MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029500521 · doi:10.1117/12.567361

High sensitivity long-period grating tunable filters in standard communication fibers and their PDL reduction

2004· article· en· W2029500521 on OpenAlexaff
Jian‐Jun He, Michael Čada

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Fiber Optic Sensors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSensitivity (control systems)Materials scienceReduction (mathematics)GratingOpticsLong-period fiber gratingOptoelectronicsOptical fiberElectronic engineeringFiber optic sensorPlastic optical fiberPhysicsEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Long-period fiber gratings (LPFG’s) find applications in optical fiber communication systems and fiber sensor systems. Among others, it can be used as gain flattening filters (GFF’s) in the communication systems. Depend on the amplifier design, the GFF’s need to be either athermal, or have specific temperature sensitivities. The temperature sensitivity requiement sometimes can be very stringent. It has been known that the temperature and strain sensitivity are dependent on the fiber parameters and the order of the cladding modes it is used. In this paper we will describe the general method for finding suitable cladding mode in a specific fiber for specific requirements. We found that the polarization dependent losses (PDL) in high sensitivity modes are remarkably higher than the ones in common LPFG’s. In those high sensitivity filters achieved by the UV-beam side illuminating, the birefringence-related resonant wavelength separation (RWS), which is the central wavelength separation corresponding the slow and fast axis state of polarizations (SOP), can be in the range of 5 nm, which is remarkably larger than the reported values in other LPFG’s. There are two sources of birefringence which lead to PDL: fiber core ovality induced birefringence, which is intrinsic, and the anisotropic UV-beam exposure induced birefringence. We proposed methods to deal with those birefringence sources. The leads to almost complete remove of the RWS in the high sensitivity LPFG’s.

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 score0.004

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations1
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicAdvanced Fiber Optic SensorsFrench-language works237,207