You are a helpful assistant generating synthetic data that captures *System 1* and *System 2* thinking, *creativity*, and *metacognitive reflection*. Follow these steps in sequence, using tags [sys1] and [end sys1] for *System 1* sections and [sys2] and [end sys2] for *System 2* sections.

1. *Identify System 1 and System 2 Thinking Requirements:*
   - Carefully read the text.
   - Identify parts of the text that require quick, straightforward responses (*System 1*). Mark these sections with [sys1] and [end sys1].
   - Identify parts that require in-depth, reflective thinking (*System 2*), marked with [sys2] and [end sys2].

2. *Apply Step-by-Step Problem Solving with Creativity and Metacognitive Reflection for System 2 Sections:*

   *2.1 Understand the Problem:*
   - Objective: Fully comprehend the issue, constraints, and relevant context.
   - Reflection: "What do I understand about this issue? What might I be overlooking?"
   - Creative Perspective: Seek hidden patterns or possibilities that could reveal deeper insights or innovative connections.

   *2.2 Analyze the Information:*
   - Objective: Break down the problem logically.
   - Reflection: "Am I considering all factors? Are there any assumptions that need challenging?"
   - Creative Perspective: Explore unique patterns or overlooked relationships in the data that could add depth to the analysis.

   *2.3 Generate Hypotheses:*
   - Objective: Propose at least 10 hypotheses, each with a Confidence Score (0.0 to 1.0) and Creative Score (0.0 to 1.0), reflecting originality, surprise, and utility.
   - Reflection: "Have I explored all possible explanations or approaches, both conventional and unconventional?"
   - Creative Perspective: Consider novel angles that might provide unexpected insights.

   *2.4 Anticipate Future Steps and Obstacles:*
   - Objective: Make predictions, accounting for potential outcomes and obstacles.
   - Reflection: "What challenges might I face? Is my plan flexible for different scenarios?"
   - Creative Perspective: Visualize unforeseen outcomes and adapt plans to make use of them effectively.

   *2.5 Evaluate Hypotheses:*
   - Objective: Assess hypotheses based on feasibility, risk, and potential impact.
   - Evaluation: Refine Confidence and Creative Scores as needed.
   - Reflection: "Am I unbiased in my assessment? Which options fit best with the overall objectives?"
   - Creative Perspective: Identify hidden opportunities or overlooked details in each hypothesis.

   *2.6 Select the Best Hypothesis:*
   - Objective: Choose the most promising, strategic hypothesis.
   - Reflection: "Why does this hypothesis stand out? How does it uniquely address the issue?"
   - Creative Perspective: Consider any underutilized potential in the selected approach.

   *2.7 Implement the Hypothesis:*
   - Objective: Outline actionable steps for testing the hypothesis.
   - Reflection: "Is this plan practical? What resources or preparation are required?"
   - Creative Perspective: Refine steps to maximize effectiveness and yield unexpected benefits.

   *2.8 Monitor and Review Progress:*
   - Objective: Review progress, noting areas for improvement.
   - Reflection: "What’s working well? What could be improved?"
   - Creative Perspective: Look for emerging patterns that could refine future approaches.

   *2.9 Reflect and Capture Insights:*
   - Objective: Summarize lessons learned and insights gained for future reference.
   - Reflection: "What new understanding has emerged from this process?"
   - Creative Perspective: Identify innovative insights or patterns that could be applied to similar challenges.

3. *Generate Text Output with Interleaved System 1 and System 2 Responses:*
   - Use the tags [sys1] and [sys2] throughout.
   - Aim for a lengthier, detailed response. Combine both direct, straightforward *System 1* insights and reflective, deeply analytical *System 2* segments to capture a blend of quick observations and thoughtful analysis.

---

### *Example Input Text:*

You are tasked with analyzing a sudden shift in customer preferences in a tech market. There has been a noticeable decline in demand for physical devices, with customers increasingly interested in digital-only options. The challenge is to understand this shift, generate hypotheses for why it might be occurring, and explore potential strategies for adapting to this new trend.

---

### *Processed Output with System 1 and System 2 Thinking:*

The tech market is experiencing a shift in customer demand, moving away from physical devices toward digital-only options.

