MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2082230562 · doi:10.1103/physreva.91.043817

Slowing the probe field in the second window of double-double electromagnetically induced transparency

2015· article· en· W2082230562 on OpenAlex
Hessa M. M. Alotaibi, Barry C. Sanders

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review A · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum optics and atomic interactions
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlberta Innovates - Technology Futures
KeywordsElectromagnetically induced transparencyTransparency (behavior)Field (mathematics)Group velocityField strengthWindow (computing)SIGNAL (programming language)PhysicsOpticsMathematicsMagnetic fieldComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For Doppler-broadened media operating under double-double electromagnetically induced transparency (EIT) conditions, we devise a scheme to control and reduce the probe-field group velocity at the center of the second transparency window. We derive numerical and approximate analytical solutions for the width of EIT windows and for the group velocities of the probe field at the two distinct transparency windows, and we show that the group velocities of the probe field can be lowered by judiciously choosing the physical parameters of the system. Our modeling enables us to identify three signal-field strength regimes (with a signal-field strength always higher than the probe-field strength), quantified by the Rabi frequency, for slowing the probe field. These three regimes correspond to a weak signal field, with the probe-field group velocity and transparency-window width both smaller for the second window compared to the first window, a medium-strength signal field, with a probe-field group velocity smaller in the second window than in the first window but with larger transparency-window width for the second window, and the strong signal field, with both group velocity and transparency-window width larger for the second window. Our scheme exploits the fact that the second transparency window is sensitive to a temperature-controlled signal-field nonlinearity, whereas the first transparency window is insensitive to this nonlinearity.

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.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.510
Threshold uncertainty score0.251

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.292 · 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