MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2089721073 · doi:10.1116/1.1752903

Advanced techniques for the fabrication of square spiral photonic crystals by glancing angle deposition

2004· article· en· W2089721073 on OpenAlexafffund
Scott R. Kennedy, Michael J. Brett

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vacuum Science & Technology B Microelectronics and Nanometer Structures Processing Measurement and Phenomena · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPhotonic Crystals and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPhotonic crystalFabricationSquare (algebra)Spiral (railway)Materials scienceOpticsPhotonicsDeposition (geology)Substrate (aquarium)OptoelectronicsPhysicsGeometryEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using the glancing angle deposition thin film fabrication technique, it is possible to create tailored, three-dimensional periodic square spiral photonic crystals that exhibit a band of forbidden electromagnetic frequencies related to the dimensions of the nanostructures. Typically, when fabricating square spirals by traditional means, several problems arise due to nonuniform shadowing that results in column broadening and the loss of required periodicity for thicker crystals. Through the use of complex substrate motion that imposes greater restrictions on growth and shadowing, many of these problems have been overcome, in particular through the implementation of two new algorithms: the slow corner and the variable angle post methods. These motion algorithms have been implemented in conjunction with square spiral photonic crystal fabrication to provide more uniform spiral structures along with more stringent periodicity across the crystal that will allow for photonic band gap structures with more ideal characteristics.

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 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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.116
Threshold uncertainty score0.405

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations39
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Vacuum Science & Technology B Microelectronics and Nanometer Structures Processing Measurement and PhenomenaSame topicPhotonic Crystals and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207