Chemical‐assisted femtosecond laser writing of optical resonator arrays
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The design of micro‐optical resonator arrays are introduced and tailored towards refractive index sensing applications, building on the previously unexplored benefits of open dielectric stacks. The resonant coupling of identical hollow cavities present strong and narrow spectral resonance bands beyond that available with a single Fabry Perot interferometer. Femtosecond laser irradiation with selective chemical etching is applied to precisely fabricate stacked and waveguide‐coupled open resonators into fused silica, taking advantage of small 12 nm rms surface roughness made available by the self‐alignment of nanograting planes. Refractive index sensing of methanol‐water solutions confirm a very attractive sensing resolution of 6.5 × 10−5 RIU. Such high finesse optical elements open a new realm of optofluidic sensing and integrated optical circuit concepts for detecting minute changes in sample properties against a control solution that may find importance in chemical and biological sensors, telecom sensing networks, biomedical probes, and low‐cost health care products. image
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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".