MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073523219 · doi:10.1134/s1054660x10110368

Near-infrared properties of periodically poled KTiOPO4 and stoichiometric MgO-doped LiTaO3 crystals for high power optical parametric oscillation with femtosecond pulses

2010· article· en· W2073523219 on OpenAlexafffund
Hongbo Zhao, Ivan T. Lima, Arkady Major

Bibliographic record

VenueLaser Physics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPhotorefractive and Nonlinear Optics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersWestern Economic Diversification CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMaterials scienceFemtosecondLaserUltrashort pulseDopingOpticsOptical parametric amplifierOscillation (cell signaling)Parametric statisticsWavelengthInfraredExcitationOptoelectronicsLithium niobateNonlinear opticsOptical amplifierPhysicsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A thorough theoretical analysis of the near-infrared properties of periodically poled KTiOPO 4 (PPKTP) and stoichiometric MgO-doped LiTaO 3 (MgO:PPSLT) crystals for optical parametric oscillation with excitation at 1 μm is presented. To the best of our knowledge, the optical, phasematching, wavelength tuning, and dispersive properties of these crystals for parametric interactions are discussed in detail for the first time. In addition, a new design for high power parametric devices based on PPKTP or MgO:PPSLT crystals with ultrafast Yb-ion laser pump is proposed. The results form a useful reference for the selection of materials and operating conditions for the practical design of high power femtosecond optical parametric oscillators with excitation at 1 μm.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations48
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLaser PhysicsSame topicPhotorefractive and Nonlinear OpticsFrench-language works237,207