MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Photonics and optoelectronics of two-dimensional materials beyond graphene

2016· article· en· W2545956921 on OpenAlexaff
Joice Sophia Ponraj, Zai‐Quan Xu, Sathish Chander Dhanabalan, Haoran Mu, Yusheng Wang, Jian Yuan, Pengfei Li, Siddharatha Thakur, Mursal Ashrafi, Kenneth Mccoubrey, Yupeng Zhang, Shaojuan Li, Han Zhang, Qiaoliang Bao

Bibliographic record

VenueNanotechnology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicGraphene research and applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrapheneMaterials sciencePhotonicsNanotechnologyPhotodetectorEngineering physicsFabricationElectronicsRealization (probability)OptoelectronicsPhysicsElectrical engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Apart from conventional materials, the study of two-dimensional (2D) materials has emerged as a significant field of study for a variety of applications. Graphene-like 2D materials are important elements of potential optoelectronics applications due to their exceptional electronic and optical properties. The processing of these materials towards the realization of devices has been one of the main motivations for the recent development of photonics and optoelectronics. The recent progress in photonic devices based on graphene-like 2D materials, especially topological insulators (TIs) and transition metal dichalcogenides (TMDs) with the methodology level discussions from the viewpoint of state-of-the-art designs in device geometry and materials are detailed in this review. We have started the article with an overview of the electronic properties and continued by highlighting their linear and nonlinear optical properties. The production of TIs and TMDs by different methods is detailed. The following main applications focused towards device fabrication are elaborated: (1) photodetectors, (2) photovoltaic devices, (3) light-emitting devices, (4) flexible devices and (5) laser applications. The possibility of employing these 2D materials in different fields is also suggested based on their properties in the prospective part. This review will not only greatly complement the detailed knowledge of the device physics of these materials, but also provide contemporary perception for the researchers who wish to consider these materials for various applications by following the path of graphene.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations325
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNanotechnologySame topicGraphene research and applicationsFrench-language works237,207