Saturable Absorption and Bistable Switching of Single Mode Fiber Core‐Guided Light by a 6 nm‐thick, Few Layers Graphene Coating on the Cladding Surface
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The coupling of less than 80 µW of in‐plane polarized near‐infrared light in a 6 nm‐thick graphene layer deposited on an optical fiber produces important permittivity changes leading to bistability and self‐starting 50% modulation of over 1 W of continuous wave light in the core. These features arise from resonant coupling of core‐guided light into the cladding by a 12‐degree tilted, 1 cm long fiber Bragg grating via narrowband, polarization‐dependent resonances that allow the selection of cladding modes with electric fields polarized in the plane of the graphene. The pulse repetition rate of the modulation increases from 10 to 269 Hz for input powers ranging from 0.3 to 1.33 W in the core, with no evidence of saturation. Investigations into the origin of these effects through physical modelling and different experimental conditions point to photo‐induced Joule heating in the graphene layer giving rise to temperature increases of the order of 60 °C and corresponding permittivity changes in the graphene and underlying silica fiber. Those changes lead to shifts in the resonance positions which result in the equivalent of saturable absorption for light guided in the core without direct contact with the absorbing graphene layer.
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".