Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 119 references

A Critical Review on the Electromigration Effect, the Electroplastic Effect, and Perspectives on the Effects of Electric Current Upon Alloy Phase Stability

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This review proposes that electromigration and the electroplastic effect share one mechanism—current-induced plastic deformation—and that the stored strain energy from that deformation changes alloy phase stability and interfacial…

desk verdict A useful review that repackages electromigration and electroplasticity under one speculative umbrella; the synthesis is interesting but the load-bearing energy term is never quantified, so treat the central claim as a hypothesis, not a result. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.01170 v1 pith:QRTWVKO4 submitted 2019-08-03 cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Yu-chen Liu , Shih-kang Lin This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mtrl-sci PACS 66.30.Qa
keywords electromigrationelectroplasticeffectphasestabilityelectriccurrenteffectsnon-polarityGibbsfreeenergylatticedeformationBlechcriticalproduct
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The authors are trying to supply the missing piece of electromigration theory: classical driving-force models explain directional transport—voids, hillocks, polarity—but cannot explain non-directional effects such as current-induced supersaturation, phase-boundary shifts, and symmetric growth of interface layers. They propose that electromigration is either part of the electroplastic effect or shares its intrinsic current-induced plastic deformation, so a current-stressed lattice carries stored strain energy. That energy is added to the Gibbs free energy as an excess term, changing phase equilibria and chemical-potential gradients. If this picture is right, the reliability of interconnects is partly a mechanical-property problem, and an electric current becomes a thermodynamic variable rather than just a transport forcing term.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is Eq. (15), the modified molar Gibbs free energy $G_{m}^{\prime} = G_{m}^{0} + G_{m}^{id} + G_{m}^{ex} + G_{m}^{strain-ex}$, where $G_{m}^{strain-ex}$ is the excess molar Gibbs energy contributed by electric-current-induced lattice strain. It does the explanatory work: when current-induced plasticity is stored rather than relaxed, this term shifts phase stability and alters chemical-potential gradients, turning a non-directional mechanical input into thermodynamic and diffusional consequences. The electron-dislocation interaction supplies the microscopic reason why the strain exists, and the empirical stress-current correlation used in the Pb-Sn study provides the quantitative scale.

What would settle it

Measure lattice strain and dislocation density in situ on an unpassivated Al or Cu strip at current densities near $10^{6}$ A/cm$^{2}$ and compute the stored strain energy from those values. If that energy is too small to produce the phase-boundary shift reported in Pb-Sn, or if no plastic strain appears before void formation, the central claim is contradicted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the missing part of EM theory is not a missing diffusion term but a missing mechanical one. Early-stage measurements show lattice bending, preferred dislocation formation, and subgrain boundaries in Al and Cu before any void or hillock appears; the paper reads this as direct evidence that electric current itself, through electron-dislocation interactions, produces plastic deformation. If that deformation is stored rather than relaxed, its energy enters the molar Gibbs free energy as $G_{m}^{strain-ex}$, and this extra term can explain supersaturation, shifted phase boundaries, and the non-polarity effect. The paper states the unification as the claim that EM is either part of the EP effect or shares the intrinsic electric-current-induced plastic deformation associated with the EP effect.

Load-bearing premise

The whole argument rests on the premise that an electric current itself creates a stable, thermodynamically significant plastic strain energy inside the lattice—enough to shift phase boundaries—even in strips with no external constraint, and that this energy can be estimated from an empirical stress-current correlation that the paper itself calls 'only empirical and lacked a physical interpretation.'

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A current-carrying interconnect should have an additional mechanical failure threshold: stronger, textured, or capped conductors should resist electromigration partly because they deform less, not only because they slow diffusion.
  • Alloy phase diagrams under sufficient current density should display shifted solvus lines, with the shift determined by stored strain energy rather than by the direction of electron flow.
  • The non-polarity effect follows as a direct corollary: if current changes the chemical potential of a phase, both interfaces in a sandwich couple can be enhanced or suppressed together, independent of current direction.
  • Stress should be able to build up in uncovered strips, because the deformation originates from the current itself rather than from externally constrained atom accumulation.
  • Early-stage EM phenomena—grain rotation, subgrain formation, and lattice bending—should be seen as plasticity events that precede, and may determine, void and hillock nucleation.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the strain-energy term is real, alternating current at the same root-mean-square density should shift phase boundaries just as direct current does, because the deformation mechanism is non-directional; this is a testable consequence the paper does not explicitly draw.
  • The argument implies that $G_{m}^{strain-ex}$ should be computable from measured dislocation density and dislocation line energy; the paper cites dislocation densities near $10^{9}$ per square centimeter but does not perform that conversion, leaving a quantitative gap.
  • A natural extension is to tabulate the stored-strain contribution as a function of current density, yield strength, and homologous temperature, which would let engineers treat current as a tunable thermodynamic knob in alloy processing.
  • If the unification holds, mechanical-strength datasets could be mined to predict EM resistance, implying that precipitation-hardened or nano-twinned conductors should be systematically EM-resistant; that pattern could be checked against existing failure-time data.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper is a review of electromigration (EM) and electroplastic (EP) effects, with the aim of proposing a unifying perspective on electric current-induced non-directional phenomena. It reviews classical EM driving-force theories, the Blech critical product, EM-induced stress models, early-stage lattice deformation measurements, the EP effect, current-induced phase equilibria changes, and the polarity/non-polarity effects in interfacial reactions. The central proposal is that EM is either part of the EP effect or shares the intrinsic current-induced plastic deformation associated with EP, and that adding an excess Gibbs free energy term G_strain-ex to the molar Gibbs free energy (Eq. 15) can explain non-directional effects such as alloy supersaturation and non-polarity interfacial reaction behavior. The paper explicitly acknowledges that the supporting stress-current correlation is empirical and that a more rigid quantitative model is needed.

