MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3015133210 · doi:10.1364/osac.391878

Direct comparison of anti-diffracting optical pin beams and abruptly autofocusing beams

2020· article· en· W3015133210 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueOSA Continuum · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicOrbital Angular Momentum in Optics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaMitacsState Scholarships FoundationNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaMinistère de l'Économie, de la Science et de l'Innovation - Québec
KeywordsBessel functionOpticsPhysicsScatteringBessel beamMain lobeOptical tweezersMorphingAmplitudeRobustness (evolution)Computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose and demonstrate a generalized class of anti-diffracting optical pin-like beams (OPBs). Such beams exhibit autofocusing dynamics while morphing into a Bessel-like shape during long-distance propagation, where the size of their main lobe can be tuned by an exponent's parameter. In particular, their amplitude envelope can be engineered to preserve the pin-like peak intensity pattern. In both theory and experiment, the OPBs are directly compared with radially symmetric abruptly autofocusing beams (AABs) under the same conditions. Furthermore, enhanced transmission and robustness of the OPBs are observed while traversing a scattering colloidal suspension, as compared to both AABs and conventional Bessel beams.

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.

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 score0.438
Threshold uncertainty score0.722

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.265
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