MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2001383562 · doi:10.1117/12.905369

Simultaneous slow light, fast light, and continues slow to fast light tuning in a microresonator via interaction of dual inputs

2011· article· en· W2001383562 on OpenAlexaff
Hiva Shahoei, Jianping Yao

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotonic and Optical Devices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSlow lightResonatorOpticsDispersion (optics)PhysicsWaveguideOptical cavityLight-emitting diodeOptoelectronicsPhase (matter)Transmission (telecommunications)AmplitudePhase differencePhotonic crystalTelecommunicationsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A simple structure is proposed to generate slow and fast light simultaneously in a double-waveguide coupled disk resonator (DCDR) launched with dual contra-propagating inputs. The interaction between the intra-cavity backscattering and the losses out of cavity are investigated for the disk resonator while random surface defects (backscatters) are intentionally introduced in the cavity to produce the backscattering. The theoretical investigation done in this work shows that by adjusting the amplitude and/or phase difference between the dual inputs the interaction between the cavity modes and backscatters can be controlled thus the transmission and dispersion of the output lights of the system can be manipulated. This scheme is attractive for slow and fast light tuning applications especially when active tuning elements such as a p-i-n diode or a heater is absent in the cavity.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.200 · 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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE→Same topicPhotonic and Optical Devices→French-language works237,207→