Terahertz quantum cascade lasers: Fabrication, characterization, and doping effect
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The terahertz gap, lying roughly between 300GHz (0.3THz) and 30THz in the electromagnetic spectrum, exists because the frequencies generated by semiconductor devices based on transistors and lasers do not overlap. Generation of coherent terahertz radiation has traditionally involved either extending electronic techniques to higher frequencies or extending photonic sources to longer wavelengths. In both cases, the efficiency drops rapidly as the frequency approaches the terahertz region. We recently fabricated GaAs∕AlGaAs quantum cascade lasers, in which a high-confinement metal-metal waveguide was employed and fabricated using In–Au metallic bonding technique. The devices demonstrated lasing operation at a wavelength of around 104.6μm (or about 2.9THz in frequency). In this article, we first present the fabrication and electrical and optical characterizations of the terahertz quantum cascade lasers. We then characterized a set of terahertz quantum cascade lasers with otherwise identical device parameters but the doping concentration. The δ-doping density for each period was varied from 3.2×1010 to 4.8×1010cm−2. We observed that both the lasing threshold and the free carrier absorption caused the waveguide loss increase monotonically. Interestingly, however, the observed maximum lasing temperature displayed an optimum at a doping concentration of 3.6×1010cm−2.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".