MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125700682 · doi:10.1109/jphot.2011.2160527

Bend Waveguides on Silicon Nanowire Optical Waveguide (SNOW)

2011· article· en· W2125700682 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammadreza Khorasaninejad, Simarjeet S. Saini

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE photonics journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotonic and Optical Devices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNanowireWaveguideMaterials scienceSiliconWavelengthOpticsRefractive indexSilicon nanowiresOptoelectronicsSurface roughnessPhysicsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a previous work, we reported a novel optical waveguide named silicon nanowire optical waveguide (SNOW), which consists of arrayed silicon nanowires acting like an effective-index medium. In this paper, we analyze bend properties of the waveguide and show that small radii bends can be achieved in SNOW structures with low radiation losses. For bend radii of 5 and 2 μm at a wavelength of 1550 nm, the radiation loss per 360° turn is 5 ×10-4and 0.05 dB, respectively. Furthermore, we study the losses for changing the pitch between the nanowires and show that the loss behavior follows effective-index bulk waveguide approximation. Consequently, we show that the bending losses can be optimized by arranging the nanowires pitch size such that the density is higher in the inner side of the bend as compared with the outer side. Effects of wavelength and sidewall roughness on propagation loss are also investigated.

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 score0.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations17
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE photonics journalSame topicPhotonic and Optical DevicesFrench-language works237,207