Resonant Photonic States in Coupled Heterostructure Photonic Crystal Waveguides
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we study the photonic resonance states and transmission spectra of coupled waveguides made from heterostructure photonic crystals. We consider photonic crystal waveguides made from three photonic crystals A, B and C, where the waveguide heterostructure is denoted as B/A/C/A/B. Due to the band structure engineering, light is confined within crystal A, which thus act as waveguides. Here, photonic crystal C is taken as a nonlinear photonic crystal, which has a band gap that may be modified by applying a pump laser. We have found that the number of bound states within the waveguides depends on the width and well depth of photonic crystal A. It has also been found that when both waveguides are far away from each other, the energies of bound photons in each of the waveguides are degenerate. However, when they are brought close to each other, the degeneracy of the bound states is removed due to the coupling between them, which causes these states to split into pairs. We have also investigated the effect of the pump field on photonic crystal C. We have shown that by applying a pump field, the system may be switched between a double waveguide to a single waveguide, which effectively turns on or off the coupling between degenerate states. This reveals interesting results that can be applied to develop new types of nanophotonic devices such as nano-switches and nano-transistors.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".