MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2080251071 · doi:10.1117/12.628870

Analysis of a bistable thermally tunable waveguide

2005· article· en· W2080251071 on OpenAlexaff
C. Raum, Robert C. Gauthier, N. Tait

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotonic and Optical Devices
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWaveguideMaterials scienceOpticsBistabilityBuckleGratingOptical path lengthStress (linguistics)WavelengthThermalFiber Bragg gratingThermal expansionBeam propagation methodOptoelectronicsRefractive indexComposite materialPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effect of thermal tuning on the optical properties of an SOI based suspended waveguide is analysed. This analysis is based on the model that a fixed-fixed suspended beam, which forms the optical waveguide, will buckle when thermal expansion causes an axial stress that exceeds the critical buckling pressure of the beam. The analysis of the waveguide response will be broken up into the pre- and post-buckle stages of thermal actuation. Each stage of actuation will have a separate relationship for the shift in optical response as a function of temperature, which will include a combination of the thermo-optic, photo-elastic, and thermo-elastic effects. Given a corrugated, or "Bragg grating" version of the waveguide, it will be shown that thermally tuning the Bragg wavelength involves a change in index via a change in temperature and stress, and a change in grating pitch via a change in temperature. Particular attention will be paid to the evolving stress field over the length of the waveguide and its relationship to the stress-optic effect. It will also be shown that the pre- and post-buckle temperatures are path-dependant. Finally, examples of device implementation will be explored.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

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 communication0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE→Same topicPhotonic and Optical Devices→French-language works237,207→