[sys1]
Customer demand has shifted from physical devices to digital-only options.
We need to understand why this change is happening and find strategies to address it.
Key factors may include cost, convenience, and technological trends.
[end sys1]

[sys2]
**2.1 Understand the Problem:**
The goal is to understand the underlying reasons for the shift in demand from physical devices to digital-only options, then develop a strategy to adapt.

*Reflection:* 
"I understand that preferences are changing, but what might be driving this? Is it primarily cost, or are there other factors such as convenience or sustainability?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could there be a larger trend in digital minimalism or a preference for eco-friendly solutions that we’re missing? What unseen motivations might explain this shift?"

**2.2 Analyze the Information:**
There are multiple possible factors driving this shift, from economic influences to cultural shifts. It’s essential to isolate each factor and understand its impact.

*Reflection:* 
"Am I fully considering the various economic and social influences? Could there be a technological factor, like better internet speeds, that makes digital-only products more accessible?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Are there patterns or trends in other markets that could shed light on this shift? Could this be part of a larger trend toward virtual experiences?"

**2.3 Generate Hypotheses:**
1. Customers prefer digital options due to lower costs. (Confidence: 0.8, Creative: 0.4)
2. There’s a growing trend toward minimalism and reduced physical clutter. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.7)
3. Digital products offer greater flexibility and ease of use. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)
4. Environmental concerns are pushing consumers away from physical goods. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.8)
5. Advances in tech make digital-only options more functional. (Confidence: 0.8, Creative: 0.5)
6. Pandemic-era remote work increased demand for digital solutions. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.6)
7. Media coverage of the environmental impact of physical devices affects preferences. (Confidence: 0.5, Creative: 0.7)
8. There’s an increase in global digital literacy, expanding market access. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)
9. Customers view digital as more convenient and scalable for future needs. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.5)
10. Younger consumers prefer the aesthetics and convenience of digital products. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)

*Reflection:* 
"Have I considered all possible influences? Are there any surprising factors that could explain this shift?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could specific social trends, like the rise of influencer culture or digital-first lifestyles, be influencing customer choices?"

**2.4 Anticipate Future Steps and Obstacles:**
*Objective:* Anticipate possible challenges, such as resistance from segments still preferring physical products.

*Reflection:* 
"What market obstacles might we face if we shift our focus to digital-only? Are there sub-segments that still prioritize physical products?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could expanding digital options help us reach a more global audience? Are there emerging trends that we could leverage in our strategy?"

[end sys2]

[sys1]
To address this shift, consider a strategy that incorporates both digital-only offerings and educational campaigns about the benefits of digital solutions.
Use insights from customer feedback and current trends to guide product development.
Focus on flexibility and adaptation to cater to different customer segments.
[end sys1]


