MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168552217 · doi:10.1109/icmens.2003.1221996

MEMS 3D optical mirror/scanner

2004· article· en· W2168552217 on OpenAlexaff
Tianshu Zhou, Paul Wright, J. Crawford, Graham McKinnon, Yingdi Zhang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced MEMS and NEMS Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaMicralyne
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOpticsMicroelectromechanical systemsComb driveFabricationMaterials scienceTilt (camera)ActuatorRadius of curvaturePlane mirrorSurface roughnessStictionRotation (mathematics)CurvatureOptoelectronicsPhysicsElectrical engineeringEngineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a novel MEMS optical mirror based on a proprietary fabrication process. The mirror is fabricated with single crystal silicon and has hexagonal reflective surface 600 /spl mu/m across, with a measured surface roughness is less than 20 angstroms RMS and a radius of curvature of greater than 5 meters. The device has a full 360/spl deg/ of Z rotation at up to 3/spl deg/ (/spl sim/1/spl deg/ controllable) of out of X-Y plane tilt angle depending the design parameters. This mirror has no perforation holes on the reflective surface and no stiction problems during fabrication or operation. The addition of lateral comb drive actuators gives the mirror up to 4 /spl mu/m X and Y in-plane movement. The control of X and Y translation is totally independent and free of movement interference. Due to all electrostatic actuation, the device has lower power consumption, with a designed driving voltage of less than 120 volts. Simulation results, including modal analysis, are included.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.113
Threshold uncertainty score0.254

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced MEMS and NEMS TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207