MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2015609519 · doi:10.1109/tcsi.2014.2365331

Weakly-Coupled Resonators in Capacitive Readout Circuits

2014· article· en· W2015609519 on OpenAlexafffund
Siamak Hafizi-Moori, Edmond Cretu

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems I Regular Papers · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMechanical and Optical Resonators
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCMC Microsystems
KeywordsCapacitive sensingResonatorSensitivity (control systems)CapacitanceElectronic circuitCapacitorAccelerometerElectronic engineeringMicroelectromechanical systemsNoise (video)Dynamic rangeElectrical engineeringComputer sciencePhysicsEngineeringOptoelectronicsVoltage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Low energy consumption and wide operating temperature range of capacitors made them common in sensor designs, e.g., MEMS accelerometers, and hence increased the popularity of capacitive readout circuits. Their main challenges, in either discrete or integrated implementations, are sensitivity, noise, energy consumption, and parasitic components at the analog front end. Compared to conventional “frequency-shift monitoring” which is one of the most accurate and common methods for capacitance measurements, weakly-coupled resonators (well-known in mechanical systems) can offer up to three orders of magnitude increase in sensitivity. Therefore, this concept has been recently applied to the design of micromechanical sensors, e.g., for sensitive mass sensing. This paper applies, for the first time in the electrical domain, the concept of monitoring the eigenstates variations in weakly-coupled resonators as a generic readout circuit technique for measuring very small capacitance changes. The outstanding sensitivity of this method is verified analytically and demonstrated using both extensive circuit simulations and experimental measurements.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.475
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.206 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations17
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems I Regular PapersSame topicMechanical and Optical ResonatorsFrench-language works237,207