Bidirectional Optical Non‐Reciprocity in a Multi‐Mode Cavity Optomechanical System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Optical non‐reciprocity that allows unidirectional flow of optical field is pivoted on time reversal symmetry breaking, which originates from radiation pressure because of light–matter interaction in cavity optomechanical systems. Here, the non‐reciprocal transport of optical signals across two ports via three optical modes optomechanically coupled to the mechanical excitations of two nanomechanical resonators (NMRs) is studied under the influence of strong classical drive fields and weak probe fields. It is found that there exists the conversion of reciprocal to non‐reciprocal signal transmission via tuning the drive fields and perfect non‐reciprocal transmission of output fields is realized when the effective cavity detuning parameters are near resonant to the NMRs' frequencies. The unidirectional non‐reciprocal transport is robust to the optomechanical couplings around resonance conditions. Moreover, the loss rates of cavities play an inevitable role in the unidirectional flow of signal across the two ports. Bidirectional transmission can also be controlled by the phase changes associated with the probe and drive fields along with their relative phase. This scheme may provide a foundation for the compact non‐reciprocal communication and quantum information processing, thus enabling novel devices that route photons in unconventional ways such as all‐optical diodes, optical transistors, and optical switches.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".