MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416875919 · doi:10.37665/smdluzm31225

Process Challenges and Solutions for Embedding Chip-On-Board into Mainstream Smt Assembly

2003· article· W4416875919 on OpenAlexaff
Mukul Luthra

Bibliographic record

VenueSMTA International · 2003
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
Topic3D IC and TSV technologies
Canadian institutionsCurrent Water Technologies (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReworkSurface-mount technologyProcess (computing)FootprintSMT placement equipmentEmbeddingKey (lock)Mount

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The fundamentals of the Chip-On-Board (COB) process imply attaching the chip (die) in place and wire bonding it directly to the substrate metalization alongside other surface mount devices attached by standard SMT processes. In essence, the packaging and testing task transfers from the IC backend process to the SMT board assembly shop. The process significantly improves footprint efficiency, cutting cost and lead-time. COB technology includes variants such as Chip-On-Flex or on other substrates. COB technology is at work in many routine day to day products but process information has remained somewhat limited in the mainstream Surface Mount world possibly because wire bonding has more in common with IC backend processes than traditional surface mount assembly. Merging COB into mainstream surface mount processes has usually entailed acquiring the specialized know-how through considerable ‘hands-on’ experimentation. This paper provides the required information on all aspects of the COB process from applications, positioning, costs, die selection, layout, process options, equipment and rework for implementing COB processes into existing SMT lines and manage COB yields. Based on real life examples, the paper covers the key considerations, major critical factors and the challenges for a successful COB-SMT merge.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.258 · 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
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSMTA InternationalSame topic3D IC and TSV technologiesFrench-language works237,207