MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992416426 · doi:10.1063/1.4793638

Upconversion luminescence in Er3+ doped Ga10Ge25S65 glass and glass-ceramic excited in the near-infrared

2013· article· en· W1992416426 on OpenAlexaff
Whualkuer Lozano B., Cid B. de Araújo, Yannick Ledemi, Younès Messaddeq

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Physics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicLuminescence Properties of Advanced Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersFundação de Amparo à Ciência e Tecnologia do Estado de PernambucoConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
KeywordsPhoton upconversionMaterials scienceExcited statePhotoluminescenceIonInfraredDopingAnalytical Chemistry (journal)ExcitationLuminescenceGlass-ceramicCeramicLaserPhosphate glassAtomic physicsOptoelectronicsOpticsChemistryComposite materialPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The infrared-to-visible frequency upconversion was investigated in Er3+-doped Ga10Ge25S65 glass and in the transparent glass-ceramic obtained by heat-treatment of the glass above its glass-transition temperature. Continuous-wave and pulsed lasers operating at 980 nm and 1480 nm were used as excitation sources. The green (2H11/2 → 4I15/2; 4S3/2 → 4I15/2) and red (4F9/2 → 4I15/2) photoluminescence (PL) signals due to the Er3+ ions were characterized. The PL decay times were influenced by energy transfer among Er3+ ions, by cross-relaxation processes and by energy transfer from the Er3+ ions to the host material. The PL from the Er3+ ions hosted in the crystalline phase was distinguished only when the glass-ceramic was excited by the 1480 nm pulsed laser. The excitation pathways responsible for the green and red PL bands are discussed to explain the differences between the spectra observed under continuous-wave and pulsed excitation.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.631

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.227
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 teacher head, 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

Citations22
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied PhysicsSame topicLuminescence Properties of Advanced MaterialsFrench-language works237,207