MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Optical Polarization Möbius Strips and Points of Purely Transverse Spin Density

2016· article· en· W2268715759 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas Bauer, Martin Neugebauer, Gerd Leuchs, Peter Banzer

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicOrbital Angular Momentum in Optics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsPolarization (electrochemistry)Transverse planeOpticsEllipseElectric fieldGaussian beamCircular polarizationSTRIPSTopology (electrical circuits)Beam (structure)Quantum mechanicsMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tightly focused light beams can exhibit complex and versatile structured electric field distributions. The local field may spin around any axis including a transverse axis perpendicular to the beams' propagation direction. At certain focal positions, the corresponding local polarization ellipse can even degenerate into a perfect circle, representing a point of circular polarization or C point. We consider the most fundamental case of a linearly polarized Gaussian beam, where-upon tight focusing-those C points created by transversely spinning fields can form the center of 3D optical polarization topologies when choosing the plane of observation appropriately. Because of the high symmetry of the focal field, these polarization topologies exhibit nontrivial structures similar to Möbius strips. We use a direct physical measure to find C points with an arbitrarily oriented spinning axis of the electric field and experimentally investigate the fully three-dimensional polarization topologies surrounding these C points by exploiting an amplitude and phase reconstruction technique.

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 score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations155
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review LettersSame topicOrbital Angular Momentum in OpticsFrench-language works237,207