Enhancement of Radiative and Nonradiative Emission in Random Lasing Plasmonic Nanofibers
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 A theory of light–matter interaction in plasmonic nanofibers is developed. When probe light propagates inside the nanofiber, it induces surface plasmon polariton (SPPs) and electric dipoles in metallic nanoparticles. The dipoles interact with each other via dipole–dipole interaction (DDI). The energy of photonic bound states in the presence of the SPP and DDI fields are calculated. It has been demonstrated that the number of bound states can be controlled by the strength of SPP and DDI couplings. The spontaneous decay rate for the quantum emitters have been calculated and it is found that decay rate is enhanced when the exciton energy is in resonance with the bound photon energy. Further, it is predicted that the spontaneous decay rate also enhances when the exciton and SPP energies are in resonance. Finally, the photoluminescence in nanofiber is calculated using the density matrix method. The authors' theory is compared with experiments and found a good agreement between theory and experiments. It has been demonstrated that the quenching of the photoluminescence intensity increases as the concentration of the MNPs increases. The findings of the paper can be used to fabricate random lasers and also for inventing new types of nanosensors and nanoswitches.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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