MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008273417 · doi:10.1117/12.796233

Nanoplasmonics in near-field optics and active coupling

2008· article· en· W2008273417 on OpenAlexaff
Michael C. Quong, A. Y. Elezzabi

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNear-Field Optical Microscopy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOpticsNear-field scanning optical microscopeSurface plasmonAperture (computer memory)DiffractionMaterials sciencePlasmonNanophotonicsNear and far fieldNear-field opticsOptoelectronicsRayOptical microscopePhysicsScanning electron microscope

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Surface plasmons enable the transmission of optical information in confined geometries, inaccessible for diffraction-limited far-field light, while having high signal bandwidth and propagation speed like conventional optics. These advantages have resulted in novel applications for surface plasmons, such as offset-apertured near-field scanning optical microscope (NSOM) probes. A subwavelength aperture couples surface plasmons that illuminate the tip apex of an adjacent metal-coated tip, which results in a single-lobed probing optical spot having a full-width half maximum (FWHM) similar to the apex diameter. Since the surface plasmons converge at the apex, an offset-apertured probe promises stronger localized electric fields than an apertured NSOM having comparable FWHM. Additionally, the subwavelength aperture does not permit the passage of far-field light, reducing the background signal in comparison to apertureless NSOM probes. For other applications, the ability to selectively switch a waveguide "on" or "off" is desired. Optical-optical switching for selective surface plasmon coupling would ideally permit high-speed switching on a small scale. Two nodes are presented as means to perform switching of four planar thin surface plasmon waveguides by interfering TEM10, TEM01, and TEM00 light beams normally-incident upon a node. One node uses a flat-apexed pyramidal reflector to reflect the incident light toward the waveguides' ends. An alternative node is a simple square aperture, which couples surface plasmons through light diffraction at the aperture's edges. Individually turned-off waveguides are shown to have their coupled power attenuated by at least -10 dB.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.211 · 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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicNear-Field Optical MicroscopyFrench-language works237,207