MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2076495926 · doi:10.1117/12.707759

Fabrication of periodically poled lithium niobate on x-cut substrates

2006· article· en· W2076495926 on OpenAlexaff
Francis Généreux, G. Baldenberger, Bruno Bourliaguet, Réal Vallée

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPhotorefractive and Nonlinear Optics
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalInstitut National d'Optique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolingLithium niobateMaterials scienceWaferFabricationOptoelectronicsOpticsPulse durationVoltageFerroelectricityLaserDielectricElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Periodically Poled Lithium Niobate (PPLN) components are very promising for the development of active photonic devices. Most of the PPLN devices currently fabricated are based on the use of z-cut wafers. We report on the fabrication of Periodically Poled Lithium Niobate on x-cut substrates by the application of a high electric pulse. The technique is taking advantage of the use of high voltage amplifier to generate the needed high voltage waveform. The shape of the pulse is controlled by feedback to maintain the poling charge constant. This approach makes the total charge independent from the electric field amplitude and the pulse duration. Using this system we show evidence that a long poling pulse improves the domains wall propagation in the forward direction e.g. from Z+ to the Z- side. We also observed an improvement of the quality of the inverted domains when controlling the poling current to a low constant value. High nucleation spike was also critical to obtain uniform inversion and repeatable poling curves for different samples. Using adequate pulse duration, nucleation spike and charges amount, uniform 1 micrometer deep PPLN were successfully fabricated on x-cut substrates.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.402
Threshold uncertainty score0.887

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.229
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 teacher head, 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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicPhotorefractive and Nonlinear OpticsFrench-language works237,207