MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3091905252 · doi:10.1364/josab.404007

Effect of dipole–dipole interactions on the one-photon and two-photon photoluminescence in an ensemble of quantum dots doped in a polymer matrix

2020· article· en· W3091905252 on OpenAlexafffund
Patrick D. Persaud, Mahi R. Singh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Optical Society of America B · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNonlinear Optical Materials Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsQuantum dotPhotonPhotoluminescenceDipoleMolecular physicsMaterials scienceQuenching (fluorescence)PhysicsFluorescenceAtomic physicsCondensed matter physicsOptoelectronicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have developed a theory for the one-photon and two-photon fluorescence of a nanohybrid composite comprised of an ensemble of quantum dots encased in a matrix of polymer. The quantum dots are comprised of four-level quantum emitters encased within a coating of dielectric material. The fluorescence of the quantum dot system is calculated using the master equation method where dipole–dipole interaction (DDI) coupling is present. The application of a probe field to the nanohybrid composite material in conjunction with the DDI between the quantum dots generates an enhancement of both the single-photon and double-photon fluorescence, and in certain conditions causes spectrum splitting. With a strong DDI field, the two-photon emission spectrum experiences slight quenching and shifts from one peak to two peaks. The dressed states are a result of strong coupling effects between the DDI field and the quantum dots. We generated an analytical expression for the fluorescence spectrum and intensity, and quantitatively compared it to experimental data in which ZnSe quantum dots were embedded within a P3HT polymer film, with our theory strongly correlating with the experiment. We also quantitatively compared our theory with experimental data that demonstrated the single-photon emission spectrum of colloidal quantum dots comprised of a CdZnS/ZnS gradient structure in varying probe field strengths. We found that our theory predicted the spectrum peak splitting that the experiment produced.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations15
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Optical Society of America BSame topicNonlinear Optical Materials StudiesFrench-language works237,207