MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2239384518 · doi:10.1063/1.4940715

Tunable open-access microcavities for on-chip cavity quantum electrodynamics

2016· article· en· W2239384518 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physics Letters · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStrong Light-Matter Interactions
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchNational Institute for NanotechnologyUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Foundation for InnovationAlfred P. Sloan Foundation
KeywordsCavity quantum electrodynamicsFinesseCoupling (piping)Resonance (particle physics)QuantumResonatorAtom (system on chip)Classical electromagnetism

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report on the development of on-chip microcavities and show their potential as a platform for cavity quantum electrodynamics experiments. Microcavity arrays were formed by the controlled buckling of SiO2/Ta2O5 Bragg mirrors and exhibit a reflectance-limited finesse of 3500 and mode volumes as small as 35λ3. We show that the cavity resonance can be thermally tuned into alignment with the D2 transition of 87Rb and outline two methods for providing atom access to the cavity. Owing to their small mode volume and high finesse, these cavities exhibit single-atom cooperativities as high as C1=65. A unique feature of the buckled-dome architecture is that the strong-coupling parameter g0/κ is nearly independent of the cavity size. Furthermore, strong coupling should be achievable with only modest improvements in mirror reflectance, suggesting that these monolithic devices could provide a robust and scalable solution to the engineering of light-matter interfaces.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations18
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Physics LettersSame topicStrong Light-Matter InteractionsFrench-language works237,207