MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067956711 · doi:10.1103/physreve.75.016608

Hamiltonian formulation of coupled-mode theory in waveguiding structures

2007· article· en· W2067956711 on OpenAlexafffund
Philip Chak, Rajiv Iyer, J. Stewart Aitchison, J. E. Sipe

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review E · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPhotonic Crystals and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHamiltonian (control theory)Mode (computer interface)PhysicsMathematicsComputer scienceMathematical optimization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a Hamiltonian formulation of coupled mode theory for scenarios in which the coupled modes are associated with different "parent structures," such as two nearby waveguides. The relativistic nature of the photon leads to the complication that not any set of orthonormal modes can be used as a basis if the associated amplitudes are to satisfy canonical commutation relations. This difficulty is circumvented by the introduction of "dressed parent modes," which are in fact seen to be the "coupled modes" of the system. While an exact solution of the linear problem within the restricted basis of interest formally must be found before these modes can be constructed, in practice they can be constructed directly from the modes of the parent structures. The approach can be applied to periodic parent structures, such as photonic crystal waveguiding structures, as well as to simpler waveguides. We illustrate the accuracy of the various approximations employed by studying two sample systems in detail. We derive the linear coupled mode equations, and show how the approach can be immediately generalized from the linear regime to treat problems in nonlinear quantum optics.

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 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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.281

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations11
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review ESame topicPhotonic Crystals and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207