MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008317622 · doi:10.1117/12.2001169

Free space and waveguide Talbot effect: phase relations and planar light circuit applications

2012· article· en· W2008317622 on OpenAlexaff
Hamdam Nikkhah, Qi Zheng, Imad Hasan, Sawsan Abdul-Majid, Trevor J. Hall

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Optical Imaging Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOpticsTalbot effectPhysicsWaveguidePlanarOptical phase spacePhotonic integrated circuitAmplitudePhase (matter)PhotonicsComputer scienceDiffraction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Optical fields that are periodic in the transverse plane self-image periodically as they propagate along the optical axis: a phenomenon known as the Talbot effect. A transfer matrix may be defined that relates the amplitude and phase of point sources placed on a particular grid at the input to their respective multiple images at an image plane. The free-space Talbot effect may be mapped to the waveguide Talbot effect. Applying this mapping to the transfer matrix enables the prediction of the phase and amplitude relations between the ports of a Multimode Interference (MMI) coupler– a planar waveguide device. The transfer matrix approach has not previously been applied to the free-space case and its mapping to the waveguide case provides greater clarity and physical insight into the phase relationships than previous treatments. The paper first introduces the underlying physics of the Talbot effect in free space with emphasis on the positions along the optical axis at which images occur; their multiplicity; and their relative phase relations determined by the Gauss Quadratic Sum of number theory. The analysis is then adapted to predict the phase relationships between the ports of an MMI. These phase relationships are critical to planar light circuit (PLC) applications such as 90° optical hybrids for coherent optical receiver front-ends, external optical I-Q modulators for coherent optical transmitters; and optical phased array switches. These applications are illustrated by results obtained from devices that have been fabricated and tested by the PTLab in Si micro-photonic integration platforms.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations7
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicAdvanced Optical Imaging TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207