MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995613701 · doi:10.1364/ao.40.000485

Spectral responsivity of various types of silicon photodiode at oblique incidence: comparison of measured and calculated values

2001· article· en· W1995613701 on OpenAlexaff
Louis‐Philippe Boivin

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Optics · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCalibration and Measurement Techniques
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResponsivityOpticsMaterials sciencePhotodiodeDiodeSiliconOblique caseOptoelectronicsPhysicsPhotodetector

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The spectral responsivity of several types of silicon photodiode at oblique incidence (approximately 45 degrees) is investigated. Both windowless diodes and diodes that incorporate quartz windows are considered. The spectral responsivities are measured directly for both parallel and perpendicular polarized radiation. For comparison, the responsivity at oblique incidence is also calculated from the normal-incidence measured responsivity in conjunction with the reflectance values at normal and oblique incidence calculated from thin-film theory by use of the measured oxide thicknesses of the diodes and published data on the refractive indices of silicon and fused silica. A technique, believed to be novel, is described for accurately measuring the oxide thicknesses of the diodes. A comparison of calculated and measured responsivity values shows that, when imperfect polarizers are used, it may be more accurate over a certain spectral range to calculate the responsivities at oblique incidence rather than to measure them directly. The additional uncertainty associated with the calculated responsivity values at oblique incidence, with respect to the original source data for normal incidence, is +/-1% over a wide spectral range.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations20
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied OpticsSame topicCalibration and Measurement TechniquesFrench-language works237,207