MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2903973169 · doi:10.1109/jstqe.2018.2885486

An Open-Source Artificial Neural Network Model for Polarization-Insensitive Silicon-on-Insulator Subwavelength Grating Couplers

2018· article· en· W2903973169 on OpenAlexafffund
Dusan Gostimirovic, Winnie N. Ye

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Quantum Electronics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotonic and Optical Devices
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGratingFinite-difference time-domain methodPolarization (electrochemistry)OpticsSilicon on insulatorNonlinear systemArtificial neural networkPhotonicsMaterials scienceOptoelectronicsComputer scienceSiliconPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present an open-source deep artificial neural network (ANN) model for the accelerated design of polarization-insensitive subwavelength grating (SWG) couplers on the silicon-on-insulator platform. Our model can optimize SWG-based grating couplers for a single fundamental-order polarization, or both, by splitting them counter-directionally at the grating level. Alternating, SWG sections are adopted to reduce the reflections (loss) of standard, single-etch devices-further accelerating the design time by eliminating the need to process a second etch. The model of this device is trained by a dense uniform dataset of finite-difference time-domain (FDTD) optical simulations. Our approach requires the FDTD simulations to be made up front, where the resulting ANN model is made openly available for the rapid, software-free design of future standard photonic devices, which may require slightly different design parameters (e.g., fiber angle, center wavelength, and polarization) for their specific application. By transforming the nonlinear input-output relationship of the device into a matrix of learned weights, a set of simple linear algebraic and nonlinear activation calculations can be made to predict the device outputs 1830 times faster than numerical simulations, within 93.2% accuracy of the simulations.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 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

Citations46
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Quantum ElectronicsSame topicPhotonic and Optical DevicesFrench-language works237,207