Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Additive manufacturing is an emerging domain with numerous potential applications. The concept of those new processes offers many advantages such as design flexibility, truly 3D packages and low cost for customization. The aerosol jet printing could enable wire bonding-like techniques that are unachievable with round wires today, combined with serious advantages for high frequency applications. However, this new field is starting off with many challenges to address, with the reliability as a focal point. The focus of this study is the reliability of printed wire bonds. Polyimide and silver inks were printed using an aerosol jet system (OPTOMEC Aerosol Jet ® HD Decathlon™). The results are focusing on the reliability of the adhesion of polyimide ink (UTD-PI-AJ) in an ethanol-based diluent and a silver ink, the HPS-108AE1 from Novacentrix, on different surface types: silicon oxide, pure aluminum and gold (ENIG). The adhesion is first addressed by a qualitative tape test at room temperature. The test samples are then put into an environmental chamber for a Deep Thermal Cycling (DTC) stress. The samples cycled 1000 times between −20°C and 85°C. They were inspected for physical defects at 250, 500 and 750 cycles. The visual inspection for defects focuses on cracks and delamination. The printed wire bonds were simulated by printing polyimide ink into a gold plated flat ceramic substrate (28 LCC from Kyocera) and then printing conductive silver ink from opposite pin leads. A layer of polyimide ink was then added on top of the printed lines. Crossover lines were finally printed on top of the last polyimide layer, again from opposite pin leads, creating an array of superimposed printed wire bonds. The reliability of printed wire bonds is tested through a Highly Accelerated Stress Test (HAST, 110°C, 85%RH, 264h) under bias. The samples were inspected at 66h, 132h and 198h for visual defects such as cracks, delamination and silver electro-migration. Cross-sections were performed on samples before and after HAST. All defects were characterized regarding of their time and condition or appearance and of their dimensions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".