MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2406505196 · doi:10.1103/physreva.96.017802

Reply to “Comment on ‘Normalization of quasinormal modes in leaky optical cavities and plasmonic resonators' ”

2017· article· en· W2406505196 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Philip Trøst Kristensen, Rong-Chun Ge, Stephen Hughes

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. A/Physical review, A · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotonic and Optical Devices
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsNormalization (sociology)ResonatorPlasmonPhysicsQuasinormal modeOptoelectronicsOpticsQuantum mechanicsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We refute all claims of the ``Comment on `Normalization of quasinormal modes in leaky optical cavities and plasmonic resonators' '' by E. A. Muljarov and W. Langbein. Based entirely on information already contained in our original article [P. T. Kristensen, R.-C. Ge, and S. Hughes, Phys. Rev. A 92, 053810 (2015)], we dismiss every point of criticism as being unsupported and point out how important parts of our argumentation appear to have been overlooked by the Comment authors. In addition, we provide additional calculations showing directly the connection between the normalizations by Sauvan et al. and Muljarov et al., which were not included in our original article.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.712
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. A/Physical review, ASame topicPhotonic and Optical DevicesFrench-language works237,207