MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4223984911 · doi:10.3390/s22082994

Simple and Robust Microfabrication of Polymeric Piezoelectric Resonating MEMS Mass Sensors

2022· article· en· W4223984911 on OpenAlexaff
Chang Ge, Edmond Cretu

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMechanical and Optical Resonators
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrofabricationMicroelectromechanical systemsSurface micromachiningMaterials scienceNanotechnologyFabricationAccelerometerMicrotechnologyMicrosystemOptoelectronicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Resonating MEMS mass sensors are microdevices with broad applications in fields such as bioscience and biochemistry. Their advantageous surface-to-volume ratio makes their resonant frequency highly sensitive to variations in their mass induced by surface depositions. Recent global challenges, such as water quality monitoring or pandemic containment, have increased the need for low-cost (even disposable), rapidly fabricated microdevices as suitable detectors. Resonant MEMS mass sensors are among the best candidates. This paper introduces a simple and robust fabrication of polymeric piezoelectric resonating MEMS mass sensors. The microfabrication technology replaces the traditional layer-by-layer micromachining techniques with laser micromachining to gain extra simplicity. Membrane-based resonant sensors have been fabricated to test the technology. Their characterization results have proven that the technology is robust with good reproducibility (around 2% batch level variations in the resonant frequency). Initial tests for the MEMS mass sensors' sensitivity have indicated a sensitivity of 340 Hz/ng. The concept could be a starting point for developing low-cost MEMS sensing solutions for pandemic control, health examination, and pollution monitoring.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.575
Threshold uncertainty score0.848

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.213 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations9
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicMechanical and Optical ResonatorsFrench-language works237,207