Significance. If the proposed mechanism were quantitatively validated, it would provide a single thermodynamic framework connecting EM, EP, and current-induced phase stability changes, and could impact reliability assessment and electric-current-assisted processing. The review's strengths lie in its breadth of literature coverage, its careful critical comparison of classical EM stress-evolution models, its useful tables of experimental polarity/non-polarity results, and its explicit admission of the empirical nature of the key stress-current correlation. The paper is honest in framing the central claim as a hypothesis and identifies specific open questions. However, the load-bearing quantity G_strain-ex is never quantified, and the evidence cited for its existence could be interpreted through alternative mechanisms. The current value of the manuscript is therefore as a synthetic perspective rather than a demonstrated theory.

major comments (3)
  1. [Electric current-induced phase equilibria change (Eq. 15 and Fig. 5)] The central mechanism of the paper rests on the G_strain-ex term, which is never quantified. The manuscript reports early-stage dislocation densities of 3×10^9 /cm^2 from Refs. [25,26] but does not convert these into an energy change. A standard estimate U = αGb^2ρV_m for typical metals gives roughly 10–100 J/mol, which is at least two orders of magnitude below RT at the 373–500 K temperatures relevant to the Pb-Sn experiments. Without a quantitative estimate, Eq. (15) is a placeholder and the claimed Pb-Sn phase-boundary shift shown in Fig. 5 is not supported by the evidence presented.
  2. [Electric current-induced phase equilibria change, discussion of Ref. [105]] The manuscript states that the correlation between compressive stress and current density in the authors' prior CALPHAD work [105] was "only empirical and lacked a physical interpretation." The text does not specify whether the strain energy entering Eq. (15) corresponds to elastic stress energy (σV_m) or elastic strain energy (σ²V_m/2E), which differ by orders of magnitude. The manuscript must clearly identify which stress or strain measure is meant and justify it using measured stresses or dislocation densities before the phase-stability explanation can be considered quantitative.
  3. [EM-induced lattice deformation measurement and Conclusion] The central claim that "EM is either part of the EP effect or shares the intrinsic electric current-induced plastic deformation associated with the EP effect" is presented as a synthesis, but the direct evidence is equally consistent with the reverse causal direction (early-stage plasticity induced by EM stress) and with local Joule heating or electron wind effects on dislocations. The paper itself calls for "a more rigid quantitative model and mechanistic study," yet it uses the unverified mechanism to explain non-directional phase equilibria changes. A revision should either provide a discriminating test (for example, showing that the stored energy scales with current density independent of mass transport) or explicitly reframe the proposal as an untested hypothesis.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract and Background] The phrase "micron or sub-nano scale" (and "sub-nano" in the abstract) appears to be a typo for "sub-micron scale" and should be corrected for clarity.
  2. [Abstract] There is a typo in the abstract: "associtated" should be "associated."
  3. [EM-induced stress section, Eq. (11)] The symbols L_th, L, and V_d in Eq. (11) are not all explicitly defined before use; adding a sentence defining these quantities would improve readability.
  4. [Table III caption and entries] The dollar-sign prefix on several entries in Table III (e.g., "$Al/Cu", "$Sn/Ag", "$Sn/Ni") is unexplained; the caption should define it (presumably indicating alternating or reversing current).
  5. [Reference list, Ref. [112]] Reference [112] is cited as "unpublished research" to support a mechanistic point in the discussion of the non-polarity effect; this is not a citable source for a key claim and should be replaced with a published reference or clearly labeled as a personal communication.
  6. [Eq. (15) notation] The symbols G_ref^0, G_id^m, and G_ex^m in Eq. (15) deviate from standard CALPHAD notation and are not defined before use; adopting conventional notation (e.g., G^0, G^id, G^xs) would help readers.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

Eq. (15)'s strain-energy term is effectively a relabeling of the authors' own empirically fitted stress-current relation, so the phase-stability and non-polarity explanations are partly circular.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section 'Electric current-induced phase equilibria change', Eq. (15) and surrounding text.]
    "Lin et al. used the ab initio-aided CALPHAD method to explain the supersaturation of Pb-Sn induced by an electric current [105]. ... However, the correlation between the stress and current density in the study was only empirical and lacked a physical interpretation. ... Therefore, the addition of the Gstrain-ex_m term might result in an abnormal supersaturation phenomenon, and would also be the origin of the stress introduced to the CALPHAD model proposed by Lin et al. [105]."

