MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3121652174 · doi:10.1117/1.jom.1.1.013502

Structurally and morphologically engineered chalcogenide materials for optical and photonic devices

2021· article· en· W3121652174 on OpenAlexaff
Casey M. Schwarz, Stephen M. Kuebler, Clara Rivero‐Baleine, Brandon M. Triplett, Myungkoo Kang, Quentin Altemose, Cesar Blanco, Kathleen A. Richardson, Qingyang Du, Skylar Deckoff–Jones, Juejun Hu, Yifei Zhang, Ying Pan, Carlos Rı́os

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Optical Microsystems · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicPhase-change materials and chalcogenides
Canadian institutionsLockheed Martin (Canada)
FundersAdvanced Research Projects AgencyDefense Advanced Research Projects Agency
KeywordsChalcogenideMaterials scienceLithographyPhotonicsFabricationNanotechnologyLens (geology)PhotolithographyNanoscopic scaleRefractive indexPlanarOptoelectronicsMetamaterialOpticsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We discuss several recent advances in the development of methodologies and techniques used to structurally and morphologically engineer chalcogenide (ChG) materials. We introduce two ChG patterning techniques both offering spatial resolution beyond the classical single-photon diffraction limit: multiphoton lithography and thermal scanning probe lithography (TSPL). The former was applied to produce nanoscale modifications in thermally deposited As2S3, and we realized gradient refractive index (GRIN) effective medium lens fabrication in multilayer As2S3-As2Se3 films with features as small as 120 nm using this approach. The GRIN lens was shown to be optically functional. ChG Ge-Sb-Se-Te (GSST) material was also explored for its potential as a phase-change material (PCM). We demonstrated nanoscale feature patterning using TSPL in PCMs with critical dimensions below 100 nm. In addition, new patterning methods, we also report solution processing of GSST PCMs as an alternative route for ChG film deposition. These new material processing and structuring techniques will offer new pathways for creating functional planar optical and photonic devices.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations19
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Optical MicrosystemsSame topicPhase-change materials and chalcogenidesFrench-language works237,207