MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010780647 · doi:10.1117/12.628718

Numerical analysis of multimode interference effect in Ti:LiNbO 3 waveguides

2005· article· it· W2010780647 on OpenAlexaff
Lin‐Ping Shen, Hua Wang, Chenglin Xu, Wei‐Ping Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2005
Typearticle
Languageit
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotonic and Optical Devices
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityVale (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMulti-mode optical fiberBeam propagation methodMaterials scienceFabricationOpticsRefractive indexPower dividers and directional couplersOptoelectronicsOptical fiberPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The self-image effects of the multi-port multimode couplers based on weakly guided graded Ti:LiNbO3 optical waveguides are analyzed through the three dimensional (3D) full-vector beam propagation method (FVBPM). By applying the perfect matching layer (PML) boundary condition, we can efficiently calculate the various performances such as insertion loss, crosstalk, and power splitting ratio of the multimode couplers. Through this model, the effect of the design and fabrication parameters such as the thickness and width of the Ti-strip and diffusion time and temperature on performances of the multimode couplers can be easily investigated. By comparing with traditional MMI couplers based on step-index optical waveguides, some salient features are observed and the related design rules should be revised. Finally, some related issues such as the bending loss and high order modes are discussed.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicPhotonic and Optical DevicesFrench-language works237,207