MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3027751918 · doi:10.1109/jsen.2020.2995606

Reel-to-Reel Fabrication of In-Fiber Low-Loss and High-Temperature Stable Rayleigh Scattering Centers for Distributed Sensing

2020· article· en· W3027751918 on OpenAlexaff
Mohan Wang, Kehao Zhao, Sheng Huang, Jingyu Wu, Ping Lü, Paul R. Ohodnicki, Ping Lu, Ming-Jun Li, Stephen J. Mihailov, Kevin P. Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Sensors Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Fiber Optic Sensors
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
FundersU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsRayleigh scatteringMaterials scienceFemtosecondReflectometryOpticsLaserScatteringFabricationOptical fiberOptoelectronicsTime domainPhysicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a method of reel-to-reel femtosecond laser direct writing that enables the continuous inscription of low-loss and high-temperature stable Rayleigh scattering centers inside the core of single-mode optical fibers for distributed temperature sensing up to 1000°C. By examining the correlation between the Rayleigh backscattering profile and the cross-section morphology of femtosecond laser-induced nanograting in fiber cores, this paper reveals the mechanisms that underlie the fabrication of high-temperature stable distributed fiber sensors with low loss. By fine-tuning laser exposure conditions, the femtosecond laser-fabricated Rayleigh scattering enhanced section could achieve an optimized propagation loss of 0.01 dB/cm with an increased signal-to-noise ratio of over 35 dB for meters of lengths. Long-term high-temperature stability of the Rayleigh scattering enhanced section was successfully demonstrated, with improved thermal stability and signal-to-noise ratio. The fabrication method presented here provides a promising technique to improve the performance of Optical Frequency-Domain Reflectometry based distributed sensing for harsh environment applications.

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 score0.175
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations19
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Sensors JournalSame topicAdvanced Fiber Optic SensorsFrench-language works237,207