MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2783132477 · doi:10.1109/coase.2017.8256168

Rapid prototyping of paper-based electronics by robotic printing and micromanipulation

2017· article· en· W2783132477 on OpenAlexaff
Xianke Dong, Pengfei Song, Xinyu Liu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Sensor and Energy Harvesting Materials
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectronicsInkwellFabricationPrinted electronicsRapid prototypingMaterials scienceNanotechnologyComputer scienceFlexible electronicsTransistorProcess (computing)VoltageElectrical engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The fabrication techniques of paper-based electronics have been widely explored in the past two decades, contributing to the wide application of these promising devices in a variety of fields. In this paper, we report a new rapid prototyping technique for constructing paper-based field-effect transistor (FET) biosensors integrating rolled-up semiconductor microtubes. Leveraging robotic printing and micromanipulation techniques, silver ink electrodes are printed on paper and pre-synthesized microtubes are transferred onto a pair of printed electrodes to form a complete FET. Compared with existing fabrication techniques of paper-based electronics that purely rely on printing, the proposed technique is more versatile in that it can rapidly integrate high-performance semiconductor microtubes onto paper substrates. To improve the printing uniformity, a time-shift mechanism is proposed to compensate the ink under-and over-dispersion at the beginning and end of the printing process, respectively. To realize automated microtube pick-up and transfer, image processing and motion control algorithms are developed to detect positions of the end-effector (a glass needle) and the microtube, and to control motions of the glass needle with minimized human intervention. We demonstrate the effectiveness of the technique by fabricating the designed paper-based devices using bimetallic microtubes and measure their current-voltage characteristics.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Sensor and Energy Harvesting MaterialsFrench-language works237,207