    Eq. (15) proposes Gstrain-ex_m as the physical mechanism by which electric current changes phase stability, and the paper explicitly identifies this term as 'the origin of the stress introduced to the CALPHAD model' in ref. [105]. In [105], that stress-current relation was empirically fitted to reproduce the Pb-Sn phase-boundary shift and supersaturation. Gstrain-ex_m is never estimated from measured dislocation densities or measured stresses; its magnitude is taken from the same fitted calibration that generated the phase-boundary change. Thus the phase-equilibria change is 'explained' by a term whose numerical content is fixed by fitting that same phase-equilibria change, making the explanation a relabeling rather than an independent derivation.

  2. self citation load bearing [Conclusion paragraph, and Section 'Electric current-induced phase equilibria change' via ref. [105].]
    "By introducing the electric current-induced plasticity, or the EP effect to the EM effect, the aforementioned electric current-induced peculiar phenomena could be comprehended. In the case of electric current-induced crystal plasticity, the additional strain energy could contribute to the changes in Gibbs free energy of phase transformation."

    The review's central thesis is that EP-induced strain energy explains non-directional effects. The only quantitative support offered for that strain-energy term is ref. [105], a prior work by the same author group whose stress-current correlation the paper itself calls 'only empirical and lacked a physical interpretation.' No independent physical model or measurement fixes the magnitude of Gstrain-ex_m. Therefore the load-bearing quantitative input for the central claim is a self-citation that is itself a fitted calibration, so the conclusion partly reduces to the authors' own empirical fit rather than to an externally verified mechanism.

full rationale

This is a review that synthesizes much external experimental work: in-situ synchrotron observations of early-stage dislocation formation [25,26], the electroplastic effect literature, Blech-effect stress models, and phase-equilibria experiments by other groups. Those parts are not circular. The circularity is confined to the paper's proposed unifying mechanism. The paper states that if current induces lattice plasticity, the stored strain energy enters the Gibbs free energy through Eq. (15), and that this 'Gstrain-ex_m' term is the origin of the stress in the authors' earlier CALPHAD model [105]. It then uses that same model's empirical stress-current relation, which it admits 'lacked a physical interpretation,' as the quantitative anchor for explaining supersaturation and the non-polarity effect. The proposed mechanism therefore leans on a fitted parameter renamed as a physical term. Notably, the paper itself acknowledges the gap, stating that 'a more rigid quantitative model and mechanistic study to correlate the electric current and early-stage stress state is required.' That admission supports the conclusion that Eq. (15) is a placeholder rather than a derived result. The central claim is not fully forced by definition, because the EP effect and early-stage plasticity are independently documented, but the specific claim that strain energy explains phase-stability changes is partly circular through the self-citation [105] and the unquantified Gstrain-ex_m term.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on a free energy term whose magnitude is unspecified, an empirical stress-current relation imported from the authors' own work, and an assumed thermodynamic role for current-induced dislocations. No fundamentally new physical entity is introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • Strain-excess Gibbs free energy term (G_strain-ex)
    Introduced ad hoc in Eq. (15) as an excess term representing current-induced strain energy. Its magnitude is not quantified in this paper, and it is the central mechanism claimed to shift phase equilibria.
  • Critical current density for phase boundary shift = ca. 2.5e4 A/cm2
    Taken from the authors' prior CALPHAD study [105], this is fit to experimental observations of Pb-Sn supersaturation and is used as evidence that current changes phase stability.
  • Empirical stress-current density correlation = Empirical relation
    From ref [106], used to connect electric current to mechanical stress in Sn whisker growth. The paper itself notes this correlation is empirical and lacks physical interpretation.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The molar Gibbs free energy of a phase can be written as a sum of reference, ideal mixing, excess mixing, and strain-excess terms (Eq. 15).
    Assumed without derivation for the current-induced strain term; the magnitude of G_strain-ex is not specified.
  • domain assumption The electron wind force and direct force models correctly describe directional electromigration.
    The paper relies on these standard models for the directional effects it contrasts with non-directional effects.
  • domain assumption The electroplastic effect arises from an intrinsic electron-dislocation interaction rather than only Joule heating.
    The paper acknowledges this is still debated, yet the unification claim depends on EP being a distinct mechanical effect.
  • ad hoc to paper Early-stage dislocation densities of about 3e9 /cm2 observed under current indicate plastic strain sufficient to affect thermodynamics.
    This link between measured dislocation content and the proposed strain-excess free energy is asserted, not quantified.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A Critical Review on the Electromigration Effect, the Electroplastic Effect, and Perspectives on the Effects of Electric Current Upon Alloy Phase Stability." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QRTWVKO4

