No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Recent Advances in Electron Tomography: TEM and HAADF-STEM Tomography for Materials Science and Semiconductor Applications
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 26 September 2005
Abstract
Electron tomography is a well-established technique for three-dimensional structure determination of (almost) amorphous specimens in life sciences applications. With the recent advances in nanotechnology and the semiconductor industry, there is also an increasing need for high-resolution three-dimensional (3D) structural information in physical sciences. In this article, we evaluate the capabilities and limitations of transmission electron microscopy (TEM) and high-angle-annular-dark-field scanning transmission electron microscopy (HAADF-STEM) tomography for the 3D structural characterization of partially crystalline to highly crystalline materials. Our analysis of catalysts, a hydrogen storage material, and different semiconductor devices shows that features with a diameter as small as 1–2 nm can be resolved in three dimensions by electron tomography. For partially crystalline materials with small single crystalline domains, bright-field TEM tomography provides reliable 3D structural information. HAADF-STEM tomography is more versatile and can also be used for high-resolution 3D imaging of highly crystalline materials such as semiconductor devices.
Keywords
- Type
- Special Issue: Frontiers of Electron Microscopy in Materials Science
- Information
- Copyright
- © 2005 Microscopy Society of America
References
REFERENCES
Anderson, M.W.,
Ohsuna, T.,
Sakamoto, Y.,
Liu, Z.,
Carlsson, A., &
Terasaki, O.
(2004).
Modern microscopy methods for the structural study of porous
materials.
Chem Comm
8,
907–916.Google Scholar
Batson, P.E.
(1999).
Advanced spatially resolved EELS in the STEM.
Ultramicroscopy
78,
33–42.Google Scholar
Baumeister, W.,
Grimm, R., &
Walz, J.
(1999).
Electron tomography of molecules and cells.
Trends Cell Biol
9,
81–85.Google Scholar
Breysse, M.,
Afanasiev, P.,
Geantet, P., &
Vrinat, M.
(2003).
Overview of support effects in hydrotreating catalysts.
Catal Today
86,
5–16.Google Scholar
Browning, N.D. &
Pennycook, S.J.
(2000).
Characterization of High TC Materials and Devices by
Electron Microscopy.
Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press.
Buseck, P.R.,
Dunin-Borkowski, R.E.,
Devouard, B.,
Frankel, R.B.,
McCartney, M.R.,
Midgley, P.A.,
Pósfai, M., &
Weyland, M.
(2001).
Magnetite morphology and life on Mars.
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
99,
13490–13495.Google Scholar
Crowther, R.A.,
de Rosier, D.J., &
Klug, A.
(1970).
The reconstruction of a three-dimensional structure from projections
and its application to electron microscopy.
Proc R Soc London A
317,
319–340.Google Scholar
Datye, A.K.
(2003).
Electron microscopy of catalysts: Recent achievements and future
prospects.
J Catal
216,
144–154.Google Scholar
Dubochet, J.,
Adrian, M.,
Chang, J.-J.,
Homo, J.-C.,
Lepault, J.,
McDowall, A.W., &
Schultz, P.
(1988).
Cryo-electron microscopy of vitrified specimens.
Quart Rev Biophys
21,
129–228.Google Scholar
de Jong, K.P. &
Koster, A.J.
(2002).
Three-dimensional electron microscopy of mesoporous
materials—Recent strides towards spatial imaging at the nanometer
scale.
Chem Phys Chem
3,
776.Google Scholar
Dhar, G.M.,
Srinivas, B.N.,
Rana, M.S.,
Kumar, M., &
Maity, S.K.
(2003).
Mixed oxide supported hydrodesulfurization catalysts—A
review.
Catal Today
86,
45–60.Google Scholar
Fetcenko, M.A.,
Ovshinsky, S.R.,
Reichman, B.,
Young, K.,
Chao, B., &
Im, J.
(1997).
