MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2345990019 · doi:10.3850/9783981537079_0719

Modeling Fabrication Non-Uniformity in Chip-Scale Silicon Photonic Interconnects

2016· article· en· W2345990019 on OpenAlexaff
Mahdi Nikdast, Gabriela Nicolescu, Jelena Trajković, Odile Liboiron-Ladouceur

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotonic and Optical Devices
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityMcGill UniversityPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSilicon photonicsPhotonicsWavelength-division multiplexingElectronic engineeringComputer scienceBlock (permutation group theory)MultiplexingChipFabricationPhotonic integrated circuitProcess (computing)WaveguideMaterials scienceWavelengthOptoelectronicsEngineeringTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Silicon photonic interconnect (SPI) is a promising candidate for the communication infrastructure in multiprocessor systems-on-chip (MPSoCs). When employing SPIs with wavelength-division multiplexing (WDM), it is required to precisely match different devices, such as photonic switches, filters, etc, in terms of their central wavelengths. Nevertheless, SPIs are vulnerable to fabrication non-uniformity (a.k.a. process variations), which influences the reliability and performance of such systems. Understanding process variations helps develop system design strategies to compensate for the variations, as well as estimate the implementation cost for such compensations. For the first time, this paper presents a computationally efficient and accurate bottom-up method to systematically study different process variations in passive SPIs. Analytical models to study the impact of silicon thickness and waveguide width variations on strip waveguides and microresonator (MR)-based add-drop filters are developed. Numerical simulations are used to evaluate our proposed method. Furthermore, we designed, fabricated, and tested several identical MRs to demonstrate process variations. The proposed method is applied to a case study of a passive WDM-based photonic switch, which is the building block in passive SPIs, to evaluate its optical signal-to-noise ratio (OSNR) under different variations. The efficiency of our proposed method enables its application to large-scale SPIs in MPSoCs, where employing numerical simulations is not feasible.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.214
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 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

Citations12
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPhotonic and Optical DevicesFrench-language works237,207