@misc{pith2026190801170,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A Critical Review on the Electromigration Effect, the Electroplastic Effect, and Perspectives on the Effects of Electric Current Upon Alloy Phase Stability},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QRTWVKO4}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.01170}
}
read the original abstract

The electronic interconnections in the state-of-the-art integrated circuit manufacturing have been scaled down to the micron or sub-micron scale. This results in a dramatic increase in the current density passing through interconnections, which means that the electromigration (EM) effect plays a significant role in the reliability of products. Although thorough studies and reviews of EM effects have been continuously conducted in the past 60 years, some parts of EM theories lack clear elucidation of the electric current-induced non-directional effects, including electric current-induced phase equilibrium changes. This review article is intended to provide a broad picture of electric current-induced lattice stability changes and to summarize the existing literature on EM-related phenomena, EM-related theoretical models, and relevant effects of the electroplastic (EP) effect in order to lead to a better understanding of electric current-induced effects on materials. This article also posits that EM is either part of the EP effect or shares the intrinsic electric current-induced plastic deformation associated with the EP effect. This concept appears to contribute to the missing parts of the EM theories.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.01170 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. z* of impurities in dilute alloys of Al, Ag, Au, Cu, Co and Sn predicted by [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. z* of impurities in dilute alloys of Al, Ag, Au, Cu, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p045_1.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

119 extracted references · 80 canonical work pages

  1. [105]

    Lin, C.K

    S.K. Lin, C.K. Yeh, W. Xie, Y .C. Liu, and M. Yoshimura, Sci. Rep., 3(2013)

    work page 2013

  2. [1]

    Shahrjerdi and S.W

    D. Shahrjerdi and S.W. Bedell, Nano Lett., 13(1), 315-320 (2013)

    2013

  3. [2]

    K.N. Tu, Y . Liu, and M. Li, Appl. Phys. Rev., 4(1), 011101 (2017)

    2017

  4. [3]

    Lancaster and M

    A. Lancaster and M. Keswani, Integration, 60, 204-212 (2018)

    2018

  5. [4]

    d'Heurle, Proc

    F.M. d'Heurle, Proc. IEEE, 59(10), 1409-1418 (1971)

    1971

  6. [5]

    Kwok, Mater

    T. Kwok, Mater. Chem. Phys., 33(3-4), 176-188 (1993)

    1993

  7. [6]

    Malone and R

    D. Malone and R. Hummel, CRIT REV SOLID STATE, 22(3), 199-238 (1997)

    1997

  8. [7]

    Pierce and P

    D. Pierce and P . Brusius, MICROELECTRON RELIAB., 37(7), 1053-1072 (1997)

    1997

Show all 119 references
  1. [8]

    Ogawa, K.-D

    E.T. Ogawa, K.-D. Lee, V.A. Blaschke, and P .S. Ho, IEEE Trans. Rel., 51(4), 403-419 (2002)

    2002

  2. [9]

    Zeng and K.-N

    K. Zeng and K.-N. Tu, Mater. Sci. Eng., R, 38(2), 55-105 (2002)

    2002

  3. [10]

    Tan and A

    C.M. Tan and A. Roy, Mater. Sci. Eng., R, 58(1), 1-75 (2007)

    2007

  4. [11]

    C.Y . Liu, C. Chen, and K.N. Tu, J. Appl. Phys., 88(10), 5703-5709 (2000)

    2000

  5. [12]

    Gan and K.N

    H. Gan and K.N. Tu, J. Appl. Phys., 97(6), 063514 (2005)

    2005

  6. [13]

    Chen, C.-M

    S.-W. Chen, C.-M. Chen, an d W.-C. Liu, J. Electron. Mater., 27(11), 1193-1199 (1998)

    1998

  7. [14]

    Huntington and A.R

    H.B. Huntington and A.R. Grone, J. Phys. Chem. Solids, 20(1–2), 76-87 (1961)

    1961

  8. [15]

    Sorbello, Solid State Phys., 51, 159-231 (1997)

    R.S. Sorbello, Solid State Phys., 51, 159-231 (1997)

    1997

  9. [16]

    Bosvieux and J

    C. Bosvieux and J. Friedel, J. Phys. Chem. Solids, 23(1–2), 123-136 (1962)

    1962

  10. [17]

    Chiu, C.H

    Y .T. Chiu, C.H. Liu, K.L. Lin, and Y .S. Lai, Scripta Mater., 65(7), 615-617 (2011)

    2011

  11. [18]

    Jiang, G

    Y . Jiang, G. Tang, C. Shek, Y . Zhu, and Z. Xu, Acta Mater., 57(16), 4797-4808 (2009)

    2009

  12. [19]

    Chen and S.W

    C.M. Chen and S.W. Chen, J. Electron. Mater., 29(10), 1222-1228 (2000)

    2000

  13. [20]

