MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2090417816 · doi:10.1103/physreve.73.046610

Photonic band-gap formation by optical-phase-mask lithography

2006· article· en· W2090417816 on OpenAlexaff
Timothy Y. M. Chan, Ovidiu Toader, Sajeev John

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review E · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPhotonic Crystals and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotonic crystalMaterials scienceOpticsLithographyDiffractionOptoelectronicsPhotonicsPhotoresistPhotolithographyLayer (electronics)PhysicsNanotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We demonstrate an approach for fabricating photonic crystals with large three-dimensional photonic band gaps (PBG's) using single-exposure, single-beam, optical interference lithography based on diffraction of light through an optical phase mask. The optical phase mask (OPM) consists of two orthogonally oriented binary gratings joined by a thin, solid layer of homogeneous material. Illuminating the phase mask with a normally incident beam produces a five-beam diffraction pattern which can be used to expose a suitable photoresist and produce a photonic crystal template. Optical-phase-mask Lithography (OPML) is a major simplification from the previously considered multibeam holographic lithography of photonic crystals. The diffracted five-beam intensity pattern exhibits isointensity surfaces corresponding to a diamondlike (face-centered-cubic) structure, with high intensity contrast. When the isointensity surfaces in the interference patterns define a silicon-air boundary in the resulting photonic crystal, with dielectric contrast 11.9 to 1, the optimized PBG is approximately 24% of the gap center frequency. The ideal index contrast for the OPM is in the range of 1.7-2.3. Below this range, the intensity contrast of the diffraction pattern becomes too weak. Above this range, the diffraction pattern may become too sensitive to structural imperfections of the OPM. When combined with recently demonstrated polymer-to-silicon replication methods, OPML provides a highly efficient approach, of unprecedented simplicity, for the mass production of large-scale three-dimensional photonic band-gap materials.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.000
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.297 · 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.

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

Citations80
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review ESame topicPhotonic Crystals and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207