Bibliographic record
Abstract
We have studied the quantum optics of a photonic quantum nanowire doped with an ensemble of three-level nanoparticles.The wire is made from two photonic crystals A and B. Crystal A is embedded within crystal B and acts as a photonic nanowire.It is considered that the conduction band of crystal A lies below that of crystal B. As a result, photons are confined in crystal A and are reflected from crystal B. The bound states of the confined photons are calculated using the transfer matrix method.It is found that the number of bound states in the wire depends on the size of the wire and the energy difference between the conduction band extrema of crystals A and B. The absorption coefficient of the system has also been calculated using the Schrödinger equation method.It is considered that the nanoparticles interact with the photonic bound states.Numerical simulations show that when one of the resonance energies lies near the bound state, the system becomes transparent.However, when the resonance energy lies away from the bound state the crystal reverts to an absorbing state.Similarly, when the radius of the dielectric spheres is changed the location of the transparency peak is shifted.This means that the present system can be switched between two states by changing the size of the wire and the transition energy.These findings can be used to make new types of optical devices.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".