High resolution interrogation of tilted fiber grating SPR sensors from polarization properties measurement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The generation of surface plasmon resonances (SPRs) in gold-coated weakly tilted fiber Bragg gratings (TFBGs) strongly depends on the state of polarization of the core guided light. Recently, it was demonstrated that rotating the linear state of polarization of the guided light by 90° with respect to the grating tilt allows to turn the SPR on and off. In this work, we measure the Jones matrix associated to the TFBG transmission properties in order to be able to analyze different polarization-related parameters (i.e. dependency on wavelength of polarization dependent loss and first Stokes parameter). As they contain the information about the SPR, they can be used as a robust and accurate demodulation technique for refractometry purposes. Unlike other methods reported so far, a tight control of the input state of polarization is not required. The maximum error on refractive index measurement has been determined to be ~1 10(-5) refractive index unit (RIU), 5 times better than intensity-based measurements on the same sensors.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".