MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2808950728 · doi:10.1109/jmems.2018.2844735

Post-Fabrication Melting Procedure With I-Shaped Beams for Stiction-Free Release of 2-D Surface-Micromachined Micromirrors Equipped With Repulsive-Force Actuators

2018· article· en· W2808950728 on OpenAlexafffund
Hui Zuo, Siyuan He

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Microelectromechanical Systems · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced MEMS and NEMS Technologies
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsStictionFabricationActuatorMaterials scienceSurface micromachiningBeam (structure)StiffnessOpticsMicroelectromechanical systemsOptoelectronicsComposite materialPhysicsEngineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a post-fabrication melting procedure with an I-shaped beam design to solve the problem of stiction in surface-micromachined 2-D micromirrors equipped with repulsive-force actuators. This design adds extra I-shaped beams to the free-standing mirror plate to increase its stiffness about one thousandfold and allow it to survive the wet release process. Then, those beams are melted and broken electrically on-chip after fabrication to restore the original stiffness. With the aid of repulsive force, the I-shaped beam design can use a low current for melting. A high current was used in the previously presented T-shaped fusible tether beam design, but it causes splattering and residue. The I-shaped beam design has been successfully applied to a repulsive-force 2D micromirror that is integrated with head-up display and stiction is eliminated. The modeling, simulation, and prototyping processes are presented, and the ways in which it can be used in a general surface-micromachined free-standing structure to eliminate stiction are discussed.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations12
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Microelectromechanical SystemsSame topicAdvanced MEMS and NEMS TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207