MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2795167929 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.97.214204

Bloch-Floquet waves in optical ring resonators

2018· article· en· W2795167929 on OpenAlexafffund
Kathleen McGarvey-Lechable, Pablo Bianucci

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. B./Physical review. B · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotonic and Optical Devices
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFonds de Recherche du Québec-Société et CultureConcordia University
KeywordsPhysicsFloquet theoryResonatorDispersion relationOpticsBloch wavePhotonic crystalRayleigh scatteringCoupling coefficient of resonatorsDegenerate energy levelsResonance (particle physics)Condensed matter physicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modal coupling between frequency-degenerate resonances of an optical ring resonator is a commonly observed phenomenon that results in adverse mode splitting. Traditionally, this coupling is attributed to Rayleigh scattering of a propagating electromagnetic wave into its associated degenerate counterpropagating mode from small perturbations to the dielectric material of the resonator. We have chosen to reframe the problem of intracavity Rayleigh scattering by considering the optical ring resonator as an infinitely long, one-dimensional photonic crystal (PhC) that possesses a lattice constant equal to the perimeter of the ring. Through application of Bloch-Floquet theory, we show that modal coupling between degenerate resonances of a ring can effectively be described as the formation of photonic frequency bands in the dispersion relation of the resonator. We additionally demonstrate that the Bragg planes of the PhC lattice coincide with the phase matching conditions for constructive interference in the ring. Finally, we show that the magnitude of frequency splitting of a particular resonance is proportional to its associated coefficient in the Fourier expansion of the ring's periodic dielectric function. The fine control of the mode splitting that can be obtained in this way provides a straightforward way to obtain ring resonances with anomalous dispersion in arbitrary wavelength ranges.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. B./Physical review. BSame topicPhotonic and Optical DevicesFrench-language works237,207