MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2267972626 · doi:10.1115/imece2014-37280

Design Specifications for Biaxial Navigation-Grade MEMS Accelerometers

2014· article· en· W2267972626 on OpenAlexaff
Xiaowei Shan, Ting Zou, James Richard Forbes, Jorge Angeles

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced MEMS and NEMS Technologies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccelerometerMicroelectromechanical systemsProof massComputer scienceNatural frequencySensitivity (control systems)Electronic engineeringAcousticsEngineeringMaterials sciencePhysicsVibration

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The focus of this paper is the design of a biaxial MEMS accelerometer for navigation applications. First, a survey is conducted to outline the commercial landscape of navigation-grade and MEMS accelerometers. The survey shows a potential market for navigation-grade accelerometers at the MEMS scale. Based on the specifications for navigation applications, the design targets are derived for the proposed biaxial MEMS accelerometers, including the common concerns of natural frequency ratios and bandwidth, as well as the important parameters for MEMS devices, such as hinge width, proof-mass size and mobility range. In light of the design targets, the ideal frequency matrix of the biaxial accelerometer system is derived based on the concept of generalized spring, in connection with the design targets. The stiffness values required are estimated herein. For further structural optimization, the parametric entries of the frequency-ratio matrix act as the objectives to be maximized for the lowest off-axis sensitivity of the proposed accelerometer. A suitable architecture for MEMS biaxial accelerometers is proposed thereafter. This architecture not only provides high compliance and structural isotropy for the in-plane translation, but also allows for direct measurement of the proof-mass motion. The proposed architecture is then optimized for the highest frequency ratio between the non-sensitive and sensitive axes, with regard to the design parameters and constraints. The optimization results of the proposed accelerometer demonstrate navigation-grade mechanical performance.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.180 · 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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced MEMS and NEMS TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207