Tunable rainbow light trapping in ultrathin resonator arrays
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Rainbow light trapping in plasmonic devices allows for field enhancement of multiple wavelengths within a single device. However, many of these devices lack precise control over spatial and spectral enhancement profiles and cannot provide extremely high localised field strengths. Here we present a versatile, analytical design paradigm for rainbow trapping in nanogroove arrays by utilising both the groove-width and groove-length as tuning parameters. We couple this design technique with fabrication through multilayer thin-film deposition and focused ion beam milling, which enables the realisation of unprecedented feature sizes down to 5 nm and corresponding extreme normalised local field enhancements up to 10 3 . We demonstrate rainbow trapping within the devices through hyperspectral microscopy and show agreement between the experimental results and simulation. The combination of expeditious design and precise fabrication underpins the implementation of these nanogroove arrays for manifold applications in sensing and nanoscale optics.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it