferred embodiments are shown in the accompanying drawings. However, this application can be implemented in many different forms and is not limited to the embodiments described herein. Rather, these embodiments are provided to provide a more thorough and complete understanding of the disclosure of this application. This application can be implemented in many other ways different from those described herein, and those skilled in the art can make similar modifications without departing from the spirit of this application; therefore, this application is not limited to the specific embodiments disclosed below. Furthermore, the terms "first" and "second" are used for descriptive purposes only and should not be construed as indicating or implying relative importance or implicitly specifying the number of indicated technical features. Thus, a feature defined as "first" or "second" may explicitly or implicitly include at least one of that feature. In the description of this application, "a plurality of" means at least two, such as two, three, etc., unless otherwise explicitly specified. In the description of this application, "several" means at least one, such as one, two, etc., unless otherwise explicitly specified. It should be noted that when an element is referred to as being "fixed to" another element, it can be directly attached to the other element or there may be an intervening element. When an element is referred to as being "connected to" another element, it can be directly connected to the other element or there may be an intervening element. The terms "vertical," "horizontal," "left," "right," and similar expressions used herein are for illustrative purposes only and do not represent the only possible implementations. Unless otherwise defined, all technical and scientific terms used herein have the same meaning as commonly understood by one of ordinary skill in the art to which this application belongs. The terminology used herein is only for describing particular implementations and is not intended to limit the scope of this application. The term "and / or" as used herein includes any and all combinations of one or more of the associated listed items.

[0019] Reference Figures 1-7 This invention discloses a wafer re-judgment method, comprising: Defect data is collected from different types of devices through a variety of preset interface protocols; The collected defect data files are parsed in a standardized manner to extract production information and store it in the database to generate standardized review tasks; Based on wafer production information, dynamically configure defect judgment rules associated with the current state; Select and execute the review mode, wherein the review mode includes online review mode and offline review mode; All wafers within the same batch undergo collaborative re-inspection, and the batch re-inspection is marked as complete after confirming that all wafers in the batch have completed the re-inspection. This scheme includes five key stages: First, the system collects defect data from different types of detection equipment through multiple preset interface protocols. In practical applications, different types of detection equipment may use different data output methods. This system, by designing a unified interface layer, supports both shared folder monitoring and FTP protocol acquisition methods, ensuring compatibility with various devices. This multi-protocol acquisition scheme solves the problem of the single acquisition method in traditional systems, significantly improving the efficiency and reliability of data acquisition.

[0020] Secondly, the system performs standardized parsing on the collected defect data files. The parsing program automatically identifies newly added defect files, extracts key production information such as batch number, wafer number, site information, and defect coordinates, and stores it in a standardized database structure. This step converts heterogeneous data generated by different devices into a unified format that the system can recognize, laying a solid foundation for subsequent review tasks.

[0021] Then, the system dynamically configures defect judgment rules based on wafer production information. The system maintains an online, maintainable defect code library, where defect codes are associated with specific production sites and film layer information. When performing a re-judgment, the system automatically matches the current wafer's process information and retrieves the corresponding defect code set from the code library for operators to use. This dynamic configuration mechanism effectively solves the misjudgment problem caused by traditional fixed defect codes.

[0022] Regarding the selection of review modes, the system provides two independent execution paths. The online review mode is deeply integrated with the MES system and is automatically triggered when the MES receives accounting information at the review station. The offline review mode does not rely on the MES system and can be started only after the defect data is parsed, providing an emergency channel for system failures or the handling of special wafers. This dual-mode design ensures the continuity of the review process and the availability of the system.

[0023] Finally, the system supports collaborative review of different wafers within the same batch by multiple users, and monitors the review status of each wafer in real time through logical operations. The system only marks the batch as complete when all wafers within it have been reviewed. This collaborative monitoring mechanism effectively prevents missed reviews and ensures the integrity of the review process.

[0024] In one feasible embodiment, defect data files are collected through various preset interface protocols, including: Obtain newly added defect data files through the shared folder specified by the monitoring and detection equipment; and / or, Receive defect data files actively uploaded by the detection equipment via file transfer protocol; The defect data files obtained through the above methods are uniformly transferred to a predefined central storage directory. In this embodiment, the specific implementation of multi-protocol data acquisition is described. For detection devices that support shared folders, the system monitors the shared directory specified by the device in real time and detects newly added defect files through a file system event listening mechanism. Once a new file is detected, the system immediately transfers it to the predefined central storage directory and records the file's data information. For devices that support the FTP protocol, the system starts an FTP client service, continuously listens for upload requests from the device, and receives files actively pushed by the device. This dual-mode acquisition scheme ensures compatibility with various detection devices and solves the data acquisition difficulties caused by differences in device interfaces in traditional systems. In practical applications, this design significantly improves the efficiency and reliability of data acquisition, providing complete and timely data support for subsequent processing.

