MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3093999681 · doi:10.1103/physreva.102.043522

Single-mode lasers using parity-time-symmetric polarization eigenstates

2020· article· en· W3093999681 on OpenAlexafffund
Jean‐François Bisson, Yves Christian Nonguierma

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. A/Physical review, A · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum Mechanics and Non-Hermitian Physics
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Moncton
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsParity (physics)LaserPhysicsPolarization (electrochemistry)Eigenvalues and eigenvectorsQuantum mechanicsOpticsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Anisotropic mirrors are used to form a laser resonator exhibiting non-Hermitian, parity-time (PT) symmetric, polarization states. The relative angle of the two mirrors' principal axes is used to control the degree of nonhermiticity. A sharp symmetry-breaking transition is observed at a specific angle, called the exceptional point, where the two states coalesce into a single polarization state and the interference pattern produced by counterpropagating (CP) waves vanishes. At a smaller angle, in the unbroken PT symmetry regime, the polarization state experiencing higher losses is suppressed. In the broken-symmetry regime, the two polarization states coexist, but the orthogonality of the CP waves favors single longitudinal mode emission by suppressing the interference pattern of the standing wave. The two regimes meet at the exceptional point, where a unique polarization state exists in a resonator free from interference intensity pattern. Microchip PT-symmetric lasers operating at the exceptional point are thus an attractive solution to achieve single-mode operation from a miniature monolithic device without any intracavity element.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.431
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.311 · 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.

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

Citations22
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. A/Physical review, ASame topicQuantum Mechanics and Non-Hermitian PhysicsFrench-language works237,207