Long-period grating refractive index sensor with a modified cladding structure for large operational range and high sensitivity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
What is believed to be a novel long-period grating (LPG) refractive index sensor with a modified cladding structure is proposed and studied. In the proposed structure, the cladding of the fiber has a two-layer structure, i.e., a cladding layer of low refractive index with a reduced radius and an overlay of high refractive index. The sensitivity of the structure-modified LPG sensor to the ambient refractive index change as a function of the cladding layer and overlay parameters is investigated by way of modeling. It is found that an increase of the ambient refractive index causes a field redistribution of the cladding mode into the overlay when the parameters of the overlay are properly selected. It is shown that by reducing the radius of the cladding layer, the operational range of the LPG refractive index sensor can be as large as 0.195 (from 1.244 to 1.440) with a minimum sensitivity of 660 nm/refractive index, which represents a 31% increase of operational range in comparison with the operational range obtained from the reported structure. The design guidelines for achieving this large operation range and high sensitivity are explained by investigating the dependence of the cladding modes on the radius of the cladding layer.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 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".