Thermal-induced nonlinearities in rose, linseed, and chamomile oils using continuous wave visible laser beam
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Self-diffraction rings or spatial self-phase modulation were observed in rose, linseed, and chamomile oils under 473 nm continuous wave laser irradiation. The measurements were performed by propagating the laser beam through a cell containing each sample. The number of rings as well as diameter of the outer-most ring in each pattern obtained increases monotonically with increasing input power. The diffraction ring patterns are theoretically simulated using Fresnel–Kirchhoff diffraction integral in the case of an optically thin medium. The experimental and simulation results show that when a laser beam with Gaussian profile is transmitted through an oil medium, a series of circular diffraction rings forms in the intensity distribution pattern in the far-field. The nonlinear refractive index, n2, was determined from the number of observed rings and by the Z-scan technique. The results obtained from self-diffraction rings experiment and Z-scan are compared and analyzed for the three different oils. A large value was obtained of the order of n2 = 1.32 × l0−6 cm2/W for chamomile oil using the diffraction ring pattern technique. This large nonlinearity is attributed to a thermal effect resulting from linear absorption. Moreover, the optical limiting characteristics of rose, linseed, and chamomile oils were investigated.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".