MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2326405972 · doi:10.1515/msr-2015-0034

Design and Analysis of a Micromechanical Three-Component Force Sensor for Characterizing and Quantifying Surface Roughness

2015· article· en· W2326405972 on OpenAlexaff
Qiaokang Liang, Wei‐Chen Wu, Dan Zhang, Bo Wei, Wei Sun, Yaonan Wang, Ge Yu

Bibliographic record

VenueMeasurement Science Review · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced machining processes and optimization
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
FundersChangsha Science and Technology ProjectSpecialized Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education of ChinaNatural Science Foundation of Hunan ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMaterials scienceSurface micromachiningSurface roughnessSensitivity (control systems)Surface finishMicroelectromechanical systemsCoupling (piping)NanometreComponent (thermodynamics)Compensation (psychology)Beam (structure)AcousticsElectronic engineeringMechanical engineeringComposite materialStructural engineeringOptoelectronicsEngineeringFabrication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Roughness, which can represent the trade-off between manufacturing cost and performance of mechanical components, is a critical predictor of cracks, corrosion and fatigue damage. In order to measure polished or super-finished surfaces, a novel touch probe based on three-component force sensor for characterizing and quantifying surface roughness is proposed by using silicon micromachining technology. The sensor design is based on a cross-beam structure, which ensures that the system possesses high sensitivity and low coupling. The results show that the proposed sensor possesses high sensitivity, low coupling error, and temperature compensation function. The proposed system can be used to investigate micromechanical structures with nanometer accuracy.

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)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.161
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.161 · 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

Citations6
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMeasurement Science ReviewSame topicAdvanced machining processes and optimizationFrench-language works237,207