MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982336972 · doi:10.1117/12.520107

<title>Gain flattening filter in the DWDM systems using C-band or L-band optical amplifiers</title>

2003· article· en· W1982336972 on OpenAlexaff
Ionut C. Bibac

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Optical Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsNortel (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWavelength-division multiplexingOptical amplifierComputer sciencePassive optical networkMultiplexingAmplifierOptical performance monitoringOptical Transport NetworkOptical cross-connectElectronic engineeringTelecommunicationsComputer networkPhysicsOptical fiberOpticsEngineeringWavelengthBandwidth (computing)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An optical transport network based on dense wavelength - division multiplexing DWDM technology is the next logical step in the evolution of Internet network. An Optical Internet network is defined as any Internet network where the network link layer connections are “dedicated” wavelengths on a Wave Division Multiplexed optical fibre directly connected to a high performance network router. The high performance network router replaces traditional ATM and SONET/SDH switching and multiplexing equipment, the essential statistical multiplexing device that controls wavelength access, switching, routing and protection. The optical amplifier is the key element that contributes to design an Optical Internet network. The design of an optical component and in particular an optical amplifier can directly and significantly affect the performance of an optical system. With the help of PTDS toll I will demonstrate the advantage of using L - band amplifiers especially for long - haul terrestrial or submarine DWDM systems in which thousands of amplifiers might be needed in a single transmission link. This is due to the exceptional feature that permits in a cascade configuration a very flat gain. It is demonstrated that L -band amplifier doesn’t require a gain-flattening fiber (GFF) compared to C -band amplifiers.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicAdvanced Optical Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207