MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075880034 · doi:10.1117/12.589339

Narrow and wide free spectral range devices based on planar reflective gratings

2005· article· en· W2075880034 on OpenAlexaff
Serge Bidnyk, Matthew R. Pearson, Mae Gao

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicOptical Coatings and Gratings
Canadian institutionsCARE Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGratingOpticsFree spectral rangePlanarMaterials sciencePolarization (electrochemistry)WavelengthComputer scienceDiffraction gratingOptoelectronicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new approach for constructing devices of various free spectral ranges (FSRs) is described. We show that devices with different FSRs can be built around the same aberration-free architecture based on elliptical grating facets. Elliptical facets, combined with double astigmatic point design, are demonstrated to lead to dramatic improvements in reflective grating performance compared to traditional flat facet designs. A discussion on the proper selection of the grating order for devices with various FSRs is given. The proposed theory was applied to manufacture devices with various FSRs. A standard silica-on-silicon process was used to fabricate interleavers with narrow FSR of 0.8 and 1.6 nm. Subsequently, we show how the above methodology can be used to scale the reflective grating design to devices with wide FSR. We applied the theory to produce coarse wavelength division multiplexing filters with FSR in excess of 500 nm. The filters exhibited insertion losses of 2.5 dB and polarization dependent losses of less than 0.2 dB. Applications of wide FSR devices in metro edge and access networks are discussed.

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 score0.002

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.235
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicOptical Coatings and GratingsFrench-language works237,207