MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041854936 · doi:10.1080/09500340500052556

External cavity semiconductor laser model for the strong feedback regime

2005· article· en· W2041854936 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Modern Optics · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSemiconductor Lasers and Optical Devices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsSemiconductor laser theoryLaser diode rate equationsDiodeLaserMaster equationSemiconductorOpticsQuantum mechanicsInjection seeder

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present a formalism describing the dynamics of a semiconductor diode and apply it to the study of the dynamics of external cavity lasers within the strong regime. The formalism is based upon the usual travelling wave phenomenological model for the field and carriers within the semiconductor gain medium. Since the non-radiative recombination time of the carriers is typically much longer than the diode round trip time, we use a multiple scales analysis to obtain a model much simpler in form than the travelling wave model, but as accurate, without assuming that the gain within the diode is uniform. We apply this model to the external cavity laser. Rather than including multiple external cavity reflections explicitly, we include all external cavity reflections through the introduction of a single additional feedback parameter and one extra term in the field equation. In the limit of a single external cavity reflection, our field equation reduces to a form of the well-known Lang–Kobayashi equation that describes very weak external feedback. For strong feedback, we examine both the steady state and dynamical laser properties such as small signal response and large signal current modulation. Acknowledgments This work has been supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada. Notes Current address: Department of Physics, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada. Additional informationNotes on contributorsJ. E. Sipe Current address: Department of Physics, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.183
Threshold uncertainty score0.487

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.222 · 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