MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Probing the intrinsic optical Bloch-mode emission from a 3D photonic crystal

2016· article· en· W2508351380 on OpenAlexaff
Mei-Li Hsieh, James A. Bur, Qingguo Du, Sajeev John, Shawn-Yu Lin

Bibliographic record

VenueNanotechnology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThermal Radiation and Cooling Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersMinistry of Science and Technology, TaiwanU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsMaterials sciencePurcell effectExcitationEmission intensityPhotonic crystalField electron emissionIsotropySpontaneous emissionAtomic physicsCondensed matter physicsOpticsPhysicsElectronOptoelectronicsPhotoluminescence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report experimental observation of intrinsic Bloch-mode emission from a 3D tungsten photonic crystal at low thermal excitation. After the successful removal of conventional metallic emission (normal emission), it is possible to make an accurate comparison of the Bloch-mode and the normal emission. For all biases, we found that the emission intensity of the Bloch-mode is higher than that of the normal emission. The Bloch-mode emission also exhibits a slower dependence on [Formula: see text] than that of the normal emission. The observed higher emission intensity and a different T-dependence is attributed to Bloch-mode assisted emission where emitters have been located into a medium having local density of states different than the isotropic case. Furthermore, our finite-difference time-domain (FDTD) simulation shows the presence of localized spots at metal-air boundaries and corners, having intense electric field. The enhanced plasmonic field and local non-equilibrium could induce a strong thermally stimulated emission and may be the cause of our unusual observation.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.244
Threshold uncertainty score0.354

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.202 · 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.

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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNanotechnologySame topicThermal Radiation and Cooling TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207