MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2527810829 · doi:10.1109/tcpmt.2016.2610321

Vacuum-Assisted Through Silicon via Filling Method With Ag-Based Epoxy

2016· article· en· W2527810829 on OpenAlexafffund
Yang Qiu, Shichao Yue, Walied A. Moussa, Pedram Mousavi

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Components Packaging and Manufacturing Technology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D IC and TSV technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersGovernment of AlbertaCMC Microsystems
KeywordsMaterials scienceEpoxyMicrofabricationSiliconElectroplatingComposite materialElectrical resistivity and conductivityDopingOptoelectronicsElectrical engineeringFabrication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the field of 3-D integration, Cu electroplating has become the most popular method to metallize the through silicon via, due to the higher conductivity of Cu compared to W and doped poly-silicon and the good compatibility with other microfabrication procedures. However, many problems embedded in this technique, such as long deposition time, relatively high complexity, and environmental pollution, are still unsolved. In this paper, we utilized the Ag-based epoxy to fill the vias with the assistance of vacuum pressure to solve all these problems. It was found that the vacuum level played a more important role than the suction time in this process, as the filling depth for the vias with a diameter of 100 μm and a depth of 500 μm grew more visibly in a fixed lifespan when the vacuum pressure elevated from 0.2 to 1.6 kPa, and to realize a 100% filling ratio, 1.6 kPa and 3 s would be needed at least. By running the basic two-point probe test for two times without any printed circuit board, the volume resistance of fully filled vias was measured, and the results indicated that the average resistance was ~25 Ω. During the temperature increase from room temperature to 120°C, this material established good stability in resistivity as the change in via resistance was negligible. The adhesion quality between this material and Cu-based bonding pad was tested as well, and the result was acceptable.

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 score0.002

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Components Packaging and Manufacturing TechnologySame topic3D IC and TSV technologiesFrench-language works237,207