323  US 9,285,679 B2  324  TABLE 7-continued  As apparent from the results shown in Table 7, in Com› parative Example IP not using an acid-increasing agent and  in Comparative Examples 2P to  SP  using an acid-increasing  agent not satisfying formula  (I), the sensitivity, resolution,  pattern profile, LER and dry etching resistance are poor. In  addition, in Comparative Examples IP, 4P and  SP,  the reduc› tion in scum is also poor, and in Comparative Examples 2P to  SP,  the aging stability is also poor.  On the other hand, in Examples IP to 28P using an acid› increasing agent satisfying formula  (I), it is seen that the  reduction in scum is particularly excellent and the sensitivity,  resolution, pattern profile, LER performance, dry etching  resistance and aging stability are excellent.  (Electron Beam Ex12osure; 120s itive)  LS  IL  Dry  Sensitivity Resolution Resolution  LER  Etching  Aging  Example  Composition  (µC/cm 2 )  (nm)  (nm)  Pattern Profile  (nm)  Scum Resistance Stability  3P  P3  10.7  50  45  rectangular  4.5  A  very good  A  4P  P4  10.7  50  45  rectangular  4.5  A  very good  A  SP  PS  10.8  50  45  rectangular  4.5  A  very good  A  6P  P6  10.8  50  45  rectangular  4.5  A  very good  A  7P  P7  10.7  50  50  rectangular  4.5  A  very good  B  SP  PS  10.8  50  45  rectangular  4.5  A  very good  A  9P  P9  10.9  50  50  rectangular  4.5  A  very good  A  !OP  PIO  10.8  50  50  rectangular  4.5  A  very good  B  llP  Pll  10.8  50  45  rectangular  4.5  A  very good  A  12P  P12  10.8  50  45  rectangular  4.5  A  very good  A  13P  P13  10.7  50  45  rectangular  4.5  A  very good  A  14P  P14  10.8  50  45  rectangular  5.0  A  very good  A  15P  P15  10.8  50  45  slightly forward  5.0  A  good  A  tapered  16P  P16  10.6  50  45  slightly forward  5.0  A  good  A  tapered  17P  P17  10.8  50  45  slightly forward  5.0  A  good  A  tapered  18P  P18  10.6  50  45  rectangular  5.0  A  good  A  19P  P19  10.6  50  45  rectangular  5.0  A  very good  A  20P  P20  10.8  50  45  rectangular  5.0  A  very good  A  21P  P21  10.8  50  45  rectangular  5.0  A  good  A  22P  P22  10.8  55  45  slightly forward  5.0  A  very good  A  tapered  23P  P23  10.8  55  45  slightly forward  5.0  A  very good  A  tapered  24P  P24  10.8  55  45  slightly forward  4.5  A  very good  A  tapered  25P  P25  10.8  50  45  rectangular  4.5  A  Good  A  26P  P26  10.8  50  45  rectangular  4.5  A  very good  A  27P  P27  10.8  50  50  rectangular  4.5  A  very good  B  28P  P28  10.8  50  45  rectangular  4.5  A  very good  A  Comparative  Comparative  12.9  70  80  fmward tapered  6.5  C  bad  A  Example lP Composition Pl  Comparative  Comparative  12.9  70  80  slightly forward  6.0  B  bad  C  Example 2P Composition P2  tapered  Comparative  Comparative  12.9  70  80  slightly forward  6.0  B  bad  C  Example 3P Composition P3  tapered  Comparative  Comparative  13.9  70  80  slightly forward  6.0  C  bad  C  Example4P Composition P4  tapered  Comparative  Comparative  14.9  70  80  slightly forward  6.0  C  bad  C  Example 5P Composition  PS  tapered  The positive resist composition shown in Table 8 below  was filtered through a polytetrafluoroethylene filter having a  pore size of 0.04 µm to prepare a pos1t1ve resist solution  having a solid content concentration of3.84 mass%.  The prepared positive resist solution was uniformly coated  on a hexamethyldisilazane-treated silicon substrate by using  a spin coater and heated/dried at 100°  C. for 60 seconds on a  hot plate to form a resist film having a thickness  of0.0S  µm.  With respect to the resist film obtained, the sensitivity,  resolution, pattern profile, line edge roughness (LER) and dry  etching resistance were evaluated by the following methods.  The obtained resist film was exposed using EUV light  (wavelength: 13 nm) through a reflective mask having a 1:1  line-and-space pattern with a line width of 100 nm by chang› ing the exposure dose in steps of0.1 mJ/cm $^{2 }$in the range of0  to 20.0 mJ/cm 2 ,  then baked at 110°  C. for 90 seconds and  thereafter, developed with an aqueous 2.38 mass % tetram› ethylanimonium hydroxide (TMAH) solution.  The exposure dose for reproducing the line-and-space  (LIS= 1/1) mask pattern with a line width ofl 00 nm was taken  as the sensitivity. A smaller value indicates higher sensitivity.  (Evaluation of Resist)  [Sensitivity]  Preparation of Resist Solution  Example as Positive Chemical Amplification Resist  EUV  Examples IQ to 9Q and Comparative Examples IQ  to  SQ 