{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.031180400890868598, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.2, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Evaluation of PAC performance in a thick film photoresist

In this paper we evaluate the photoactive compound (PAC) performance in a thick film photoresist. In an effort to report the performance of a thick film photoresist and the correlation to PAC structure, we have studied several formulations containing a monofunctional PAC(A) in comparison to a polyfunctional (PAC(B). We have seen that the use of a monofunctional photoactive compound provides for a high performance thick film photoresist with good profile, depth of focus, resolution, and exposure latitude. A polyfunctional PAC however, causes a loss in performance. The ratio of monofunctional PAC(A) to polyfunctional PAC(B) was varied and lithography was studied on a Nikon stepper (i-line). In our study, we evaluate the effect of the addition of PAC(B) to our formulations and the consequences in terms of lithographic performance.