MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2108525391 · doi:10.1364/josab.17.001360

Nonlinear distributed-feedback structures as passive optical limiters

2000· article· en· W2108525391 on OpenAlexaff
Lukasz Brzozowski, Edward H. Sargent

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Optical Society of America B · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotonic and Optical Devices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLimiterLimitingNonlinear systemIntensity (physics)Computer scienceOpticsPhysicsEngineeringTelecommunicationsMechanical engineeringQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We analyze the intensity-dependent optical response of the passive optical limiters realized with distributed-feedback structures, which consist of alternating layers of materials possessing opposite Kerr nonlinearities. By elaborating an analytical model and employing numerical simulations, we explore device performance with respect to key requirements for passive optical-limiter deployment. We prove that the proposed limiting mechanism results in complete clamping of transmitted intensity to a sensor-safe limiting value, independent of incident intensity. We provide a direct analytical result of this limiting intensity in terms of structural and material parameters.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.424
Threshold uncertainty score0.541

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 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

Citations39
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Optical Society of America BSame topicPhotonic and Optical DevicesFrench-language works237,207