MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3158830729 · doi:10.1002/lpor.202000478

Bricked Subwavelength Gratings: A Tailorable On‐Chip Metamaterial Topology

2021· article· en· W3158830729 on OpenAlexaff
José Manuel Luque‐González, Alejandro Ortega‐Moñux, Robert Halir, Jens H. Schmid, Pavel Cheben, Íñigo Molina‐Fernández, J. Gonzalo Wangüemert‐Pérez

Bibliographic record

VenueLaser & Photonics Review · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotonic and Optical Devices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaNational Research Council Canada
FundersEuropean Regional Development FundJunta de AndalucíaMinisterio de Economía y CompetitividadMinisterio de Educación, Cultura y DeporteUniversidad de Málaga
KeywordsMetamaterialMaterials scienceLithographyOptoelectronicsFabricationPhotonicsBandwidth (computing)OpticsWaferComputer sciencePhysicsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Integrated metamaterials are redefining the capabilities of silicon photonic chips. In providing lithographic control over dielectric permittivity, dispersion and anisotropy, they are enabling photonic devices with unprecedented performance. However, the implementation of these materials at telecom wavelengths often requires a fabrication resolution of the order of 100 nm and below, pushing current wafer‐scale fabrication technology to its limits and hindering the widespread exploitation of on‐chip metamaterials. Herein, a subwavelength grating metamaterial with bricked topology is proposed, that provides lithographic control over the metamaterial dispersion and anisotropy using a single etch Manhattan‐like geometry with pixel dimensions up to 150 × 150 nm2, thereby easing the path toward fabrication at wafer‐scale. The behavior of these structures as biaxial crystals is analytically shown, validating their use in high performance on‐chip beam‐splitters. Through engineering of the metamaterial anisotropy tensor, the splitters are shown to exhibit sub‐decibel insertion losses and imbalance over a 400 nm design bandwidth, via 3D FDTD simulations. The excellent device performance is demonstrated over a 140 nm bandwidth, limited by the measurement setup.

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 score0.002

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations30
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLaser & Photonics ReviewSame topicPhotonic and Optical DevicesFrench-language works237,207