MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1991729205 · doi:10.1117/12.2041576

Heterogeneous MEMS device assembly and integration

2014· article· en· W1991729205 on OpenAlexaff
P. Topart, Francis Picard, S. Ilias, Christine Alain, C. Chevalier, Bruno Fisette, Jacques E. Paultre, Francis Généreux, Mathieu Legros, Jean‐François Lepage, Christian Laverdière, Linh Ngo Phong, Jean-Sol Caron, Yan Desroches

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced MEMS and NEMS Technologies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Space AgencyDefence Research and Development CanadaInstitut National d'Optique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicroelectromechanical systemsWaferMaterials sciencePixelGyroscopeOptoelectronicsFabricationDetectorOpticsEngineeringPhysicsAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, smart phone applications have both raised the pressure for cost and time to market reduction, and the need for high performance MEMS devices. This trend has led the MEMS community to develop multi-die packaging of different functionalities or multi-technology (i.e. wafer) approaches to fabricate and assemble devices respectively. This paper reports on the fabrication, assembly and packaging at INO of various MEMS devices using heterogeneous assembly at chip and package-level. First, the performance of a giant (e.g. about 3 mm in diameter), electrostatically actuated beam steering mirror is presented. It can be rotated about two perpendicular axes to steer an optical beam within an angular cone of up to 60° in vector scan mode with an angular resolution of 1 mrad and a response time of 300 ms. To achieve such angular performance relative to mirror size, the microassembly was performed from sub-components fabricated from 4 different wafers. To combine infrared detection with inertial sensing, an electroplated proof mass was flip-chipped onto a 256×1 pixel uncooled bolometric FPA and released using laser ablation. In addition to the microassembly technology, performance results of packaged devices are presented. Finally, to simulate a 3072×3 pixel uncooled detector for cloud and fire imaging in mid and long-wave IR, the staggered assembly of six 512×3 pixel FPAs with a less than 50 micron pixel co-registration is reported.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.225
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicAdvanced MEMS and NEMS TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207