MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2072369207 · doi:10.1109/jqe.2008.2002089

Simulation Analysis of Higher Order Laterally-Coupled Distributed Feedback Lasers

2008· article· en· W2072369207 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal of Quantum Electronics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicOptical Coatings and Gratings
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersCMC Microsystems
KeywordsGratingLaserOpticsMaterials scienceDuty cycleDiffraction gratingFabricationDistributed feedback laserLithographyOptoelectronicsSemiconductor laser theoryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Laterally-coupled distributed feedback (LC-DFB) lasers use a lithographic fabrication step to define the distributed feedback grating, avoiding subsequent regrowth. Using higher order gratings can enhance the lithographic tolerance for lower resolution patterning, yielding lasers more amenable to fabrication. We show that LC-DFB lasers with higher order gratings, although requiring a higher threshold gain than those of first-order, provide a degree of longitudinal mode discrimination. Incorporating radiating partial waves, we have calculated modified coupled-mode coefficients for various duty cycles, grating orders, and grating geometries using a two-dimensional finite-element method. The modified coupled-mode equations were solved with and without a lambda/4 phase shift. The phase shift, while beneficial for first-order gratings, was found to generally diminish laser performance for lasers with higher order gratings.

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 score0.381
Threshold uncertainty score0.477

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.259 · 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