MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1607208830 · doi:10.1109/leos.2002.1159600

Transmission uniformity of diffractive parallel optical interconnect relays: a numerical analysis based on rigorous coupled wave theory

2003· article· en· W1607208830 on OpenAlexaff
Colin J. Alleyne, Andrew G. Kirk

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotonic and Optical Devices
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOpticsDiffraction efficiencyDiffractionAperture (computer memory)PhysicsOptical interconnectInterconnectionTransmission (telecommunications)Focal lengthLens (geology)Computer scienceTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Free-space optical interconnects have been proposed as a possible solution to the interconnection bottleneck in high performance electronic systems at the board-to-board and chip-to-chip level. The optical design is shown of a VCSEL-based bi-directional optical interconnect system that has recently been implemented This clustered optical system transmits 256 channels in each direction and is based on a diffractive double minilens relay. The relay lenses have a square aperture of 750 /spl mu/m, a focal length of 8.5 mm, 256 phase levels and operate at a wavelength of 850 nm. Each lens relays a 4 /spl times/ 4 spot array on a 125 /spl mu/m pitch. This system was originally designed using scalar diffraction theory and so it was assumed that the diffraction efficiency is a function only of the number of phase levels in the lenses and is thus identical for all beams in the array. However since each beam within the 4 /spl times/ 4 array passes through a different set of zones in the lenses and since the outer zones of the lenses have smaller local periods than the central zones the diffraction efficiency experienced by each beam will not be identical, leading to transmission non-uniformity. In this paper we will apply rigorous coupled wave analysis (RCWA) to this optical system design in order to accurately determine the efficiency of the minilens as a function of the zone radius and hence calculate the variation in transmission efficiency that will result. We will also extend this analysis to faster diffractive optical systems (f/3.7) that relay larger (16 /spl times/ 16) spot arrays and investigate polarization dependence.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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