Failure analysis challenges and solution for thin package
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Packaging failure analysis (FA) is becoming more challenging as packaging technology transitions from standard cores to coreless substrates. Substrate thickness has been driven from standard cores at 800 um to thin cores at 380 um on its way to coreless. As a result, substrate mechanical strength has also decreased; therefore, solder joint cracking is a common issue on thin packages due to high package warpage during assembly manufacturing processes that produce strains exceeding the solder joint limit capability. Substrate and the overall thermal coefficient of expansion (CTE) of thin-core or coreless is another major challenge in assembly; its effect on the flip-chip solder joint integrity needs thorough study. Current FA methodology using manual cross-sectioning/polishing provides very limited information. Through novel research on an available concept, AMD Device Analysis was lab able to improve FA methodology by applying a well-known, non-destructive test (NDT) called dye penetrant testing (DPT). The steel and oil-and-gas industries use this methodology widely, and the problem statement is the same in semiconductor packaging: metal integrity inspection. Our modified methodology has been applied semiconductor FA. This paper details the application of DPT in flip-chip package for solder joint crack analysis. DPT builds on the principle of visual inspection, overcoming the limitation of conventional method by enabling complete die solder joint crack analysis. DPT is the first conventional board-level analysis to be introduced to flip-chip packaging.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".