Optical depth profiling of strontium titanate and electro-optic lanthanum-modified lead zirconium titanate multilayer structures for active waveguide applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Transparent polycrystalline strontium titanate (STO) and lanthanum-modified lead zirconium titanate (PLZT) thin films were deposited, respectively, on Si and on indium-doped tin oxide (ITO) coated glass by pulsed laser deposition (PLD). PLZT films are shown to exhibit electro-optic properties close to the bulk material when deposited on ITO in specific process conditions. The refractive index depth profile was determined by using a combination of variable angle spectroscopic ellipsometry and spectrophotometry, and the multisample analysis approach. PLZT films deposited at high O2 pressure, PO2, and annealed at 700°C were found to be more porous and inhomogeneous than low PO2 films. The optical properties of STO films strongly depend on PO2 as well: low PO2 depositions lead to denser film growth with homogeneous, bulk-like refractive index profile, while high PO2 depositions lead to porous and highly inhomogeneous films, exhibiting band-gap variation and formation of a 60-nm-thick interdiffusion layer on Si. We use an optical depth-profiling procedure to investigate the formation of three-layer air/PLZT/STO/ITO/glass stacks, where the PLZT and STO optical properties are optimized by controlling PO2 during STO deposition, in order to form a cladding layer for potential active waveguide applications.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".