MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081698742 · doi:10.1364/oe.15.004474

Plasmonic interconnects versus conventional interconnects: a comparison of latency, crosstalk and energy costs

2007· article· en· W2081698742 on OpenAlexaff
Josh Conway, Subal Sahni, Thomas Szkopek

Bibliographic record

VenueOptics Express · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotonic and Optical Devices
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDissipationPlasmonMaterials scienceInterconnectionOptoelectronicsSurface plasmonSurface plasmon polaritonElectronic circuitCrosstalkIntegrated circuitOpticsElectrical engineeringPhysicsTelecommunicationsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The continued scaling of integrated circuits will require advances in intra-chip interconnect technology to minimize delay, density of energy dissipation and cross-talk. We present the first quantitative comparison between the performance of metal wire interconnects, operated in the traditional manner by electric charge and discharge, versus the performance of metal wires operated as surface plasmon waveguides. Surface plasmon wire waveguides have the potential to reduce signal delay, but the high confinement required for low cross-talk amongst high density plasmon wire interconnects significantly increases energy dissipation per transmitted bit, above and beyond that required for electric charge/discharge interconnects at the same density.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations125
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOptics ExpressSame topicPhotonic and Optical DevicesFrench-language works237,207