MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2796049108 · doi:10.1109/tcpmt.2018.2810738

Packaging-Induced Range Tunability of Tactile Sensors for Physiological Signal Monitoring Applications

2018· article· en· W2796049108 on OpenAlexafffund
Shichao Yue, Yang Qiu, Walied A. Moussa

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Components Packaging and Manufacturing Technology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Sensor and Energy Harvesting Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of AlbertaCMC Microsystems
KeywordsMicroelectromechanical systemsEmulationTactile sensorMaterials sciencePolydimethylsiloxaneSIGNAL (programming language)Pressure sensorFabricationReusabilitySensitivity (control systems)Electronic engineeringAcousticsComputer scienceOptoelectronicsMechanical engineeringNanotechnologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Packaging-induced performance changes of microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) usually are detrimental in the device development. This paper presents a methodology of tuning the force range of a designated MEMS tactile sensor for broader application potentials by packaging this millinewton-level force sensor with different polymers. The force range of the tactile sensor has been enhanced from 30 mN to 400 mN and 100 N, respectively, which are more than tenfolds or 1000 folds of its original capability, by ruggedizing with the polydimethylsiloxane and polyurethane. Numerical analysis and experimental characterization have verified the tuned force range by these two packaging approaches. Three potential applications for the physiological signal monitoring have been revealed by preliminary emulation test results, including emulated lip pressure measurement, heart rate monitoring, and the finger strength evaluation. This methodology sheds light on reconciling the sensitivity changes induced by the packaging phase from defects to merits for broader application potentials in the MEMS development, accelerating the fabrication flow and lowering the cost with the reusability of concurrent devices.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.228 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Components Packaging and Manufacturing TechnologySame topicAdvanced Sensor and Energy Harvesting MaterialsFrench-language works237,207