Packaging of Arrayed Waveguide Grating Demultiplexer and Subsequent Device Characterization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper focuses on the optical alignment, packaging and subsequent characterization of a low-loss acrylate polymer arrayed waveguide grating (AWG) multiplexer/demultiplexer. Process, equipment and set-ups used for optical alignment and packaging of the AWG device are presented. The AWG itself was used as a vehicle for the package characterization. The variation of the output optical power versus wavelength for the packaged AWG channels is presented, analyzed and compared with theoretical calculation results. The variation of the packaged AWG center wavelength for each channel with temperature (peak wavelength thermal shift) over a range of temperatures between 18°C and 42°C is analyzed and the test results discussed. The thermal stability of the packaged AWG device, determined by the spectral response measurements over a similar range of temperatures is investigated. During the heating and cooling processes the packaged AWG is subjected to thermal stress. These phenomena are investigated and a thermal analysis (temperature distribution simulation) performed. Finally, conclusions and recommendations for future AWG packaging are presented.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".