MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2804636666 · doi:10.3390/ma11050854

The Influence of the External Signal Modulation Waveform and Frequency on the Performance of a Photonic Forced Oscillator

2018· article· en· W2804636666 on OpenAlexaff
Noemi Sánchez-Castro, M. Palomino‐Ovando, Denise Estrada‐Wiese, Nydia Xcaret Valladares, J. A. del Rı́o, M.B. de la Mora, R. Doti, Jocelyn Faubert, J. E. Lugo

Bibliographic record

VenueMaterials · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotonic and Optical Devices
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWaveformPhotonicsAmplitudeSIGNAL (programming language)OpticsPhysicsArbitrary waveform generatorFrequency modulationVibrationAcousticsWavelengthMaterials scienceRadio frequencyTelecommunicationsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Photonic crystals have been an object of interest because of their properties to inhibit certain wavelengths and allow the transmission of others. Using these properties, we designed a photonic structure known as photodyne formed by two porous silicon one-dimensional photonic crystals with an air defect between them. When the photodyne is illuminated with appropriate light, it allows us to generate electromagnetic forces within the structure that can be maximized if the light becomes localized inside the defect region. These electromagnetic forces allow the microcavity to oscillate mechanically. In the experiment, a chopper was driven by a signal generator to modulate the laser light that was used. The driven frequency and the signal modulation waveform (rectangular, sinusoidal or triangular) were changed with the idea to find optimal conditions for the structure to oscillate. The microcavity displacement amplitude, velocity amplitude and Fourier spectrum of the latter and its frequency were measured by means of a vibrometer. The mechanical oscillations are modeled and compared with the experimental results and show good agreement. For external frequency values of 5 Hz and 10 Hz, the best option was a sinusoidal waveform, which gave higher photodyne displacements and velocity amplitudes. Nonetheless, for an external frequency of 15 Hz, the best option was the rectangular waveform.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.097
Threshold uncertainty score0.118

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMaterialsSame topicPhotonic and Optical DevicesFrench-language works237,207