MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Theoretical Study of Miniaturization of a Silicon Vapor Chamber for Compact Microelectronics

2018· preprint· en· W2907027985 on OpenAlexaff
Quentin Struss, P. Coudrain, Jean-Philippe Colonna, A. Souifi, Christian Goutrand, Luc G. Fréchette

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHeat Transfer and Optimization
Canadian institutionsInstitut interdisciplinaire d'innovation technologiqueUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicroelectronicsMiniaturizationSiliconMaterials scienceThermal conductivityOptoelectronicsThermal resistanceThermalMechanical engineeringComputer scienceNanotechnologyComposite materialEngineeringPhysicsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Interest in silicon vapor chambers (SVCs) has increased in recent years as they have been identified as efficient cooling systems for microelectronics. They present the advantage of higher thermal conductivity compared to conventional heat spreaders, but the ability to miniaturise and integrate them remains limited. This work aims to investigate the potential miniaturization of these devices for integration on the backside of mobile device chips, located as close as possible to hotspots. Analytical models are used to predict the operating limits of water filled micropillar-based SVCs. The results show that such 1 × 1 cm2SVCs thinner than 200 μm thick can operate below 10 W and the corresponding design is presented. Optimum micropillars diameter / spacing ratio of 2 and wick thickness / internal height between 0.25 and 0.31 have been identified. A compatible layout of internal support pillars is also studied in order to insure sufficient mechanical resistance in the case of thin walls.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHeat Transfer and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207