MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3108823711 · doi:10.1364/josab.403604

On-chip Ge, InGaAs, and colloidal quantum dot photodetectors: comparisons for application in silicon photonics

2020· article· en· W3108823711 on OpenAlexafffund
Qiwei Xu, Jun Hu, Xihua Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Optical Society of America B · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotonic and Optical Devices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsOptoelectronicsPhotonicsResponsivityDark currentPhotodetectorIndium gallium arsenideGallium arsenideMaterials scienceQuantum dotSilicon photonicsSiliconGermaniumBandwidth (computing)Indium arsenideComputer scienceTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The past twenty years have seen explosive growth in silicon photonics technology. It has revolutionized numerous fields such high-speed optical interconnects in data centers. A photodetector (PD) is one of the key building blocks in silicon photonics, enabling on-chip light detection. Here a comprehensive study has been demonstrated in which three materials, germanium (Ge), indium gallium arsenide (InGaAs), and colloidal quantum dots (CQD), are compared for a PD integrated with a waveguide in silicon photonics. Comparisons are conducted by assuming InGaAs and CQD PDs have the same interface quality as mature Ge PD technology. With this premise, we intend to predict future InGaAs and CQD PD performances. Figures of merit such as dark current, responsivity, and RF bandwidth are compared using simulations. With the premise that epitaxial InGaAs on silicon is as of high quality as epi-Ge, results found that the InGaAs PD is advantageous over the Ge PD with higher-efficiency bandwidth product and lower dark current. CQD PD, on the other hand, is slow but has the lowest dark current, which is suitable for medium-speed applications where ultralow noise is required.

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)0.000
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.240
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Optical Society of America BSame topicPhotonic and Optical DevicesFrench-language works237,207