Polarization‐resolved electroluminescence study of InGaN/GaN dot‐in‐a‐wire light‐emitting diodes grown by molecular beam epitaxy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The polarization properties of light emission from InGaN nanowire (NW) light‐emitting diodes (LEDs) have been studied with the use of goniometric setup. A maximum polarization ratio of ∼0.7 has been obtained from the edge emission of NW array‐based LEDs and the light is mainly polarized parallel to the c‐axis of NWs. The nearly isotropic polarization response from a core–shell NW LED structure is also observed, and it is found that the degree of polarization is strongly depended on the NW diameter. With the growth of the AlGaN shell, the resulting diameter of core–shell NWs becomes larger and is comparable to the emission wavelength, thus weakening the optical confinement effect and the polarization behavior. The size‐dependent polarization properties of NW structures are further verified by the finite‐difference time‐domain simulation. NWs with diameters much less than the emission wavelength render a strong contrast between the p‐ and s‐polarized light emissions. (Left) FE‐SEM image of MBE‐grown NWs covered with polyimide. (Right) Plot of integrated electroluminescence intensity as a function of polarizer angle for a NW LED.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".