MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2190972769 · doi:10.4071/isom-2015-wa53

Thermal Aging Behavior of Fine Pitch Palladium Coated Silver (PCS) Ball Bonds on Al Metallization

2015· article· en· W2190972769 on OpenAlexafffund
Di Xu, J. Gomes, M. Mayer, Rob Lyn, John Persic

Bibliographic record

VenueIMAPSource Proceedings · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectronic Packaging and Soldering Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMaterials scienceMicroelectronicsComposite materialBall (mathematics)IntermetallicWire bondingElectrical engineeringAlloyNanotechnologyChipGeometryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The high price of Au has motivated many to look for alternative bonding wire materials in the field of microelectronics packaging. In the present study, the reliability performance of palladium coated silver (PCS) wire in high temperature storage test (HTST) is carried out using 18 μm diameter fine pitch PCS wire. Fine pitch ball bonds are made on Al metallization, with bonded ball diameter (BBD) of 32 ± 0.5 μm and ball height (BH) of 8 ± 0.5 μm. The aging temperature used in HTST is 170 °C and both shear and pull test are used to evaluate the aged ball bonds at regular time intervals. The shear force increases from 9.9 gf at 96 h to 12.5 gf at 192 h, and remains almost constant until 1344 h, and starts dropping gradually until 10.9 gf at 1848 h. The pad lift percentage recorded in pull test gradually drops from 90 % at 96 h to 20 % at 1008 h, and increases to 90 % at 1848 h. The chip side fractography after shear test indicates that the main failure modes are through pad at 96 h, through ball bond at 504 h, and half of both at 168 h, respectively. Cross-sectional images show that the thickness of the intermetallic compound (IMC) layer growth follows parabolic relationship and the rate constant is 0.10 ± 0.02 μm/h½. Gaps are observed along the periphery of the ball bond interface where no IMC is observed. The IMCs are located at the center of the ball bond interface, and the width is 16.0–19.3 μm at 96 h and 17.2–22.7 μm at 1344 h, respectively.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.215 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIMAPSource ProceedingsSame topicElectronic Packaging and Soldering TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207