MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2165425251 · doi:10.1117/1.oe.52.12.125101

Microlens array fabricated by a low-cost grayscale lithography maskless system

2013· article· en· W2165425251 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Sergio Lopera Aristizabal, Giuseppe A. Cirino, Arlindo Neto Montagnoli, Aparecido Arruda Sobrinho, José Benaque Rubert, Ronaldo Domingues Mansano

Bibliographic record

VenueOptical Engineering · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced optical system design
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Research Council CanadaUniversidade de São Paulo
KeywordsMaterials scienceFull width at half maximumMicrolensDigital micromirror deviceOpticsWaferLithographyPhotoresistOptoelectronicsSurface finishLight intensityLens (geology)Nanotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work presents the fabrication of a contiguous f/#=f/15 Fresnel microlens array (MLA) by employing a low-cost home-built maskless exposure lithographic system based on a digital light projector technology by using Texas Instruments’ digital micromirror device chip. A continuous diffractive phase relief structure was generated on a photoresist-coated silicon wafer, replicated in polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) and electrostatically bonded to a glass substrate. The whole exposure time takes 10.8 min to expose a 2.4×2.4 mm MLA, with a resolution of 2.5 μm. This exposure time is relatively short, enabling high throughput or fast prototyping. Optical characterization was carried out using a He-Ne laser source (λ=633 nm ), by evaluating the maximum intensity of each spot generated at the MLA focal plane, Imax, as well as its sharpness by measuring their full width at half maximum (FWHM) intensity values. The resulting FWHM and maximum intensity spot average values were FWHM AVG =20±8% μm and Imax AVG =0.71±7% a.u. , respectively. The quality of replication was evaluated by profile characterization of the resulting mold and replica based on step height measurement along 180 μm. The maximum obtained difference was 32 nm, corresponding to 2.5% of the total mold height or λ/20 . AFM measurements were also carried out to quantify the roughness quality between mold and replica. The resulting RMS roughness was 4.73 nm (λ/130 ) and 6.66 nm (λ/95 ) for mold and replica, respectively. A comparison between theoretical and measured intensity profiles at the MLA focal plane was also carried out. A good correspondence between the results was found. Such an MLA can be applied as a Shack–Hartmann wavefront sensor in optical interconnects and to enhance the efficiency of detector arrays.

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)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.154
Teacher spread0.152 · 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

Citations41
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOptical EngineeringSame topicAdvanced optical system designFrench-language works237,207