MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2078550639 · doi:10.1021/ph400114e

Modes and Mode Volumes of Leaky Optical Cavities and Plasmonic Nanoresonators

2013· article· en· W2078550639 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Photonics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPhotonic Crystals and Applications
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlasmonResonatorPhotonicsDissipative systemModalMode (computer interface)Coupled mode theory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electromagnetic cavity modes in photonic and plasmonic resonators offer rich and attractive regimes for tailoring the properties of light–matter interactions, yet there is a disturbing lack of a precise definition for what constitutes a cavity mode, and as a result their mathematical properties remain largely unspecified. The lack of a definition is evidenced in part by the diverse nomenclature at use, “resonance”, “leaky mode”, and “quasimode”, to name but a few, suggesting that the dissipative nature of cavity modes somehow makes them different from other modes, but an explicit distinction is rarely made. This Perspective aims to introduce the reader to some of the subtleties and working definitions that can be rigorously applied when describing the modal properties of leaky optical cavities and plasmonic nanoresonators. We describe some recent developments in the field, including calculation methods for quasinormal modes of both photonic and plasmonic resonators and the concept of a generalized effective mode volume, and we illustrate the theory with several representative cavity structures from the fields of photonic crystals and nanoplasmonics.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations276
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS PhotonicsSame topicPhotonic Crystals and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207