MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055455986 · doi:10.1115/imece2006-14861

Electro-Fluidic Packaging for CMOS Based Laboratory-on-Chips

2006· article· en· W2055455986 on OpenAlexaff
Ebrahim Ghafar‐Zadeh, Mohamad Sawan, Daniel Therriault

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNanomaterials and Printing Technologies
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFluidicsFabricationMicroscale chemistryMicrofluidicsMicrochannelMaterials scienceCMOSCapacitive sensingNanotechnologyChipPlanarOptoelectronicsElectrical engineeringComputer scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Direct-write fabrication process (DWFP) is a robotic deposition technique used to produce planar or three-dimensional (3D) microscale structures. These structures consist of paste-like filaments which are extruded through a micronozzle and deposited on a substrate [1]. These filaments are encapsulated inside an epoxy resin and then melted and removed by applying a moderate temperature for the creation of microfluidic components (e.g., microchannels, reservoirs). Following our previous reports [2–3] on the fabrication of microchannels by DWFP and high precision CMOS capacitive sensors [4], we present in this paper a microfluidic packaging procedure to realize microchannel and fluidic connections on top of CMOS chip. The compatibility of this fluidic packaging procedure with conventional electrical packaging techniques (e.g. wire bonding) is an important advantage of DWFP for CMOS based Laboratory-On-Chip applications. The fabrication challenges are discussed in the experimental section.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.178
Teacher spread0.173 · 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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNanomaterials and Printing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207