MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146814333 · doi:10.1002/mop.10223

Modeling the electrostatic and band‐mixing effects on gain for double‐quantum‐well lasers

2002· article· en· W2146814333 on OpenAlexaff
P. Weetman, Marek S. Wartak, M. Kucharczyk

Bibliographic record

VenueMicrowave and Optical Technology Letters · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSemiconductor Quantum Structures and Devices
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrowaveQuantum wellMixing (physics)Lattice (music)Poisson's equationMaterials sciencePhysicsLaserCondensed matter physicsOptoelectronicsOpticsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The simultaneous role of electrostatic effects and band‐mixing effects on optical modal gain in two coupled wells is analyzed within the self‐consistent solution of the Poisson and Luttinger–Kohn effective‐mass equations. The analysis is performed for a 1.3‐μm InGaAsP/InP lattice‐matched system. It shows that the electrostatic effects play a significant role in selecting the optimum barrier width and composition of the wells and barriers. The gain is actually larger when electrostatic effects are included because of better charge localization in the wells. © 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Microwave Opt Technol Lett 33: 35–37, 2002; DOI 10.1002/mop.10223

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.145
Threshold uncertainty score0.545

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMicrowave and Optical Technology LettersSame topicSemiconductor Quantum Structures and DevicesFrench-language works237,207