[0025] In one feasible embodiment, configuring the defect determination rule includes: Establish a defect code library and associate defect codes with specific production site identifiers and membrane layer identifiers; When performing a review operation, the system automatically matches the current wafer's site and film layer information, and retrieves the associated defect code set from the defect code library for use. This embodiment demonstrates the specific implementation of dynamic defect rule configuration. The system establishes an online maintainable defect code library, allowing administrators to update defect code definitions in real time via a web interface. Defect codes are bound to production sites and film layer information through a multi-dimensional association table. For example, codes related to pattern defects might be configured at the lithography site, while codes related to film quality might be configured at the thin film deposition site. When the reviewer operates, the system automatically identifies the current process stage of the wafer and retrieves the corresponding defect code set in real time through a database query. This dynamic matching mechanism significantly improves the accuracy and efficiency of the review, avoiding misjudgments caused by fixed rules in traditional systems. In practical applications, this design makes defect determination more accurate and significantly improves product quality control.

[0026] In one feasible embodiment, a triple verification mechanism is performed before the defective code set is displayed: Verify that the captured site information is consistent with the pre-configured re-judgment sites; Verify that the defect data files for the corresponding site have been parsed and stored in the database; Verify that the database is accessible. The system will only display the corresponding set of defect codes if all verification conditions are met. This embodiment introduces at least a triple verification mechanism. Before displaying defective code, the system performs the following verifications in sequence: First, by querying the MES system interface, it confirms that the current site is a legitimate site requiring re-evaluation; second, it checks the parsing status of the corresponding defective data file in the database to ensure that the data has been completely stored; finally, it verifies the availability of the database service through a database connection pool health check. Only when all verification conditions are met will the system retrieve and display the corresponding set of defective codes from the defective code repository, as follows: Figure 6 As shown, when the site information retrieved by the system from the MES matches the re-judgment, and the corresponding defect files have been successfully parsed and entered into the database, the system displays the defect images of all wafers in that batch and the defect codes of the corresponding sites maintained in step two.

[0027] in: 1. Site matching: Step_Info(Lot) = Judge_Step 2. The defect file has been parsed and stored in the database: Is_Parsed(Scan_Step_Defect_File(Lot))=True 3. Database accessibility: Defect_Data_Exists(Lot) = True This verification mechanism effectively prevents misjudgments caused by incomplete data or system anomalies, ensuring the reliability of the review process. In practical applications, this design significantly reduces the error rate of review due to abnormal system conditions.

[0028] In one feasible embodiment, the method for selecting the re-judgment mode includes: Online review mode: When the manufacturing execution system receives accounting information at the review station, the online review process is automatically triggered and started; Offline Review Mode: When the Manufacturing Execution System (MES) lacks posting information, experiences system failure, or processes non-standard wafers, the offline review process is directly initiated based on the parsed defect data. This embodiment illustrates the collaborative operation of online and offline review modes. In online mode, the system establishes a real-time data connection with the MES system and listens for MES posting events via a web service interface. When batch information is detected entering the review station, the system automatically triggers the review process, loading the corresponding defect data from the database for operator use. Offline mode provides a completely independent review channel. In special circumstances such as MES system failure, network interruption, or the need to process experimental wafers, operators can directly access the parsed defect data list and manually select a specific batch to initiate review. This dual-mode design ensures the continuity of the review process and the robustness of the system, significantly improving production line availability in practical applications.

[0029] In one feasible embodiment, the collaborative review is performed on all wafers within the same batch, including: It supports multiple operators to perform parallel re-judgment operations on different wafers in the same batch at the same time. The system monitors and updates the re-judgment status of each wafer in real time. This method allows multiple operators to simultaneously perform re-judgment operations on different wafers in the same batch. Furthermore, a real-time database locking mechanism ensures that the same wafer is not assigned repeatedly. Re-judgment progress is recorded using status flags. When the status flags of all wafers in the batch are set to "complete," the system automatically updates the batch status and notifies downstream processes. This collaborative approach improves re-judgment efficiency, ensures the integrity of the re-judgment process, and effectively prevents missed judgments.

[0030] In one feasible embodiment, the condition for the completion of the batch re-judgment is: The system uses logical operations to confirm that the re-judgment status of each wafer in the batch is in a completed state. The logic for determining whether the current batch has been fully re-judged is as follows: A certain lot contains N wafers, numbered W1, W2, ..., W n .

[0031] The re-judgment state of each wafer is S. i (where S) i =1 indicates that it has been re-judged, S i =0 indicates that no review was conducted.

[0032] The condition for the completion of this batch of re-inspection is that all wafers have been re-inspected, that is:

[0033] Where ⋀ represents the logical AND operation, that is, all S i It must be equal to 1.

[0034] This embodiment demonstrates the specific implementation of a closed-loop feedback mechanism for yield. After the re-evaluation is completed, the system automatically extracts the re-evaluation result data from the database and calculates the wafer yield based on the defect type and quantity. The yield calculation uses a weighted algorithm to comprehensively consider the severity of different defect types. After the calculation is completed, the system writes the yield data back to the production management system through a data interface and generates a yield analysis report. This mechanism forms a closed-loop quality control system from defect detection to yield analysis, providing data support for process improvement and quality control. In practical applications, this design enables the automatic flow and analysis of quality data, significantly improving quality management efficiency.