    P.-C. Wang, G. Cargill III, I. Noyan, and C.-K. Hu, Appl. Phys. Lett., 72(11), 1296- 1298 (1998)

    1998

  14. [21]

    Zhang, G

    H. Zhang, G. Cargill III, Y . Ge, A. Maniatty, and W. Liu, J. Appl. Phys. , 104(12), 123533 (2008)

    2008

  15. [22]

    Kao, G.S.C

    H.-K. Kao, G.S.C. III, F. Giuliani, and C. -K. Hu, J. Appl. Phys., 93(5), 2516-2527 (2003)

    2003

  16. [23]

    K. Chen, N. Tamura, M. Kunz, K.N. Tu, and Y .-S. Lai, J. Appl. Phys., 106(2), 023502 (2009)

    2009

  17. [24]

    Lin, Y .-c

    S.-k. Lin, Y .-c. Liu, S.-J. Chiu, Y .-T. Liu, and H.-Y . Lee, Scientific Reports, 7(1), 3082 (2017)

    2017

  18. [25]

    Valek, N

    B.C. Valek, N. Tamura, R. Spolenak, W.A. Caldwell, A.A. MacDowell, R.S. Celestre, H.A. Padmore, J.C. Bravman, B.W. Batterman, W.D. Nix, and J.R. Patel, J. Appl. Phys., 94(6), 3757-3761 (2003)

    2003

  19. [26]

    Budiman, W.D

    A.S. Budiman, W.D. Nix, N. Tamura, B.C. Valek, K. Gadre, J. Maiz, R. Spolenak, 40 and J.R. Patel, Appl. Phys. Lett., 88(23), 233515 (2006)

    2006

  20. [27]

    Chiu, K.-L

    Y.-T. Chiu, K.-L. Lin, A.T. Wu, W.-L. Jang, C.-L. Dong, and Y .-S. Lai, J. Alloys Compd., 549, 190-194 (2013)

    2013

  21. [28]

    A.T. Wu, A.M. Gusak, K.N. Tu, and C.R. Kao, Appl. Phys. Lett. , 86(24), 241902 (2005)

    2005

  22. [29]

    Ho and T

    P .S. Ho and T. Kwok, Rep. Prog. Phys., 52(3), 301 (1989)

    1989

  23. [30]

    D'Heurle and R

    F.M. D'Heurle and R. Rosenberg, Physics of Thin Films, G. Hass, M.H. Francombe, and R.W. Hoffman, (Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier, 1973), p. 257-310

    1973

  24. [31]

    Huntington, Diffusion in solids: recent developments , A.S

    H. Huntington, Diffusion in solids: recent developments , A.S. NOWICK and J.J. BURTON, (Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier, 1975), p. 303-352

    1975

  25. [32]

    Tu, Solder Joint Technology, K.-N

    K.-N. Tu, Solder Joint Technology, K.-N. Tu, (New York, NY: Springer, 2007), p. 211-243

    2007

  26. [33]

    van Ek, J.P

    J. van Ek, J.P. Dekker, and A. Lodder, Phys. Rev. B, 52(12), 8794-8800 (1995)

    1995

  27. [34]

    Dekker, A

    J.P . Dekker, A. Lodder, and J. van Ek, Phys. Rev. B, 56(19), 12167-12177 (1997)

    1997

  28. [35]

    Dekker and A

    J.P . Dekker and A. Lodder, J. Appl. Phys., 84(4), 1958-1962 (1998)

    1998

  29. [36]

    Dekker, P

    J.P . Dekker, P . Gumbsch, E. Arzt, and A. Lodder, Phys. Rev. B, 59(11), 7451-7457 (1999)

    1999

  30. [37]

    Lodder, Defect Diffus

    A. Lodder, Defect Diffus. Forum, 261-262, 77-84 (2007)

    2007

  31. [38]

    Sorbello, J

    R.S. Sorbello, J. Phys. Chem. Solids, 34(6), 937-950 (1973)

    1973

  32. [39]

    Lodder, J

    A. Lodder, J. Phys. F: Met. Phys., 6(10), 1885 (1976)

    1976

  33. [40]

    Y.-c. Liu, B. Afflerbach, R. Jacobs, S.-k. Lin, and D. Morgan, MRS COMMUN, 1-9 (2019)

    2019

  34. [41]

    Blech, J

    I.A. Blech, J. Appl. Phys., 47(4), 1203-1208 (1976)

    1976

  35. [42]

    Blech and C

    I.A. Blech and C. Herring, Appl. Phys. Lett., 29(3), 131-133 (1976)

    1976

  36. [43]

    Schreiber, Thin Solid Films, 175, 29-36 (1989)

    H.U. Schreiber, Thin Solid Films, 175, 29-36 (1989)

    1989

  37. [44]

    Wei and C.Y

    C.C. Wei and C.Y . Liu, J. Mater. Res., 20(08), 2072-2079 (2005)

    2005

  38. [45]

