Silica Bottle Resonator Sensor for Refractive Index and Temperature Measurements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We propose and theoretically demonstrate a bottle resonator sensor with a nanoscale altitude and with alength several of hundreds of microns made on the top of the fiber with a radius of tens microns for refractive index and temperature sensor applications. The whispering gallery modes (WGMs) in the resonators can be excited with a taper fiber placed on the top of the resonator. These sensors can be considered as an alternative to fiber Bragg grating (FBG) sensors.The sensitivity of TM-polarized modes is higher than the sensitivity of the TE-polarized modes, but these values are comparable and both polarizations are suitable for sensor applications. The sensitivity ~150 (nm/RIU) can be reached with abottle resonator on the fiber with the radius 10 μm. It can be improved with theuse of a fiber with a smaller radius. The temperature sensitivity is found to be ~10 pm/K. The temperature sensitivity can decrease ~10% for a fiber with a radius r(co) = 10 μm instead of a fiber with a radius r(co) = 100 μm. These sensors have sensitivities comparable to FBG sensors. A bottle resonator sensor with a nanoscale altitude made on the top of the fiber can be easily integrated in any fiber scheme.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".