United States Patent 5,616,432.
Fetcenko, M.A.,
Ovshinsky, S.R.,
Reichman, B.,
Young, K.,
Chao, B., &
Im, J.
(2003).
United States Patent Pending 10/733,702.
Frangakis, A.S. &
Hegerl, R.
(2001).
Noise reduction on electron tomographic reconstructions using
nonlinear anisotropic diffusion.
J Struct Biol
135,
239–250.Google Scholar
Frank, J.
(1992).
Electron Tomography: Three-dimensional Imaging with the Transmission
Electron Microscope.
New York:
Plenum Press.
Gilbert, P.
(1972a).
Iterative methods for the three-dimensional reconstruction of an
object from projections.
J Theor Biol
36,
105–117.Google Scholar
Gilbert, P.F.C.
(1972b).
The reconstruction of a three-dimensional structure from projections
and its application to electron microscopy. II Direct methods.
Proc Roy Soc London B
182,
89–102.Google Scholar
Grimm, R.,
Bärmann, M.,
Häckl, W.,
Typke, D.,
Sackmann, E., &
Baumeister, W.
(1997).
Energy filtered electron tomography of ice-embedded actin and
vesicles.
Biophys J
72,
482–489.Google Scholar
Grimm, R.,
Singh, H.,
Rachel, R.,
Typke, D.,
Zillig, W., &
Baumeister, W.
(1998).
Electron tomography of ice-embedded prokaryotic cells.
Biophys J
74,
1031–1042.Google Scholar
James, E.M. &
Browning, N.D.
(1999).
Practical aspects of atomic resolution imaging and analysis in
STEM.
Ultramicroscopy
78,
125–139.Google Scholar
Janssen, A.H.,
Koster, A.J., &
de Jong, K.P.
(2001).
Three-dimensional transmission electron microscopic observations of
mesopores in dealuminated zeolite Y.
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl
40,
1102–1104.Google Scholar
Janssen, A.H.,
Koster, A.J., &
de Jong, K.P.
(2002).
A three-dimensional transmission electron microscopic study combined
with texture analysis.
J Phys Chem B
106,
11905–11909.Google Scholar
Janssen, A.H.,
Yang, C.M.,
Wang, Y.,
Schüth, F.,
Koster, A.F., &
de Jong, K.P.
(2003).
Localization of metal (oxide) particles in SBA-15 using bright-field
electron tomography.
J Phys Chem B
107,
10552–10556.Google Scholar
Jia, C.L.,
Lentzen, M., &
Urban, K.
(2003).
Atomic-resolution imaging of oxygen in Perovskite ceramics.
Science
299,
870–873.Google Scholar
Kisielowski, C.,
Hetherington, C.J.D.,
Wang, Y.C.,
Kilaas, R.,
O'Keefe, M.A., &
Thust, A.
(2001).
Imaging columns of the light elements carbon, nitrogen and oxygen
with sub Ångstrom resolution.
Ultramicroscopy
80,
243–263.Google Scholar
Koster, A.J.,
Grimm, R.,
Typke, D.,
Hegerl, R.,
Stoschek, A.,
Walz, J., &
Baumeister, W.
(1997).
Perspectives of molecular and cellular electron tomography.
J Struct Biol
120,
276–308.Google Scholar
Koster, A.J. &
Klumperman, J.
(2003).
Electron microscopy in cell biology: Integrating structure und
function.
Suppl Nat Rev Cell Biol
2003,
SS6–SS10.Google Scholar
Koster, A.J.,
van den Bos, A., &
van der Mast, K.D.
(1987).
An autofocus method for a TEM.
Ultramicroscopy
21,
209–221.Google Scholar
Koster, A.J.,
Ziese, U.,
Verkleij, A.J.,
Janssen, A.H., &
De Jong, K.P.
(2000).
Three-dimensional electron microscopy: A novel imaging and
characterization technique with nanometer scale resolution for materials
science.