    Li and D

    Y . Li and D. Goyal, 3D Microelectronic Packaging: From Fundamentals to Applications. 1 ed. (New York, NY: Springer, 2017). p. 71-99

    2017

  39. [46]

    Fr ankovic and G.H

    R. Fr ankovic and G.H. Bernstein, IEEE Trans. Electron Devices , 43(12), 2233 - 2239 (1996)

    1996

  40. [47]

    D. Ney, X. Federspiel, V. Girault, O. Thomas, and P . Gergaud, IEEE Trans. Device Mater. Rel., 6(2), 175-180 (2006)

    2006

  41. [48]

    Arnaud, T

    L. Arnaud, T. Berger, and G. Reimbold, J. Appl. Phys., 93(1), 192-204 (2003)

    2003

  42. [49]

    Chai, P .C

    Y . Chai, P .C. Chan, Y . Fu, Y . Chuang, and C. Liu, IEEE Electron Device Lett., 29(9), 1001-1003 (2008)

    2008

  43. [50]

    Ogawa, A.J

    E.T. Ogawa, A.J. Bierwag, K. -D. Lee, H. Matsuhashi, P .R. Justison, A.N. Ramamurthi, P .S. Ho, V.A. Blaschke, D. Griffiths, A. Nelsen, M. Breen, and R.H. Havemann, Appl. Phys. Lett., 78(18), 2652-2654 (2001). 41

    2001

  44. [51]

    Wang and R.G

    P.-C. Wang and R.G. Filippi, Appl. Phys. Lett., 78(23), 3598-3600 (2001)

    2001

  45. [52]

    Frankovic, G.H

    R. Frankovic, G.H. Bernstein, and J.J. Clement, IEEE Electron Device Lett., 17(5), 244-246 (1996)

    1996

  46. [53]

    Filippi, G.A

    R.G. Filippi, G.A. Biery, and M.H. Wood, MRS Symp. Proc., 309, 141 (1993)

    1993

  47. [54]

    Glickman, N

    E. Glickman, N. Osipov, A. Ivanov, and M. Nathan, J. Appl. Phys., 83(1), 100-107 (1998)

    1998

  48. [55]

    Klinger, E

    L. Klinger, E. Glickman, A. Katsman, and L. Levin, Mater. Sci. Eng., B, 23(1), 15- 18 (1994)

    1994

  49. [56]

    Glickman and M

    E. Glickman and M. Nathan, Microelectron. Eng., 50(1-4), 329-334 (2000)

    2000

  50. [57]

    Kirchheim, ACTA METALL MATER, 40(2), 309-323 (1992)

    R. Kirchheim, ACTA METALL MATER, 40(2), 309-323 (1992)

    1992

  51. [58]

    Korhonen, P

    M.A. Korhonen, P . Bo/rgesen, K.N. Tu, and C.Y . Li, J. Appl. Phys. , 73(8), 3790- 3799 (1993)

    1993

  52. [59]

    Clement and C.V

    J.J. Clement and C.V. Thompson, J. Appl. Phys., 78(2), 900-904 (1995)

    1995

  53. [60]

    Park and C.V

    Y .J. Park and C.V. Thompson, J. Appl. Phys., 82(9), 4277-4281 (1997)

    1997

  54. [61]

    Lloyd, Microelectron

    J.R. Lloyd, Microelectron. Eng., 49(1), 51-64 (1999)

    1999

  55. [62]

    Sarychev, Y .V

    M. Sarychev, Y .V. Zhitnikov, L. Borucki, C.-L. Liu, and T. Makhviladze, J. Appl. Phys., 86(6), 3068-3075 (1999)

    1999

  56. [63]

    K.N. Tu, J. Appl. Phys., 94(9), 5451-5473 (2003)

    2003

  57. [64]

    Valek, J.C

    B.C. Valek, J.C. Bravman, N. Tamura, A.A. MacDowell, R.S. Celestre, H.A. Padmore, R. Spolenak, W.L. Brown, B.W. Batterman, and J.R. Patel, Appl. Phys. Lett., 81(22), 4168-4170 (2002)

    2002

  58. [65]

    Tamura, R.S

    N. Tamura, R.S. Celestre, A.A. MacDowell, H.A. Padmore, R. Spolenak, B.C. Valek, N.M. Chang, A. Manceau, and J.R. Patel, Rev. Sci. Instrum., 73(3), 1369- 1372 (2002)

    2002

  59. [66]

    K. Chen, N. Tamura, B.C. Valek, and K.N. Tu, J. Appl. Phys., 104(1), 013513 (2008)

    2008

  60. [67]

    A.T. Wu, K.N. Tu, J.R. Lloyd, N. Tamura, B.C. Valek, and C.R. Kao, Appl. Phys. Lett., 85(13), 2490-2492 (2004)

    2004

  61. [68]

    Shibata, M

    H. Shibata, M. Murota, and K. Hashimoto, Jpn. J. Appl. Phys., 32(Part 1, No. 10), 4479-4484 (1993)

    1993

  62. [69]

