Integration of Optical Waveguide Array and Multilayer Substrate Integrated Waveguide for Electrooptical Modulator
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Integration of an optical waveguide array using four waveguides in a Mach-Zehnder (MZ) structure and a two-layer low-loss substrate integrated waveguide (SIW) structure is presented to propose a new class of electrooptical phase modulators. In the proposed SIW modulator, synthesized rectangular waveguide in planar form is used as “electrodes” to guide millimeter-wave signals instead of conventional coplanar waveguide (CPW) for an electrooptical modulator, thus providing low-loss non-TEM mode propagation. In this study, two layers of a lithium niobate (LiNbO3) substrate for creating a high field interaction between the millimeter-wave and optical signals are considered and studied. Fabrication of the proposed structure by titanium diffusion in an LiNbO3substrate as the optical waveguides and laser micromachining of the SIW via-holes has been done. The validation of our simulated results is also performed by the measurement of CPW-to-SIW transitions in the LiNbO3substrate. Optical loss of 0.8 dB/cm at the wavelength of 1550 nm is obtained for an MZ structure using an optical waveguide array consisting of four waveguiding channels. In addition, it is shown that 5-GHz bandwidth over a 60-GHz operating frequency range can easily be obtained for the proposed modulator.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".