Tilted optical trapping of anisotropic single crystal nanorod (Presentation Recording)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When a nanorod of typically d=100's nm diameter and h=1-3 micrometers length trapped in the optical tweezers, its orientation is along the trapping beam axis for h/d > 2 and is normal to beam axis for h/d < 2. We report the preliminary experimental observation that some anisotropic single crystal nanorod was stably trapped at a tiled angle to the beam axis. We explain the observation with the T-matrix calculation. In the anisotropic media, as the divergence of is non zero, the conventional vector spherical wave functions (VSWFs) do not individually satisfy the anisotropic vector wave equation. Some new bases, such as the modified VSWFS and qVSWF, have been proposed. Notice that the anisotropic nanorod is floating in the aquatic isotropic medium, we make the VSWF expansions of the incident and scattered fields in terms of, and the VSWF expansion of internal field in the anisotropic nanorod in terms of. Both expansions are therefore legitimate. The boundary condition was chosen as for the normal components of. The internal field is represented as a sum of a set of compoment VSWF expansions to gave better description with more expansion coefficients and to help the convergence of the T-matrix solver. Our calculation showed that when the optical axes of an anisotropic nanorod are not aligned to the nanorod axis, the nanorod may be trapped at a tilted angle position where the lateral torque is zero and its derivative is negative.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".