MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4392906318 · doi:10.32920/25417234

FPCB Micromirrors for 3D Scanning LIDAR

2024· preprint· en· W4392906318 on OpenAlexaff
Trevor S Tai

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotonic and Optical Devices
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLidarFrame ratePerpendicularPoint cloudRotation (mathematics)OpticsLaser scanningLaserPoint (geometry)PhysicsRemote sensingComputer scienceGeologyComputer visionGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis presents two types of FPCB (Flexible Printed Circuit Board) micromirrors, i.e., 1D (rotation about one axis) FPCB micromirror and 2D (rotation about two perpendicular axes) FPCB micromirror. Each type of micromirror is integrated with a commercial single-point LIDAR (TF03) to form a scanning 3D LIDAR, which can be used in autonomous guided vehicles (AGVs). Using the 3D scanning LIDAR, real-time 3D point cloud maps can be generated by collecting positional data and processing it on a computer. The first 3D LIDAR scanning system uses two 1D FPCB mirrors rotating about perpendicular axes to steer an infrared (IR) laser from the LIDAR (Class 1 laser) and collect the diffusion reflected light at the receiver. This system is capable of: 1) field of view (FOV) of 38°×24°; 2) 12.5 or 25 horizontal scanning lines, 3) refreshing rate of 2 or 4 frames per second (fps), 4) 0.2~20 meters detection distance, and 5) 1,250-5,000 points per frame. The second 3D LIDAR system uses a single 2D FPCB mirror to steer the LIDAR light in two axial directions where one axis is actuated with Lorentz forces and the other by electromagnetic solenoids. This second system can achieve: 1) FOV of 40°×24; 2) 15 or 30 horizontal scanning lines; 3) refreshing rate of 2.5 or 5 fps; 4) detecting distance of 0.2~20 meters; and 5) 1,000-4,000 points per frame.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPhotonic and Optical Devices→French-language works237,207→