MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7161954521 · doi:10.82308/12012

A surface micromachining fabrication process for aluminium MEMS micromirrors /

2006· dissertation· en· W7161954521 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Cristina. Marinescu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced MEMS and NEMS Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFabricationMicroelectromechanical systemsSurface micromachiningMicrofabricationMicroelectronicsCantileverBulk micromachiningAluminium

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis focuses on the implementation of a surface micromachining fabrication process for electrostatically actuated MEMS micromirrors in the McGill University's Nanotools microfabrication laboratory. The process consists in fabricating the devices out of aluminum using photoresist as a sacrificial material. To this effect simple cantilever micromirror structures were designed. They were then modeled and simulated using finite-element analyses from the commercially-available software ANSYS. Finally, in order to validate the results of the new process, the same structures were fabricated out of polysilicon using the Multi-User MEMS Processes (PolyMUMPS) technology available through the Canadian Microelectronics Corporation (CMC). The theoretical and experimental results from the PolyMUMPS micromirrors were compared. The results at low voltages were similar, but they diverged for larger voltages and deflections, with the simulations usually predicting stiffer structures. The characterization of the structures fabricated with the Nanotools process indicated that they remained stuck to the substrate after the release process. Manipulation during testing caused some of them to be partially released, at which point they could be electrostatically actuated. With a better understanding of the aluminum properties and modifications to the original designs, one can fabricate viable aluminum structures using this process. Different areas of improvement as well as future directions for MEMS fabrication in this laboratory were also identified.

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)0.000
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.268 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced MEMS and NEMS TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207