MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3103092903 · doi:10.1109/ius46767.2020.9251429

Transducer fabrication using a 355nm pulsed picosecond laser – Rapid prototyping of 40 Mhz composites, custom electrode patterns, and circularly symmetric curvable composite patterns

2020· article· en· W3103092903 on OpenAlexaff
Jeffrey Woodacre, Thomas Landry, Jeremy Brown

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLaser Material Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceWafer dicingComposite numberElectrodeSubstrate (aquarium)Phased arrayPiezoelectricityFabricationOpticsComposite materialOptoelectronicsElectrical engineeringPhysicsWafer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, a 355 nm pulsed picosecond laser dicing system is used to cut a 40 MHz 1-3 composite, an 11.6 MHz circularly symmetric 1-3 composite, and create custom electrode fanouts and element sub-dices for a 40 MHz phased array. The kerfs for the 40 MHz, composite, measuring 42 μm thick, were measured to be 3.2 μm and the pillars 15.8 μm square. kt was found to be 0.43 under no bias and 0.47 with a DC bias. The circularly symmetric composite shows a kt of 0.62 but contains spurious acoustic modes within the operating band which could be accounted for in the future by adjusting pillar spacing or changing epoxy filler. The circular composite has pillars designed to be 50 μm square, with kerfs of 30 μm. Total thickness is 148 μm which results in an 11.68 MHz resonance. A phased array electrode pattern was defined on a piezoelectric substrate with a fan-out geometry for electrical interconnect. This pattern contained features measuring less than 3 um in width. This array was subsequently kerfed fully through the piezoelectric substrate as well as sub-diced starting from within the array element.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.220
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLaser Material Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207