MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416877519 · doi:10.37665/smwidms67050

CGA Trends and Capabilities

2015· article· W4416877519 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSMTA International · 2015
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicElectronic Packaging and Soldering Technologies
Canadian institutionsIBM (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBall grid arrayFlip chipSolderingReliability (semiconductor)Eutectic systemCeramicWettingPrinted circuit boardTemperature cycling

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The Column Grid Array (CGA) module is a high reliability JEDEC format package, with several options adaptable to end user needs. The dark or white ceramic thickness ranging from 1.4mm to 4.2mm and body sizes up to 52.5 mm JEDEC. The typical 42.5 mm CGA module is configured with a full array of 1089 I/O (33x33) with 1.27mm (0.050") pitch or 1657 I/O (41x41) with 1.00mm (0.040") pitch of 10/90 ( Sn/PB) columns and eutectic alloy solder connections The CGA shows superior coplanarity and reliability compared to a BGA device and can be utilized on a JEDEC register package, bare chips, or capped modules with thermal management to include wire bond or Flip Chip C4 devices. Substrate and System Level Reliability (SLR) is enhanced by a greater stand-off, flexible interconnection, improved thermal characterization, and improved thermal fatigue life of package solder joint. The contact integrity is where the Column Attach technology takes the lead over other Ball Grid predecessors. The need for complex, high density interconnects that can handle contact resistance, fatigue, CTE compliance, and ultra-high speed connectivity makes the process so valuable. The CGA has a proven long shelflife and maintains wetting properties with proper board placement as well.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.531
Threshold uncertainty score0.860

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.229 · 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