    Vaidya and A.K

    S. Vaidya and A.K. Sinha, Thin Solid Films, 75(3), 253-259 (1981)

    1981

  63. [70]

    Attardo and R

    M.J. Attardo and R. Rosenberg, IEEE 8th Rel. Phys. Symp. , 41(6), 2381 -2386 (1970)

    1970

  64. [71]

    Kim and J.W.M

    C. Kim and J.W.M. Jr., J. Appl. Phys., 72(5), 1837-1845 (1992)

    1992

  65. [72]

    Colgan and K.P

    E.G. Colgan and K.P . Rodbell, J. Appl. Phys., 75(7), 3423-3434 (1994)

    1994

  66. [73]

    Learn, J

    A.J. Learn, J. Appl. Phys., 44(3), 1251-1258 (1973)

    1973

  67. [74]

    Liu, C.L

    X.Y . Liu, C.L. Liu, and L.J. Borucki, Acta Mater., 47(11), 3227-3231 (1999)

    1999

  68. [75]

    Tu, Phys

    K.N. Tu, Phys. Rev. B, 45(3), 1409 (1992)

    1992

  69. [76]

    Nguyen-Tran, H.-S

    H.-D. Nguyen-Tran, H.-S. Oh, S.-T. Hong, H.N. Han, J. Cao, S.-H. Ahn, and D.-M. 42 Chun, INT J PR ENG MAN-GT., 2(4), 365-376 (2015)

    2015

  70. [77]

    Sprecher, S.L

    A.F. Sprecher, S.L. Mannan, and H. Conrad, Acta Metall. , 34(7), 1145 -1162 (1986)

    1986

  71. [78]

    Conrad, A

    H. Conrad, A. Sprecher, W. Cao, and X. Lu, JOM, 42(9), 28-33 (1990)

    1990

  72. [79]

    Ruszkiewicz, T

    B.J. Ruszkiewicz, T. Grimm, I. Ragai, L. Mears, and J.T. Roth, J MANUF SCI E -T ASME, 139(11)(2017)

    2017

  73. [80]

    Salandro, J.J

    W.A. Salandro, J.J. Jones, C. Bunget, L. Mears, and J.T. Roth, Electrically Assisted Forming, (Switzerland: Springer, Cham, 2015), p. 255-311

    2015

  74. [81]

    L. Guan, G. Tang, and P .K. Chu, J. Mater. Res., 25(7), 1215-1224 (2011)

    2011

  75. [82]

    Troitskii, Pis'ma Zhurn

    O.A. Troitskii, Pis'ma Zhurn. Experim. Teor. Fiz., 10, 18-22 (1969)

    1969

  76. [83]

    Spitsyn, O.A

    V.I. Spitsyn, O.A. Troitskii, E.V. Gusov, and V.K. Kurdynkov, Izvest. Akad. Nauk, SSSR, Metallog, 2(123)(1974)

    1974

  77. [84]

    Okazaki, M

    K. Okazaki, M. Kagawa, and H. Conrad, Scr. Metall., 12(11), 1063-1068 (1978)

    1978

  78. [85]

    Conrad, N

    H. Conrad, N. Karam, and S. Mannan, Scr. Metall., 17(3), 411-416 (1983)

    1983

  79. [86]

    Silveira, R.A.F.O

    V.L.A. Silveira, R.A.F.O. Fortes, and W.A. Mannheimer, Scr. Metall., 17(11), 1381- 1382 (1983)

    1983

  80. [87]

    Barnak, A.F

    J.P . Barnak, A.F. Sprecher, and H. Conrad, Scr. Metall., 32(6), 879-884 (1995)

    1995

  81. [88]

    Y . Cao, L. He, Y . Zhou, P . Wang, and J. Cui, Mater. Sci. Eng., A, 674(Supplement C), 193-202 (2016)

    2016

  82. [89]

    Conrad, Mater

    H. Conrad, Mater. Sci. Eng., A, 287(2), 276-287 (2000)

    2000

  83. [90]

    Kim, M.-G

    M.-J. Kim, M.-G. Lee, K. Hariharan, S. -T. Hong, I.-S. Choi, D. Kim, K.H. Oh, and H.N. Han, Int. J. Plast., 94(Supplement C), 148-170 (2017)

    2017

  84. [91]

    He, K.-L

    J.-Y . He, K.-L. Lin, and A.T. Wu, J. Alloys Compd., 619, 372-377 (2015)

    2015

  85. [92]

    Chen, T.-C

    W.-Y . Chen, T.-C. Chiu, K. -L. Lin, A.T. Wu, W.-L. Jang, C. -L. Dong, and H. -Y . Lee, Scripta Mater., 68(5), 317-320 (2013)

    2013

  86. [93]

    Kuang, T.S.E

    J. Kuang, T.S.E. Low, S.R. Niezgoda, X. Li, Y . Geng, A.A. Luo, and G. Tang, Int. J. Plast., 87(Supplement C), 86-99 (2016)

