MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974590895 · doi:10.1117/12.686579

Microassembly of 3D micromirrors as building elements for optical MEMS switching

2006· article· en· W1974590895 on OpenAlexaff
Nikolai Dechev, Mohammad Abd Alkhalik Basha, Sujeet K. Chaudhuri, Safieddin Safavi‐Naeini

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Surface Polishing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicroelectromechanical systemsProcess (computing)Construct (python library)Computer scienceLock (firearm)Optical switchGrippersKey (lock)RobotMechanical engineeringEngineeringElectronic engineeringMaterials scienceArtificial intelligenceOptoelectronics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A robotic-based microassembly process has been successfully applied to the construction of a novel micro-mirror design for use in optical switching. This paper is devoted to the description of the microassembly process used to construct the 3D micro-mirror. The microassembly process is based upon the PMKIL (Passive Microgripper, Key and Inter-Lock) assembly system. Details of the assembly process include, the methodology to construct the micro-mirror, the design of the micro-mirror parts, and the design of the tools (microgrippers) that are mounted to the robot to handle the micro-parts. The results of the assembly process are presented, along with examples of prototype 3D micro-mirrors. The entire 3D micromirror consists of a novel electro-static rotary motor, onto which the 3D mirror structure is assembled. The 3D micro-mirror is used as a building element for 1 N optical switching systems and for N×M optical crossconnects.

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)0.000
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations13
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicAdvanced Surface Polishing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207