MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150860749 · doi:10.1364/josaa.23.001757

Theoretical performance of Bragg gratings based on long-range surface plasmon-polariton waveguides

2006· article· en· W2150860749 on OpenAlexaff
Stéphanie Jetté-Charbonneau, Pierre Berini

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Optical Society of America A · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotonic and Optical Devices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaDepartment of National DefenceDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOpticsMaterials scienceApodizationGratingWavelengthSurface plasmon polaritonFiber Bragg gratingOptoelectronicsPlasmonSurface plasmonPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A plasmon-polariton Bragg grating (PPBG) concept, based on the propagation of the long-range ss0b mode in structures comprising a thin metal film of finite width embedded in a homogeneous background dielectric, is discussed theoretically. The PPBGs are operated in an end-fire arrangement with access plasmon-polariton waveguides or optical fibers being directly butt-coupled to their input and output ports. A model for the PPBGs, which was recently proposed and validated experimentally for third order structures, is used to generate theoretical results describing their expected performance for various architectures. First order uniform periodic, interleaved, and apodized grating structures are considered and compared. Third order uniform periodic designs are also considered. The gratings investigated are based on a 20 nm thick Au film embedded in SiO2 and have a Bragg wavelength near 1550 nm. First order uniform periodic gratings provide the strongest reflection, with a maximum reflectance of about 97% being achievable over a length of a few millimeters and over a full width at half-maximum bandwidth of about 0.8 nm. The off-resonance insertion loss of the gratings can be as low as a few decibels. Specific Bragg wavelengths can easily be attained using interleaving without requiring extraordinary resolution from the fabrication process. Apodized designs providing low sidelobe levels 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 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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.426

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations31
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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