Air gaps in metal stripe waveguides supporting long-range surface plasmon polaritons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of air gaps in metal stripe waveguides supporting long-range surface plasmon polaritons have been determined theoretically. The study is motivated by a recently adopted fabrication approach based on direct bonding, where various kinds of air gaps may form near the metal stripe due to fabrication imperfections. Specifically, “Air wings,” a top air gap, and side air gaps have been considered as possible perturbations. The main effects of the air gaps on the propagation of the long-range surface plasmon-polariton wave are that its attenuation and confinement decrease as the gaps become more invasive, and that its mode fields become strongly perturbed. Taken together, these effects are deleterious, so air gaps do not appear suitable for range extension. In general, very small air gaps can only be tolerated before confinement is completely lost. A lower-index planarizing layer could be used to help eliminate air gaps but the waveguide design space becomes constrained. The air gaps perturb the long-range mode such that its main transverse electric-field component (Ey) develops a maximum within the gaps and some localization therein. This feature could be interesting in applications where high-intensity fields in nanometric air gaps are sought, but only if coupling and radiation losses are not much of a concern.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".