MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1878172696 · doi:10.1109/aps.2003.1220356

Negative group velocity in left-handed materials

2004· article· en· W1878172696 on OpenAlexaff
J. F. Woodley, Mo Mojahedi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMetamaterials and Metasurfaces Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeft handedGroup (periodic table)Group velocityPhysicsComputer scienceOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 1968, Veselago posed that media with simultaneous negative values of the permittivity and permeability would exhibit a negative index of refraction (Soviet Physics Uspekhi, vol. 10, pp. 509-514, 1968.). Due to the left-handed relationship between the electric field, magnetic field, and wave vector in these materials he termed them left-handed media (LHM). These LHM are expected to have many unusual properties such as inverted Snell's law, Doppler shift and Cherenkov radiation. However, until recently, such materials were unavailable and these predictions remained uncorroborated for nearly thirty years. As with any new field, the topic of the LHM suffers from some misconceptions and misunderstandings. One such misconception has to do with the notion of negative group velocity which has been closely linked with these media (R.A. Shelby et al, Appl. Phys. Lett., vol. 78, pp. 489-91, 2001) and in fact has been used as equivalent to the term LHM. In this paper, the existence and meaning of negative group velocity in LHM are discussed. It is shown that similar to normal right-handed media (RHM), LHM can also exhibit a negative group velocity and group delay within the region of anomalous dispersion (/spl delta/n//spl delta//spl omega/<0). On the other hand, in the experiments presented so far, the researchers have only measured positive group velocity and negative phase velocity corresponding to so called backward waves (BWs).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0070.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.242 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations9
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMetamaterials and Metasurfaces ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207