J Phys Chem B
104,
9368–9370.Google Scholar
Kübel, C.
(2001).
Application of electron tomography for materials science.
Tomography Workshop of the Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van
Wetenschappen, Amsterdam.
Lee, T.-C.,
Huang, J.-Y.,
Chen, L.-C.,
Hwang, R.-L., &
Su, D.
(2002).
Methodology for TEM analysis of barrier profiles.
ISTFA Conference, 2002.
McEwen, B.F. &
Marko, M.
(2001).
The emergence of electron tomography as an important tool for
investigating cellular ultrastructure.
J Histochem Cytochem
49,
553–563.Google Scholar
McIntosh, J.R.
(2001).
Electron microscopy of cells: A new beginning for a new
century.
J Cell Biol
153,
F25–F32.Google Scholar
Midgley, P.A. &
Weyland, M.
(2003).
3D electron microscopy in the physical sciences: The development of
Z-contrast and EFTEM tomography.
Ultramicroscopy
96,
413–431.Google Scholar
Midgley, P.A.,
Weyland, M.,
Thomas, J.M., &
Johnson, B.F.G.
(2001).
Z-contrast tomography: A technique in three-dimensional
nanostructural analysis based on Rutherford scattering.
Chem Comm
18,
907–908.Google Scholar
Möbus, G.,
Doole, R.C., &
Inkson, B.J.
(2003).
Spectroscopic electron tomography.
Ultramicroscopy
96,
433–451.Google Scholar
Muller, D.A.,
Sorsch, T.,
Moccio, S.,
Baumann, F.H.,
Evans-Lutterodt, K., &
Timp, G.
(1999).
The electronic structure at the atomic scale of ultrathin gate
oxides.
Nature
399,
758–761.Google Scholar
Penczek, P.,
Marko, M.,
Buttle, K., &
Frank, J.
(1995).
Double-tilt electron tomography.
Ultramicroscopy
60,
393–410.Google Scholar
Rademacher, M.
(1988).
3-dimensional reconstruction of single particles from random and
nonrandom tilt-series.
J Electron Microsc Technol
9,
359–394.Google Scholar
Sali, A.,
Glaeser, R.,
Earnest, T., &
Baumeister, W.
(2003).
From words to literature in structural proteomics.
Nature
422,
216–225.Google Scholar
Stegmann, H. &
Zschech, E.
(2002).
Electron tomography of semiconductor copper interconnect
structures.
G.I.T. Imaging & Microscopy
4,
8–9.Google Scholar
Voyles, P.M.,
Muller, D.A.,
Grazul, J.L.,
Citrin, P.H., &
Gossmann, H.-J.L.
(2002).
Atomic-scale imaging of individual dopant atoms and clusters in
highly n-type Si.
Nature
416,
826.Google Scholar
Weyland, M.
(2001).
Two and Three Dimensional Nanoscale Analysis: New Techniques and
Applications.
Ph.D. Thesis,
Cambridge, UK.
Weyland, M. &
Midgley, P.A.
(2003).
Extending energy-filtered transmission electron microscopy (EFTEM)
into three dimensions using electron tomography.
Microsc Microanal
9,
542–555.Google Scholar
Weyland, M.,
Midgley, P.A., &
Thomas, J.M.
(2001).
Electron tomography of nanoparticle catalysts on porous supports: A
new technique based on Rutherford scattering.
J Phys Chem
B105,
7882–7886.Google Scholar
Young, R.J.,
Carleson, P.D.,
Da, X.,
Hunt, T., &
Walker, J.F.
(1998).
High-yield high-throughput TEM sample preparation using focus ion
beam automation.
Proceedings of the 24th International Symposium for Testing and
Failure Analysis, ISTFA 98, pp.
329–336.
Materials Park, Ohio:
ASM International.
Ziese, U.,
de Jong, K.P., &
Koster, A.J.
