MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2338696771 · doi:10.1088/0960-1317/26/5/057001

A novel technique for die-level post-processing of released optical MEMS

2016· article· en· W2338696771 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohannad Y. Elsayed, Philippe-Olivier Beaulieu, Jonathan Brière, Michaël Ménard, Frédéric Nabki

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Micromechanics and Microengineering · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced MEMS and NEMS Technologies
Canadian institutionsActive Ethernet Passive Optical Networks Over λ MultipleXing (Canada)Université du Québec à Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDie (integrated circuit)Microelectromechanical systemsMaterials scienceOptoelectronicsEngineeringNanotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This work presents a novel die-level post-processing technique for dies including released movable structures. The procedure was applied to microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) chips that were fabricated in a commercial process, SOIMUMPs from MEMSCAP. It allows the performance of a clean DRIE etch of sidewalls on the diced chips enabling the optical testing of the pre-released MEMS mirrors through the chip edges. The etched patterns are defined by photolithography using photoresist spray coating. The photoresist thickness is tuned to create photoresist bridges over the pre-released gaps, protecting the released structures during subsequent wet processing steps. Then, the chips are subject to a sequence of wet and dry etching steps prior to dry photoresist removal in O 2 plasma. Processed micromirrors were tested and found to rotate similarly to devices without processing, demonstrating that the post-processing procedure does not affect the mechanical performance of the devices significantly.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Micromechanics and MicroengineeringSame topicAdvanced MEMS and NEMS TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207