MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979089510 · doi:10.1364/opex.13.007304

Efficient design and optimization of photonic crystal waveguides and couplers: The Interface Diffraction Method

2005· article· en· W1979089510 on OpenAlexafffund
Alexander A. Green, Emanuel Istrate, Edward H. Sargent

Bibliographic record

VenueOptics Express · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPhotonic Crystals and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsOpticsPhotonic crystalCladding (metalworking)DiffractionPlanarMaterials sciencePlane wave expansionPlane waveScatteringComputationStopbandOptoelectronicsPhysicsResonatorComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the interface diffraction method (IDM), an efficient technique to determine the response of planar photonic crystal waveguides and couplers containing arbitrary defects. Field profiles in separate regions of a structure are represented through two contrasting approaches: the plane wave expansion method in the cladding and a scattering matrix method in the core. These results are combined through boundary conditions at the interface between regions to model fully a device. In the IDM, the relevant interface properties of individual device elements can be obtained from unit cell computations, stored, and later combined with other elements as needed, resulting in calculations that are over an order of magnitude faster than supercell simulation techniques. Dispersion relations for photonic crystal waveguides obtained through the IDM agree with the conventional plane wave expansion method to within 2.2% of the stopband width.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.653
Threshold uncertainty score0.274

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOptics ExpressSame topicPhotonic Crystals and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207