Cylindrical and spherical space equivalents to the plane wave expansion technique of Maxwell's wave equations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The plane wave expansion (PWM) technique applied to Maxwell’s wave equations provides researchers with a supply of information regarding the optical properties of dielectric structures. The technique is well suited for structures that display a linear periodicity. When the focus is directed towards optical resonators and structures that lack linear periodicity the eigen-process can easily exceed computational resources and time constraints. In the case of dielectric structures which display cylindrical or spherical symmetry, a coordinate system specific set of basis functions have been employed to cast Maxwell’s wave equations into an eigen-matrix formulation from which the resonator states associated with the dielectric profile can be obtained. As for PWM, the inverse of the dielectric and field components are expanded in the basis functions (Fourier-Fourier-Bessel, FFB, in cylindrical and Fourier- Bessel-Legendre, BLF, in spherical) and orthogonality is employed to form the matrix expressions. The theoretical development details will be presented indicating how certain mathematical complications in the process have been overcome and how the eigen-matrix can be tuned to a specific mode type. The similarities and differences in PWM, FFB and BLF are presented. In the case of structures possessing axial cylindrical symmetry, the inclusion of the z axis component of propagation constant makes the technique applicable to photonic crystal fibers and other waveguide structures. Computational results will be presented for a number of different dielectric geometries including Bragg ring resonators, cylindrical space slot channel waveguides and bottle resonators. Steps to further enhance the computation process will be reported.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.003 |
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".