MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2089066100 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.69.235329

<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi>χ</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mn>3</mml:mn><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:math>analysis of all-optical polarization switching in semiconductor quantum wells

2004· article· lv· W2089066100 on OpenAlexaff
I. Rumyantsev, N. H. Kwong, R. Binder, Eric J. Gansen, Arthur L. Smirl

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review B · 2004
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum optics and atomic interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersDefense Advanced Research Projects Agency
KeywordsPolarization (electrochemistry)PhysicsExcitationAlgorithmComputer scienceQuantum mechanicsPhysical chemistryChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A theoretical and experimental analysis of an all-optical polarization switching technique that has been demonstrated recently is presented. The analysis is restricted to the lowest-order nonlinear regime (${\ensuremath{\chi}}^{(3)}$ regime). The theory allows for a detailed analysis of the switching action, which is based on near-resonant optical excitation of spin-polarized excitons. The theoretical results are found to be in good agreement with experimental data. The respective contributions of phase-space blocking and various many-particle interaction and correlation terms to the switching process are identified and studied as function of experimentally adjustable parameters. The resulting parametric dependence of the switching action is used as a basis for proposals for further optimization of the device.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.589
Threshold uncertainty score0.586

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.5890.297

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.252 · 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.

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

Citations20
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review BSame topicQuantum optics and atomic interactionsFrench-language works237,207