Roughness characterisation of gas phase micromachining process suitable for fabricating silicon based microsystems
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Non-conventional or advanced machining techniques are becoming the enabling fabrication techniques for many emerging fields including Micro Electro Mechanical Systems (MEMS) or Microsystems Technology (MST). The processes used for MEMS fabrication include standard semiconductor fabrication processes and emerging micromachining techniques. Among the challenges emerging from the manufacturing of MEMS devices, post-processing seems to be one of the most sensitive issues. The non-traditional common post-processing techniques are bulk micromachining and surface micromachining. It has been a challenge for MEMS designers to develop a micromachining technique that is compatible with IC (Integrated Circuits) processes and also capable of making MEMS structures through both bulk and surface micromachining with acceptable surface roughness requirements. The selected micromachining process should not affect the integrity of the free standing structure due to the reduced selectivity and aggressive etch of the adjacent electronic circuitry. Moreover, the integrity of the released structure, the dynamic properties as well as the electrostatic characteristics, are strongly dependent on the achieved roughness of the surfaces produced by the etching process. Hence, this paper presents the surface roughness characterisation of gas phase micromachining with XeF2 that is suitable for fabricating integrated MEMS with both micromechanical and microelectronics components. This paper also presents some fabricated microsystems using this process.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it