MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157984475 · doi:10.1115/1.4002835

Modeling MEMS Resonators Past Pull-In

2011· article· en· W2157984475 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computational and Nonlinear Dynamics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced MEMS and NEMS Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGalerkin methodDamperNonlinear systemMicroelectromechanical systemsBeam (structure)MechanicsPartial differential equationControl theory (sociology)Ordinary differential equationDifferential equationHarmonic balanceResonatorNatural frequencyPhysicsVibrationStructural engineeringEngineeringMathematical analysisAcousticsMathematicsComputer scienceOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we develop a mathematical model of an electrostatic MEMS (Micro-Electro-Mechanical systems) beam undergoing impact with a stationary electrode subsequent to pull-in. We model the contact between the beam and the substrate using a nonlinear foundation of springs and dampers. The system partial differential equation is converted into coupled nonlinear ordinary differential equations using the Galerkin method. A numerical solution is obtained by treating all nonlinear terms as external forces. We use the model to predict the contact length, natural frequencies, and mode shapes of the beam past pull-in voltage as well as the dynamic response of a shunt switch in a closing and opening sequence.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.252

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.207 · 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