MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2758232364 · doi:10.5539/mas.v11n10p123

Sensitivity-Based Reliability Analysis of MEMS Acceleration Switch

2017· article· en· W2758232364 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Prashank Kansal, Pramod Kasturi, Nam Ho Kim, Seung‐gyo Jang

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering Design
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDefense Acquisition Program AdministrationAgency for Defense Development
KeywordsReliability (semiconductor)Sensitivity (control systems)AccelerationMicroelectromechanical systemsFinite element methodComputer scienceProcess (computing)Beam (structure)Reliability engineeringMaterials scienceElectronic engineeringStructural engineeringEngineeringPhysicsNanotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MEMS acceleration switches have been used in many engineering applications. In this paper, the reliability of MEMS switch is evaluated under various uncertainties from materials and manufacturing process. First, the performance of MEMS switch is modeled using 1D mass-spring-damper-contact system. Different from conventional lumped element methods, the model includes the effect of geometric parameters as well as contact conditions. The parameters of 1D models are calibrated using a high-fidelity finite element model. For reliability assessment, four different methods are used in order to compare computational cost as well as accuracy in predicting reliability. It turned out that sensitivity-based reliability method has several benefits, such as computational time and identifying important parameters that contribute significantly to reliability. The sensitivity analysis showed that the cross-sectional height and the length of folded-beam contribute most significantly to the reliability of switch-on condition. After changing the length of the beam, the probability of failure was improved from 0.168 to 0.0003.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern Applied ScienceSame topicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering DesignFrench-language works237,207