Cynthia Hatch

The goal is to model the reflection of extreme ultraviolet light off of a rough surface, in order to improve the resolution of the image formed. Extreme ultraviolet light is used primarily in astronomy to image the sun and the magnetosphere of the Earth. It is also used in lithography for computers. A common problem with using extreme ultraviolet light is that it passes through most material. How this is often over come is by layering surfaces of different width in such a way that the reflected light off the various layers is in phase, and thus amplified. The method commonly used to correct for attenuation of x-ray or neutron scattering was the Debye-Waller correction factor. This method on the other hand is not as well adapted for finding the attenuation of light off of rough surfaces. In the paper the accuracy of the Debye-Waller correction is addressed and other correction options are explored as well.

The Debye-Waller factor:

DWF = exp(-2(qh))

Where q is the momentum of the light perpendicular to the surface and h is the surface roughness height. This helps us determine the phase difference of reflected light off of a rough surface, and gives us a compensation factor for the phase change. The problem with the Debye-Waller factor is that it does not account for the correlations of atoms in the surface.

The method used in this project the Field Integral Equation (FIE), derived from the Helmholtz equation, which applies Maxwells equations to the scattering field of the magnetic and electric components of the light to the surface currents.

Where A is the amplitude, k is the wave number and F is the induced field. By applying the Greens function to the surface currents A and F can be found. When this is used in the case of transverse magnetic polarization (TM), the FIE can be reduced to In the case of transverse electric polarization (TM) it reduces to

They set up a two dimensional surface and a Gaussian distribution to set up a random array of points to create the rough part of the surface. Finally they use a cubic spline interpolation. This is a smooth piecewise polynomial that is chosen for its ability to have a small interpolation error even when using small degree polynomials. In other words, it connects the various heights with a smooth line. All these steps allows them to create a surface that is characterized by a cutoff frequency, or the point where the light stops going through the surface and starts reflecting off of the surface.

In the code they used in this project was a loop that went through and solved the partial differential equation for the FIE and varying the incident angle, roughness height, and the knot separation, and ran through the calculation 100 times each. They compared the intensity of light as it changes with the angle of the computed values with the analytical values to make sure that the model was accurate. They compared the intensity of the light off of a flat surface and a rough surface to show the effects of rough surfaces. This is shown below.

Comparing the correction function and the attenuation shows a strong correlation between the two, but, as shown in the figure, the Debye-Waller factor is inaccurate in its predictions of the correction coefficient as the attenuations become larger. The correction function is shown below, where , , and are the correction coefficients.

The Debye-Waller factor predicted that there would only be one coefficient in the quadratic the quadratic term, and that the coefficient is 2. When the simulation was run, however, it was discovered that the cubic and linear terms were not insignificant, so the accuracy of the Debye-Waller is not sufficient. As shown by the figures below.

In conclusion: there is a strong relation between the correction coefficient and the phase shift given by the Debye-Waller. But the Debye-Waller factor is insufficient for the system of EUV because it does not account for the relationship between atoms. Below are the corrected coefficients for TM and TE.

How does the math work? How does a current form in the surface of the mirror? Why does the relationship between the correction factor and the phase shift in the light for TE? How did they figure out that the linear and cubic terms are significant in determining the correction function?