MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1983291295 · doi:10.1115/imece2006-14765

Design and Modelling of Novel Linearly Tunable Capacitors

2006· article· en· W1983291295 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohammad Shavezipur, Amir Khajepour, Seyed Mohammad Hashemi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced MEMS and NEMS Technologies
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of WaterlooGovernment of Ontario
KeywordsCapacitorLinearitySensitivity (control systems)CapacitanceMaterials scienceVoltageNonlinear systemStiffnessMicroelectromechanical systemsVariable capacitorElectronic engineeringOptoelectronicsElectrical engineeringEngineeringPhysicsElectrodeComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MEMS-based tunable capacitors with electrostatic actuation are well-known for their wide tuning ranges, high Q-factors, fast responses, and small sizes. However, tunable capacitors exhibit very high sensitivity near pull-in voltage which counters the concept of tunability. In this research, two novel designs are presented that improve the high sensitivity in capacitance-voltage (C-V) curve. In the first design, the nonlinear deformation of supporting beams is studied to develop a new nonlinear spring. The variable stiffness coefficients of such springs improve the linearity of the C-V curve, and by delaying the pull-in, the maximum tunability is also increased without using complex geometries. In the second design, an asymmetric non-parallel-plate capacitor is introduced, in which the C-V response has lower sensitivity at high voltages. The design concept can be applied to highly tunable capacitors to improve the sensitivity and maintain high tunability. The numerical results demonstrate low sensitivity and high linearity and tunability for the new designs.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.341
Threshold uncertainty score0.203

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.166 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations6
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced MEMS and NEMS TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207