MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100829238 · doi:10.1109/robot.2006.1641723

Calibration of multi-axis MEMS force sensors using the shape from motion method

2006· article· en· W2100829238 on OpenAlexaff
Yu Sun, Keekyoung Kim, Richard M. Voyles, Bradley J. Nelson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced MEMS and NEMS Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCalibrationMicroelectromechanical systemsCapacitive sensingComputer scienceLinearityMotion (physics)AcousticsElectronic engineeringPhysicsArtificial intelligenceEngineeringOptoelectronics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a new design of a two-axis MEMS (microelectromechanical systems) capacitive force sensor with strict linearity and a new sensor calibration method for micro-sensors. Precise calibration of multi-axis micro force sensors is difficult for several reasons, including the need to apply many known force vectors at precise orientations at the micro force scale, and the risk of damaging the small, fragile MEMS device. In this paper the shape from motion method is introduced for micro force sensors resulting in a rapid and effective calibration technique. Structural-electrostatic coupled field simulations are conducted in order to optimize the sensor design, which is calibrated with the shape from motion method as well as the least squares method for comparison purposes. Calibration results demonstrate that the shape from motion method is an effective, practical, and accurate method for calibrating multiaxis micro force sensors

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.244 · 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
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

Citations12
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced MEMS and NEMS TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207