MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3080992424 · doi:10.1103/physreva.102.061501

Quantum nondemolition photon counting with a hybrid electromechanical probe

2020· article· en· W3080992424 on OpenAlexafffund
Junjie Liu, Hsing-Ta Chen, Dvira Segal

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. A/Physical review, A · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMechanical and Optical Resonators
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersBasic Energy SciencesOffice of ScienceNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsPhysicsPhotonQuantum opticsQuantumPhoton countingMeasure (data warehouse)Coupling (piping)Quantum mechanicsOptoelectronicsOpticsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quantum nondemolition (QND) measurements of photons is a much pursued endeavor in the field of quantum optics and quantum information processing. Here, we propose a hybrid optoelectromechanical platform that integrates a cavity system with a hybrid electromechanical probe for QND photon counting. Building upon a mechanical-mode-mediated nonperturbative electro-optical dispersive coupling, our protocol performs the QND photon counting measurement by means of the current-voltage characteristics of the probe. In particular, we show that the peak voltage shift of the differential conductance is linearly dependent on the photon occupation number, thus providing a sensitive measure of the photon number, especially in the strong optomechanical coupling regime. Given that our proposed hybrid system is compatible with state-of-the-art experimental techniques, we discuss its implementations and anticipate applications in quantum optics and polariton physics.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 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

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. A/Physical review, ASame topicMechanical and Optical ResonatorsFrench-language works237,207