MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411488637 · doi:10.1117/12.3064140

Characterization of pulsed ultraviolet laser micromachining operation for rapid prototyping of microfluidic devices

2025· article· en· W4411488637 on OpenAlexaff
Sean S. Worthington, Seth N. Lowry, M Richardson, Christopher M. Collier

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLaser Material Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSurface micromachiningMicrofluidicsRapid prototypingMaterials scienceUltravioletCharacterization (materials science)LaserOptoelectronicsNanotechnologyFabricationOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Advancements in lab-on-a-chip technologies have led to the rapid development and widespread use of miniaturized, portable analytical chemistry equipment and biosensing devices. These biosensing devices have enabled the application of modern analytical methods to numerous industries including forensics, agrifood technology, and point-of-care medical diagnostics. The development of such devices is largely made possible by continuous advancements in microfluidic fabrication techniques. In this area, laser ablation processes have shown promise as a replacement to more complex lithographic fabrication methods. Such processes are prone to causing microfractures and thermal stresses in the microfluidic substrate, potentially causing leaking and delamination when the devices are in use. In this work, an Oxford Lasers A-355 Micromachining System is used to fabricate microfluidic devices with high resolution features in low-cost glass substrates (borosilicate glass and soda lime glass). The fabricated microfluidic devices are enclosed using a low-temperature glass-to-glass bonding technique. For each substrate the laser cut depth is reported as a function of pulse frequency and peak operating power. This characterization fills important gaps in literature and enables researchers to customize the laser ablation process to fit the unique requirements of their microfluidic devices. The optimized ablation procedure is presented and shown to produce a watertight seal when bonded to a secondary enclosure substrate. Nominal actuation of the device is demonstrated with a red dye sample.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.139
Threshold uncertainty score0.357

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 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 topicLaser Material Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207