The optical forces of vortex arrays in two-dimensional photonic crystals and slabs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Applications of optical forces for particle trapping and manipulation would be greatly enhanced if the simultaneous generation of multiple trap sites could be realized "on-chip". We demonstrate that this may be possible through the exploitation of vortex arrays in hexagonal photonic crystals for a band 1 mode at the K point. Flux vortices whose existences are symmetry-required may be located using phasor geometry in the vanishing contrast limit. Direct solution of Maxwell's equations using the Finite Element Method (FEM), for high-dielectric-contrast 2D and 2D-slab geometries, validates the symmetry approach. Optical forces on particles much smaller than the wavelength of light have been calculated using the Lorentz force model, yielding optical gradient and radiation pressure terms. Interestingly, the complementary hexagonal symmetries appear to express optical force distributions of fundamentally different character. The high-index "pillar" geometry has trap sites at Wyckoff A positions for TE modes, while the low-index "hole" geometry has trap sites at Wyckoff B positions for TM modes. Only in the latter case do the trap sites co-locate with the flux vortices that may exert net rotational forces on finite particles. In the former case, the vorticity at a trap site is zero and the net optical force must be purely irrotational.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".