MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3196103355 · doi:10.1515/nanoph-2021-0110

A review of silicon subwavelength gratings: building break‐through devices with anisotropic metamaterials

2021· review· en· W3196103355 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNanophotonics · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotonic and Optical Devices
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
FundersMinisterio de Educación, Cultura y DeporteUniversidad de Málaga
KeywordsMetamaterialPhotonicsNanophotonicsSilicon photonicsMaterials scienceGratingSiliconPhotonic metamaterialOptoelectronicsComputer scienceNanotechnologyOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Silicon photonics is playing a key role in areas as diverse as high‐speed optical communications, neural networks, supercomputing, quantum photonics, and sensing, which demand the development of highly efficient and compact light‐processing devices. The lithographic segmentation of silicon waveguides at the subwavelength scale enables the synthesis of artificial materials that significantly expand the design space in silicon photonics. The optical properties of these metamaterials can be controlled by a judicious design of the subwavelength grating geometry, enhancing the performance of nanostructured devices without jeopardizing ease of fabrication and dense integration. Recently, the anisotropic nature of subwavelength gratings has begun to be exploited, yielding unprecedented capabilities and performance such as ultrabroadband behavior, engineered modal confinement, and sophisticated polarization management. Here we provide a comprehensive review of the field of subwavelength metamaterials and their applications in silicon photonics. We first provide an in‐depth analysis of how the subwavelength geometry synthesizes the metamaterial and give insight into how properties like refractive index or anisotropy can be tailored. The latest applications are then reviewed in detail, with a clear focus on how subwavelength structures improve device performance. Finally, we illustrate the design of two ground‐breaking devices in more detail and discuss the prospects of subwavelength gratings as a tool for the advancement of silicon photonics.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.756
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.269 · 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