Casimir Forces in MEMS/NEMS: Influence of Nanoscale Surface Roughness and Material Optical Properties
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding the vacuum state of a quantum system is one of the major challenges of fundamental physics and some associated increasingly important technologies. It is also key to model the possible origin of our universe and its observed accelerated expansion. If confined within boundaries, vacuum fluctuations manifest themselves by the generation of Casimir forces. However, boundaries between interacting bodies posses in many cases nanoscale surface roughness, which is both difficult to avoid and control. When two bodies are separated by a small distance (e.g., less than 200 nm) the roughness starts to play an important role on the Casimir interaction between the bodies and their adhesion. Control of this short-distance interaction is crucial for micro and nanoelectromechanical devices, microfluidics, and for micro/nanotechnology. These forces between flat bodies can be described by the Lifshitz theory that takes into account the actual measured optical properties of interacting materials. For rough surfaces the problem is complicated by the nonadditivity of the dispersion forces. In this talk I will review the current state of the problem with attention to be given for metallic systems, phase change materials, and pure conductors (promising for devices operating under severe environments) with respect to actuation dynamics of MEMS/NEMS.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".