(2004).
Electron tomography: A tool for 3D structural probing of
heterogeneous catalysts at the nanometer scale.
Appl Catal A: Gen
260,
71–74.Google Scholar
Ziese, U.,
Janssen, A.H.,
Murk, J.L.,
Geerts, W.J.,
Van der Krift, T.,
Verkleij, A.J., &
Koster, A.J.
(2002a).
Automated high-throughput electron tomography by pre-calibration of
image shifts.
J Microsc
205,
187–200.Google Scholar
Ziese, U.,
Kübel, C.,
Verkleij, A.J., &
Koster, A.J.
(2002b).
Three-dimensional localization of ultra-small immuno-gold labels by
HAADF-STEM tomography.
J Struct Biol
138,
58–62.Google Scholar
Zschech, E.,
Engelmann, H.-J.,
Stegmann, H.,
Saage, H., &
de Robillard, Q.
(2003).
Barrier/seed step coverage analysis in via structures for inlaid
copper process control.
Future Fab Intl
14.Google Scholar
Figure 2 movie file (optimally viewed on PC)
Topsoe Catalyst WBP
Video
2.1 MB
Figure 2: movie file (optimally viewed on Mac)
Topsoe Catalyst WBP
Video
1.1 MB
Figure 3 movie file (optimally viewed on PC)
Topsoe Catalyst VIS
Video
372.2 KB
Figure 3: movie file (optimally viewed on Mac)
Topsoe Catalyst VIS
Video
601.5 KB
Figure 5 movie file (optimally viewed on PC)
Pt Catalyst WBP
Video
3.7 MB
Figure 5 movie file (optimally viewed on Mac)
Pt Catalyst WBP
Video
1.7 MB
Figure 5 addition movie file (optimally viewed on PC)
Pt Catalyst VIS
Video
2 MB
Figure 5 addition movie file (optimally viewed on Mac)
Pt Catalyst VIS
Video
1.1 MB
Figure 8 movie file (optimally viewed on PC)
HSM TEM-Tomo ALI
Video
1.4 MB
Figure 8 movie file (optimally viewed on Mac)
HSM TEM-Tomo ALI
Video
2.2 MB
Figure 8 addition movie file (optimally viewed on PC)
HSM TEM-Tomo WBP
Video
3.7 MB
Figure 9 movie file (optimally viewed on PC)
HSM STEM-Tomo SIRT
Video
877.6 KB
Figure 9 movie file (optimally viewed on Mac)
HSM STEM-Tomo SIRT
Video
1.1 MB
Figure 11 movie file (optimally viewed on PC)
HSM STEM-Tomo VIS
Video
2.3 MB
Figure 11 movie file (optimally viewed on Mac)
HSM STEM-Tomo VIS
Video
1.3 MB
Figure 13 movie file (optimally viewed on PC)
AMD VIA WBP
Video
472.6 KB
Figure 13 movie file (optimally viewed on Mac)
AMD VIA WBP
Video
1.1 MB
Figure 14 movie file (optimally viewed on PC)
AMD VIA VIS
Video
1.9 MB
Figure 14 movie file (optimally viewed on Mac)
AMD VIA VIS
Video
1.4 MB
Figure 16 movie file (optimally viewed on PC)
TSMC Flash Memory WBP
Video
1.5 MB
Figure 16 movie file (optimally viewed on Mac)
TSMC Flash Memory WBP
Video
1.3 MB
Figure 17 movie file (optimally viewed on PC)
TSMC Flash Memory VIS
Video
3.7 MB
Figure 17 movie file (optimally viewed on Mac)
TSMC Flash Memory VIS
Video
2 MB
Figure 18 movie file (optimally viewed on PC)
TSMC Flash Memory SIRT
Video
633.3 KB
Figure 18 movie file (optimally viewed on Mac)
TSMC Flash Memory SIRT
Video
1.6 MB