MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2612119003 · doi:10.1002/lpor.201700003

Efficient Integrated Graphene Photonics in the Visible and Near‐IR

2017· article· en· W2612119003 on OpenAlexaff
Charles Lin, Amr S. Helmy

Bibliographic record

VenueLaser & Photonics Review · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPlasmonic and Surface Plasmon Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrapheneMaterials scienceMetamaterialPlasmonOptoelectronicsWaveguideInsertion lossPhotonicsNanophotonicsAbsorption (acoustics)NanotechnologyOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Graphene photonics has emerged as a promising platform for providing desirable optical functionality. However, graphene's monolayer‐scale thickness fundamentally restricts the available light matter interaction, posing a critical design challenge for integrated devices, particularly in wavelength regimes where graphene plasmonics is untenable. While several plasmonic designs have been proposed to enhance graphene light interaction in these regimes, they suffer from substantial insertion loss due to metal absorption. Here we report a non‐resonant metamaterial‐based waveguide platform to overcome the design bottleneck associated with graphene device. Such metamaterial structure enables low insertion loss even though metal is being utilized. By examining waveguide dispersion characteristics via closed‐form analysis, it is demonstrated that the metamaterial approach can provide optimized optical field that overlaps with the graphene monolayer. This enables graphene‐based integrated components with superior optical performance. Specifically, the metamaterial‐assisted graphene modulator can provide 5‐fold improvement in extinction ratio compared to Si nanowire, while reducing insertion loss by one order magnitude compared to plasmonic structures. Such a waveguide configuration thus allows one to maximize the optical potential that graphene holds in the telecom and visible regimes.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.233
Threshold uncertainty score0.698

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 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

Citations11
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLaser & Photonics ReviewSame topicPlasmonic and Surface Plasmon ResearchFrench-language works237,207