MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409263067 · doi:10.1109/wacv61041.2025.00156

SEMU-Net: A Segmentation-Based Corrector for Fabrication Process Variations of Nanophotonics with Microscopic Images

2025· article· en· W4409263067 on OpenAlexaff
Rasool Azimi, Yang Kong, Dusan Gostimirovic, James J. Clark, Odile Liboiron-Ladouceur

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNanofabrication and Lithography Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNanophotonicsProcess (computing)Computer scienceImage segmentationFabricationSegmentationArtificial intelligenceOpticsMaterials scienceNanotechnologyPhysicsProgramming languageMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Integrated silicon photonic devices, which manipulate light to transmit and process information on a silicon-on-insulator chip, are highly sensitive to structural variations. Minor deviations during nanofabrication-the precise process of building structures at the nanometer scale-such as over-or under-etching, corner rounding, and unintended defects, can significantly impact performance. To address these challenges, we introduce SEMU-Net, a comprehensive set of methods that automatically segments scanning electron microscope (SEM) images and uses them to train two deep neural network models based on U-Net and its variants. The predictor model anticipates fabrication-induced variations, while the corrector model adjusts the design to address these issues, ensuring that the final fabricated structures closely align with the intended specifications. Experimental results show that the segmentation U-Net reaches an average IoU score of 99.30%, while the corrector attention U-Net in a tandem architecture achieves an average IoU score of 98.67%.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNanofabrication and Lithography TechniquesFrench-language works237,207