MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2533175364 · doi:10.1109/leosst.1997.619187

Using a retro-reflecting echelle grating to improve WDM demux efficiency

2002· article· en· W2533175364 on OpenAlexaff
L. E. Erickson, B. Lamontagne, Jian‐Jun He, A. Delâge, Michael Davies, Emil S. Köteles

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicOptical Coatings and Gratings
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Microstructural Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemultiplexerWavelength-division multiplexingMultiplexerGratingOpticsMaterials scienceOptoelectronicsFacet (psychology)Refractive indexWaferComputer scienceMultiplexingPhysicsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of uncoated facets on the echelle grating in a monolithic InP WDM demux leads to a reflection loss of 5.65 dB for an index of refraction of approximately 3.18. This loss can be largely eliminated by coating the out of plane facet with gold, but it involves another processing step. An alternative is to use total internal reflecting (retro-reflecting) facets. We have fabricated a WDM demultiplexer in InP for use at 1550 nm using an echelle with retro-reflecting facets and have compared its performance to another demux on the same wafer using an echelle with flat facets.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.127
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 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

Citations6
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOptical Coatings and GratingsFrench-language works237,207