Cascaded planar reflective gratings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent progress in the development of planar reflective gratings has resulted in the demonstration of multiplexers, comb filters, interleavers, power monitors, and receivers for long-haul and metro-area networks. Until recently, all of these devices were based on a single-grating architecture. We have now successfully designed, fabricated, and tested optical chips that are composed of cascaded planar reflective gratings. The chips have been realized in both additive and subtractive dispersion configurations. The versatility of cascaded gratings was utilized to produce a variety of optical responses, including single-mode transmission of wide bands (> 100 nm) with simultaneous demultiplexing of narrow optical channels with Gaussian and box-like responses. We have further demonstrated that cascaded gratings can be used to suppress optical noise and improve isolation. The devices were fabricated using a standard silica-on-silicon process with a refractive index contrast of 0.82% and have a remarkably small footprint of less than 0.3 sq. cm. We discuss the potential for tailoring of cascaded planar reflective gratings for applications in biophotonics, spectroscopy, and telecommunications.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".