    2016

  87. [94]

    H. Lv, R. Zhou, L. Li, H. Ni, J. Zhu, and T. Feng, Materials, 11(11), 2220 (2018)

    2018

  88. [95]

    Stolyarov, ACTA METALL SIN-ENGL, 31(12), 1305-1310 (2018)

    V. Stolyarov, ACTA METALL SIN-ENGL, 31(12), 1305-1310 (2018)

    2018

  89. [96]

    Jiang, G

    Y . Jiang, G. Tang, C. Shek, Y . Zhu, L. Guan, S. Wang, and Z. Xu, J. Mater. Res., 24(5), 1810-1814 (2009)

    2009

  90. [97]

    Jiang, G

    Y . Jiang, G. Tang, C. Shek, and Y . Zhu, Appl. Phys. A, 97(3), 607-615 (2009)

    2009

  91. [98]

    Y . Zhu, S. To, W.B. Lee, X. Liu, Y . Jiang, and G. Tang, J. Mater. Res., 24(8), 2661- 2669 (2009)

    2009

  92. [99]

    Zhang, M

    W. Zhang, M. Sui, Y . Zhou, and D. Li, Micron, 34(3-5), 189-198 (2003)

    2003

  93. [100]

    Zhang, M.L

    W. Zhang, M.L. Sui, K.Y . Hu, D.X. Li, X.N. Guo, G.H. He, and B.L. Zhou, J. Mater. Res., 15(10), 2065-2068 (2011)

    2011

  94. [101]

    S. To, Y . Zhu, W. Lee, X. Liu, Y . Jiang, and G. Tang, Appl. Phys. A, 96(4), 939-944 43 (2009)

    2009

  95. [102]

    G. Tang, J. Zhang, Y . Yan, H. Zhou, and W. Fang, J. Mater. Process. Technol. , 137(1), 96-99 (2003)

    2003

  96. [103]

    Dolinsky and T

    Y . Dolinsky and T. Elperin, Phys. Rev. B, 47(22), 14778-14785 (1993)

    1993

  97. [104]

    Dolinsky and T

    Y . Dolinsky and T. Elperin, Phys. Rev. B, 50(1), 52 (1994)

    1994

  98. [106]

    Tu, Phys

    K.N. Tu, Phys. Rev. B, 49(3), 2030-2034 (1994)

    1994

  99. [107]

    Chen and S.-k

    S.-w. Chen and S.-k. Lin, J. Mater. Res., 21(12), 3065-3071 (2011)

    2011

  100. [108]

    Chen, S.-k

    S.-w. Chen, S.-k. Lin, and J.-m. Jao, Mater. Trans., 45(3), 661-665 (2004)

    2004

  101. [109]

    Liu, S.W

    W.C. Liu, S.W. Chen, and C.M. Chen, J. Electron. Mater., 27(1), L6-L9 (1998)

    1998

  102. [110]

    Bertolino, J

    N. Bertolino, J. Garay, U. Anselmi-Tamburini, and Z.A. Munir, TPHB, 82(8), 969- 985 (2002)

    2002

  103. [111]

    Hsu, D.S.H

    C.M. Hsu, D.S.H. Wong, and S.W. Chen, J. Appl. Phys., 102(2), 023715-023715- 7 (2007)

    2007

  104. [112]

    Yeh and S.K

    C.K. Yeh and S.K. Lin, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan, unpublished research, 2013

    2013

  105. [113]

    Chen and S.W

    C.M. Chen and S.W. Chen, J. Electron. Mater., 28(7), 902-906 (1999)

    1999

  106. [114]

    Chen, National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu, Taiwan, unpublished research, 2002

    C.-m. Chen, National Tsing Hua University, Hsinchu, Taiwan, unpublished research, 2002

    2002

  107. [115]

    Garay, U

    J.E. Garay, U. Anselmi -Tamburini, and Z.A. Munir, Acta Mater., 51(15), 4487- 4495 (2003)

    2003

  108. [116]

    Friedman, J.E

    J.R. Friedman, J.E. Garay, U. Anselmi-Tamburini, and Z.A. Munir, Intermetallics, 12(6), 589-597 (2004)

    2004

  109. [117]

    Kumar, M

    A. Kumar, M. He, Z. Chen, and P .S. Teo, Thin Solid Films, 462, 413-418 (2004)

    2004

  110. [118]

    Braunovic and N

    M. Braunovic and N. Alexandrov, IEEE Compon. Packag. Manuf. Technol. Part A, 17(1), 78-85 (1994)

    1994

  111. [119]

    M.Y . Du, C.M. Chen, and S.W. Chen, Mater. Chem. Phys., 82(3), 818-825 (2003). 44 Table Caption: Table I. Blech critical product measurement. Table II. Summary of the experimental results for the polarity effect found in several reaction couple systems. Adapted from Ref. [111]...

    2003

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.