MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987546819 · doi:10.1117/12.629343

Fabrication, characterisation, and optimisation of optical fibre lenses and efficient wave-guide coupling using an iterative approach

2005· article· en· W1987546819 on OpenAlexafffund
Julie Baron, Raman Kashyap

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSemiconductor Lasers and Optical Devices
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsOptical fiberCoupling (piping)Optical powerOpticsOptical amplifierMaterials scienceLens (geology)OptoelectronicsCoupling lossSemiconductor laser theoryFiberAmplifierFacet (psychology)LaserSemiconductorPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The coupling efficiency of a pigtailed optical fiber lens is often a critical parameter in the manufacture of optical devices. For example, efficient coupling from high power semiconductor lasers to optical fiber pigtails with fiber lenses is of great importance as the uncoupled power can affect the lifetime of the device through thermal degradation of the pigtail or its welding point; for optical amplifiers, the coupling efficiency determines the overall gain. Generally, mass-produced optical fiber lenses do not have a consistent enough quality and it is often necessary to discard lenses that exhibit poor coupling. We previously demonstrated a method for digitally modifying optical fiber lenses. We have now developed a scheme whereby we are able to produce high quality optical fibre lenses with a given lens radius and then to iteratively alter it to achieve the required divergence and spot size in a repeatable fashion for efficient coupling to a variety of devices such as semiconductor optical amplifiers, lasers and wave-guides. We have consistently demonstrated 75% coupling efficiency to angled facet semiconductor optical amplifiers at 1550nm with only three-axis adjustment, and believe the true coupling efficiency to be close to 90%. Our powerful scheme allows the use of nearly all of the lenses for a given application.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicSemiconductor Lasers and Optical DevicesFrench-language works237,207