MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392388166 · doi:10.4071/001c.94521

Gold Coated Silver Bonding Wire and Its Consistent Reliability Performances

2024· article· en· W4392388166 on OpenAlexaff
Sarangapani Murali, Dhayalan Mariyappan, Loke Chee Keong, B. Kumar, Kang Sungsig SS

Bibliographic record

VenueIMAPSource Proceedings · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectronic Packaging and Soldering Technologies
Canadian institutionsWorkplace Health, Safety and Compensation Commission
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKirkendall effectMaterials scienceIntermetallicComposite materialEpoxyBall grid arrayAluminiumBond strengthBall (mathematics)MetallurgyAlloyAdhesiveSoldering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thermal aging of gold coated silver bonded ball with aluminium bond pads exhibited a stable interface without Kirkendall voids until 4000h at 200°C for an un-molded device tested under vacuum. Ball and stitch pull remains in strength and remained constant until 4000 hours of aging. The growth of aluminides at the bond interface is about 4.5µm for 4000 hours of aging. The electrical resistance of the bonded ball remains the same until 4000 hours at 175°C for an epoxy molded device, molded with 5 to 7 pH green epoxy molding compound containing low chlorine and sulfur. Interestingly, the bonded ball interface of epoxy molded device has sustained 480h on biased Highly Accelerated Stress Test (bHAST) at +20V bias, 130°C, 85%RH. The bonded ball interface is stable until 1000 hours on unbiased HAST (uHAST) at 130°C, 85% RH as well. Cross-sectional ovservations of the bonded balls revealed the presence of intermetallic phases at the bond interface. However, formation of Kirkendall voids or crack propagatioon due to galvanic corrosions are absent.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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