[0035] In one embodiment, a manual review system for wafers is provided. This system includes a data acquisition module, a parsing and storage module, a rule management module, a review execution module, and a collaborative monitoring module. The data acquisition module adopts a pluggable design, supports multiple interface protocol adapters, and is responsible for collecting defect data from various inspection devices. The parsing and storage module includes a file parsing engine and a database management component, which standardizes the data and stores it in the database. The rule management module adopts a microservice architecture, providing a RESTful API interface for the defect code repository. The review execution module includes a workflow engine, supporting dynamic switching between online and offline review modes. The collaborative monitoring module adopts an event-driven architecture, tracking the batch review status in real time. These modules communicate asynchronously through a message queue, forming a highly available and scalable review solution.

[0036] In one feasible embodiment, the system further includes a yield feedback module, which establishes a bidirectional data connection with the production management system and extracts key quality indicators from the review results using an ETL process. The yield calculation engine automatically calculates various yield data, including site yield, batch yield, and overall yield, based on a preset algorithm. After calculation, the data push module synchronizes the yield data to the production management system in real time via a message middleware, simultaneously triggering a report generation service to create a yield trend analysis report. This design enables the automatic flow and analysis of quality data, providing real-time support for production decisions and significantly improving the precision of quality management in practical applications.

[0037] The above embodiments illustrate the specific implementation of the technical solution of the present invention and the technical effects it brings. Through innovative designs such as multi-protocol data acquisition, dynamic rule configuration, dual-mode re-judgment, collaborative monitoring, and yield closed-loop feedback, the present invention effectively solves the key technical problems of traditional re-judgment systems and realizes the automation, intelligence, and efficiency of the re-judgment process.

[0038] As is known from common technical knowledge, this invention can be implemented through other embodiments that do not depart from its spirit or essential characteristics. Therefore, the disclosed embodiments described above are merely illustrative and not exhaustive. All modifications within the scope of this invention or its equivalents are included in this invention.

Claims

1. A method for manual re-inspection of wafers, characterized in that, include: Defect data is collected from different types of devices through a variety of preset interface protocols; The collected defect data files are parsed in a standardized manner to extract production information and store it in the database to generate standardized review tasks; Based on wafer production information, dynamically configure defect judgment rules associated with the current state; Select and execute the review mode, wherein the review mode includes online review mode and offline review mode; All wafers within the same batch are re-evaluated collaboratively, and the batch re-evaluation is marked as complete after confirming that all wafers in the batch have completed the re-evaluation.

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, Defect data files are collected through various preset interface protocols, including: Obtain newly added defect data files through the shared folder specified by the monitoring and detection equipment; and / or, Receive defect data files actively uploaded by the detection equipment via file transfer protocol; The defect data files obtained through the above methods will be uniformly transferred to a predefined central storage directory.

3. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, Configure the defect determination rules, including: Establish a defect code library and associate defect codes with specific production site identifiers and membrane layer identifiers; When performing a re-evaluation operation, the system automatically matches the site and film layer information of the current wafer and calls the set of defect codes bound to it from the defect code library for use.

4. The method according to claim 3, characterized in that, Before displaying the aforementioned set of defective codes, a triple verification mechanism is executed: Verify that the captured site information is consistent with the pre-configured re-judgment sites; Verify that the defect data files for the corresponding site have been parsed and stored in the database; Verify that the database is accessible. The system will only display the corresponding set of defect codes when all verification conditions are met.

5. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The methods for selecting the re-judgment mode include: Online review mode: When the manufacturing execution system receives accounting information at the review station, the online review process is automatically triggered and started; Offline review mode: When the manufacturing execution system has no posting information, system failure, or is processing non-standard wafers, the offline review process is directly started based on the parsed defect data.

6. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The aforementioned collaborative review is performed on all wafers within the same batch, including: It supports multiple operators to perform parallel re-judgment operations on different wafers in the same batch at the same time. The system monitors and updates the re-judgment status of each wafer in real time.

7. The method according to claim 1 or 6, characterized in that, The conditions for the completion of the batch re-judgment are: The system uses logical operations to confirm that the re-judgment status of each wafer in the batch is in a completed state.

8. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The method also includes a yield closed-loop feedback step: After the re-evaluation operation is completed, the system automatically calculates the wafer yield based on the re-evaluation results; The yield data is written back to the production management system to form a closed loop of quality control.

9. A manual review system for wafers, characterized in that, The system for implementing the method as described in any one of claims 1 to 8 comprises: The data acquisition module is used to collect defect data from the device through various interface protocols; The parsing and storage module is used to standardize and parse defect data and store it in the database; The rules management module is used to dynamically configure defect judgment rules based on production status; The review and execution module supports both online and offline review modes; The collaborative monitoring module is used to manage batch collaborative review and determine the batch completion status.

10. The system according to claim 9, characterized in that, The system also includes a yield feedback module, which automatically calculates the yield based on the re-judgment results and sends it back to the production system.

Images