Bibliographic record
Abstract
An alternative wire joining method is explored that utilizes femtosecond laser pulses directed towards the contact point of two pieces of 25-μm diameter Au bonding wires typically used in microelectronics wire bonding. The two pieces are in the form of wire loops bonded onto four terminals in a crossing pattern. In-situ four-wire measurement is used to measure the contact resistance at the contact point of the crossed-wires before and after femtosecond laser irradiation. A greater decrease in contact resistance correlates to a stronger joint between the crossed-wires. Broad beam laser irradiation was initially investigated to understand the effect femtosecond laser pulses had on Au microwires. Focus beam laser irradiation was utilized later to construct a parameter space. Laser parameters of pulse energy and pulse number were varied between 20 to 40 μJ and 10 to 100 pulses respectively to develop an initial process window. With a repetition rate of 1 kHz, the corresponding average power that the crossed-wires received was between 20 to 40 mW. Over 90 % of all crossed-wires samples showed drops in contact resistance ranging from 39.8 % to 83.3 %, indicating that microwelding of fine Au wire is possible with femtosecond laser pulses. Joining mechanisms are proposed for broad beam and focus beam irradiation. SEM imaging of the weld morphologies for focus beam irradiation revealed two distinct structures on the crossed-wires: a lip structure with veins resultant from molten material splash and a fringe structure resultant of an interference pattern. Cross-section analysis reveal two different modes of joining under focus beam irradiation depending on whether the laser pulses are precisely directly between the crossed-wires. A case study was done to investigate how the firing rate of the laser affects the crossed-wire joints. Focus beam laser irradiation using lower pulse numbers in high repetition showed a larger contact resistance drop than using higher pulse numbers in low repetition. The joint breaking strength of the laser welds on the crossed-wires is too low to be measured. Conclusions are drawn based on the experimental data and future work is discussed.
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".