Omnidirectional reflection from nanocolumnar TiO2 films
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Anisotropic properties of columnar nanoporous thin films were utilized to design and fabricate interference mirrors with lossless omnidirectional reflection in the visible spectral range. Index graded columnar films with distributed Bragg reflector (DBR), sinusoidal, and Gaussian refractive index profiles were studied using finite-difference frequency-domain and finite-difference time-domain methods, with an emphasis on maximizing the omnidirectional reflection bandwidth. Titanium dioxide columnar films with sixteen period sinusoidal refractive index profile were fabricated using the glancing angle deposition technique and characterized by angle resolved transmittance measurements. Simulations and experimental measurements have shown the presence of the omnidirectional reflection band up to 5% wide for a film with a maximum refractive index nmax=2.3 and refractive index contrast Δn=0.8. Simulations further showed that with the optimal choice of the refractive index variation range, the omnidirectional reflection band can reach 10.5% width in TiO2 films with a sinusoidal index profile, 14.5% with a DBR index profile, and 12% with a Gaussian profile. Due to the optical anisotropy of the columnar films, the reflection bandwidth exceeded the corresponding value, observed in isotropic analogs, by a factor of three to four depending on the choice of the refractive index profile.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".