MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2012627669 · doi:10.1117/12.810907

Free carrier lifetime modification in silicon

2009· article· en· W2012627669 on OpenAlexaff
Nick Wright, Dave J. Thomson, K. L. Litvinenko, William R. Headley, Andrew J. Smith, Andrew P. Knights, Jonathan H. B. Deane, Frédéric Y. Gardes, Goran Z. Mashanovich, R. Gwilliam, Graham T. Reed

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIntegrated Circuits and Semiconductor Failure Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
KeywordsSiliconMaterials scienceCarrier lifetimeOptoelectronicsFree carrier absorptionIon implantationAbsorption (acoustics)DiodeFree carrierRaman spectroscopyRaman amplificationIonOpticsRaman scatteringChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate the effects of silicon ion irradiation on free carrier lifetime and propagation loss in silicon rib waveguides, and thus its ability to reduce the density of two-photon-absorption (TPA) generated free carriers, an undesired effect of the Raman process in crystalline silicon. Our experimental results show that free carrier lifetime can be reduced significantly by silicon ion implantation. Associated excess optical absorption from the implanted silicon ions can be kept low if irradiation energy and dose are correctly chosen. Simulations of Raman amplification in silicon rib waveguides suggest that net gain can be achieved in certain cases without the need for an integrated diode in reverse bias to sweep out the photo-generated free carriers.

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 score0.003

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations3
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicIntegrated Circuits and Semiconductor Failure AnalysisFrench-language works237,207