MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2003998770 · doi:10.1103/physreve.73.066616

Effective-medium theory for energy velocity in one-dimensional finite lossless photonic crystals

2006· article· en· W2003998770 on OpenAlexaff
Guido Torrese, Jason Taylor, Trevor J. Hall, Patrice Mégret

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review E · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPhotonic Crystals and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHomogenization (climate)Group velocityLossless compressionPhotonic crystalTransfer matrixComputationPhysicsComputational physicsPhase velocityTransfer-matrix method (optics)OpticsRefractive indexMathematical analysisTransmission (telecommunications)Reflection (computer programming)Energy (signal processing)MathematicsQuantum mechanicsComputer scienceAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effective medium theory is a useful approach for investigating the electromagnetic wave propagation in periodic multilayer slabs. It allows accurate computation of transmission and reflection spectra as well as of phase and group velocities. In this paper we derive an exact analytical expression for the energy velocity of a one-dimensional finite photonic crystal based on the effective medium approach. It accounts for the multiple reflections within the structure which results in the characteristic oscillations of the transmission spectrum. Our analytical expression holds for an arbitrary refractive index contrast and goes beyond the limits of the standard homogenization method. In order to validate our approach, results obtained by using the all-frequency effective energy velocity have been compared to those obtained using the transfer matrix method.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.283
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations4
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review ESame topicPhotonic Crystals and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207