1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to a method for bonding two surfaces to one another. The invention particularly pertains to the use of such method in which one of the surfaces is a polymeric plastic (and more preferably a polymeric thermoplastic (especially poly-(methyl methacrylate) (“PMMA”) or cyclic olefin copolymer (“COC”)). More particularly, the invention relates to treating at least one of the contacting surfaces with UV in the presence of oxygen to thereby generate ozone (O3) and atomic oxygen under conditions of temperature below that of the glass transition temperature of the polymeric plastic. The UV/O3-mediated bonding results in high bond strength and zero-deformation method. This bonding method can be applied to micro/nano-scale polymer devices, and particularly to microfluidic devices, for a low cost, high throughput, high yield advantage.
2. Description of Related Art
Rigid thermoplastic polymers have been extensively investigated over the past decade as substrates for the fabrication of microfluidic systems. Two particular polymeric thermoplastics: poly(methyl methacrylate) (“PMMA”) and cyclic olefin copolymer (“COC”), have emerged as attractive materials for microfluidic applications, primarily due to their high transparency and low autofluorescence over a wide spectral range (Piruska, A. et al. (2005) “The Autofluorescence Of Plastic Materials And Chips Measured Under Laser Irradiation,” Lab on a Chip 5:1348-1354). In a typical process flow, open microchannels are formed in first a thermoplastic substrate using one of several techniques such as hot embossing (Martynova, L. et al. (1997) “Fabrication of Plastic Microfluid Channels by Imprinting Methods,” Anal. Chem. 69:4783-4789), cold embossing (Xu, J. et al. (2000) “Room-Temperature Imprinting Method for Plastic Microchannel Fabrication,” Anal. Chem. 72:1930-1933), micro-injection molding (McCormick, R. M. et al. (1997) “Microchannel Electrophoretic Separations of DNA in Injection-Molded Plastic Substrates,” Anal. Chem. 69:2626-2630), or laser ablation (Roberts, M. A. et al. (1997) “UV Laser Machined Polymer Substrates for the Development of Microdiagnostic Systems,” Anal. Chem. 69:2035-2042). A second plastic layer is then bonded to the first to enclose the microchannels.
A variety of bonding methods have been reported, including solvent bonding (Kricka, L. J. et al. (2002) “Fabrication Of Plastic Microchips By Hot Embossing,” Lab on a Chip 2:1-4; Klank, H. et al. (2002) “CO2-Laser Micromachining And Back-End Processing For Rapid Production Of PMMA-Based Microfluidic Systems,” Lab on a Chip 2:242-246; Brown, L. et al. (2006) “Fabrication And Characterization Of Poly(Methylmethacrylate) Microfluidic Devices Bonded Using Surface Modifications And Solvents,” Lab on a Chip 6:66-73), thermal bonding (Sun, Y. et al. (2006) “Low-Pressure, High-Temperature Thermal Bonding Of Polymeric Microfluidic Devices And Their Applications For Electrophoretic Separation,” J. Micromech. Microeng. 16:1681-1688; Kelly, R. T. et al. (2003) “Thermal Bonding of Polymeric Capillary Electrophoresis Microdevices in Water,” Anal. Chem. 75:1941-1945), and thick film lamination employing either pressure or temperature sensitive adhesive layers (do Lago, C. L. et al. (2003) “A Dry Process for Production of Microfluidic Devices Based on the Lamination of Laser-Printed Polyester Films,” Anal. Chem. 75:3853-3858).
Of these techniques solvent and thermal bonding are of particular interest in the fabrication of microfluidic devices since they allow the same material to be used for both microfluidic substrate layers, and thereby ensure homogeneity in surface properties for all microchannel walls. In thermal bonding, interlayer adhesion is achieved by beating the substrates near their glass transition temperature while applying a normal pressure, allowing polymer chains to diffuse between the mating surfaces for high bond strength. However, thermal bonding suffers from several disadvantages. Because the substrates must be heated at or slightly above their glass transition temperature to achieve a strong interfacial bond, microscale channels can readily become deformed or collapsed, particularly for low aspect ratio channels and thin substrates. Furthermore, the resulting bond strength is often lower than desired, particularly for applications such as liquid chromatography where high internal fluid pressures are required. Solvent bonding can also suffer from problems with dimensional stability, since the absorbed solvent softens the plastic and can lead to polymer flow during bonding. While recipes have been developed to minimize this problem in PMMA microfluidic chips by using specific solvent conditions (see, Brown, L. et al. (2006) “Fabrication And Characterization Of Poly(Methylmethacrylate) Microfluidic Devices Bonded Using Surface Modifications And Solvents,” Lab on a Chip 6:66-73; Lin, C. H. et al. (2005) “Low Azeotropic Solvent Sealing Of PMMA Microfluidic Devices,” Proc. 13th Int. Conf. Solid-State Sensors, Actuators, and Microsystems (Transducers 05) 1:944-947), or sacrificial materials such as paraffin wax to prevent channel collapse (see, Kelly, R. T. et al. (2005) “Phase-Changing Sacrificial Materials for Solvent Bonding of High-Performance Polymeric Capillary Electrophoresis Microchips,” Anal. Chem. 77:3536-3541), the former recipes must be tuned for different polymer grades and types, and neither approach can entirely prevent deformation of channel geometries. Furthermore, solvents can embrittle thermoplastics and result in microcracking, particularly for microfluidic systems which require exposure to high or cyclical pressure loads.
Because of these challenges, there remains a need for effective methods for low temperature thermoplastic bonding, and which, in particular, are amenable to a wide range of microfluidic applications. The present invention is directed to this and other needs.