MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3012527148 · doi:10.1109/access.2020.2980039

Learning Localized Spatial Material Properties of Substrates in Ultra-Thin Packages Using Markov Chain Monte Carlo and Finite Element Analysis

2020· article· en· W3012527148 on OpenAlexaff
Cheryl Selvanayagam, Pham Luu Trung Duong, Nagarajan Raghavan

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvancements in Photolithography Techniques
Canadian institutionsAdvanced Micro Devices (Canada)
FundersEconomic Development Board - SingaporeAdvanced Micro Devices
KeywordsFinite element methodMaterials scienceMonte Carlo methodSubstrate (aquarium)Material propertiesStack (abstract data type)Markov chain Monte CarloMechanical engineeringSiliconIntegrated circuit packagingElectronic packagingElectronic engineeringComputer scienceComposite materialStructural engineeringOptoelectronicsIntegrated circuitEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thinned silicon dies and thin substrates using thin core and coreless structures have enabled thin packages. For robust manufacturing and reliability of these parts, solving the warpage problem is key. While current finite element methodologies can provide some insights at the design stage, these simulations are only as accurate as the inputs such as the material properties and the stress-free temperatures. Electronic substrates are especially challenging to characterize and model as they are laminates consisting of a core with layers of resin and metal lines on either side. In this work, a hybrid approach using Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) and Finite Element Analysis (FEA) is used to learn the spatially varying properties of the substrate from Digital Image Correlation (DIC) measurements of the warpage. The analysis is carried out at room temperature and at an elevated temperature point. Image analysis on electrical artwork is also carried out to correlate the material properties to the substrate metal density. These results will be useful to package and substrate designers to understand how material properties vary over the substrate and how temperature and metal density affect material properties so that robust design for future packages to minimize warpage can be initiated by careful routing of metal lines depending on the locally desired properties of the stack.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicAdvancements in Photolithography TechniquesFrench-language works237,207