Rapid thermal annealing in high repetition rate ultrafast laser waveguide writing in lithium niobate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For the first time to our knowledge, bulk modification of lithium niobate using high repetition rate ultrashort laser pulses has been studied. A fiber based ultrafast laser has been applied in a range of 0.1 to 1.5 MHz repetition rate to directly inscribe optical waveguides in z-cut lithium niobate. Circularly polarized light with stretched 600 fs pulses produced waveguides with nearly circular mode profiles that guided in the telecom band of 1300 nm. Higher laser repetition rate of 700 kHz was found to offer smooth waveguides with low propagation loss of 0.6 dB/cm, matching the best reported value so far, with the advantage of 50 fold faster writing speed. At repetition rates of 250 kHz and higher, the tracks exhibited a cladding-like modification zone that extended outside the main laser interaction volume, yielding smoother structures, despite higher net fluence delivery, providing concrete evidence of heat accumulation and thermal annealing effects. We also present the first observation of periodic micro-structures in the bulk laser interaction volume of a non-glass material.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".