MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

A Reconfigurable Nanophotonic Architecture based on Phase Change Material

2021· article· en· W3217489926 on OpenAlexaff
Parya Zolfaghari, Sébastien Le Beux

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotonic and Optical Devices
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNature
KeywordsComputer scienceControl reconfigurationElectronic engineeringScalabilitySilicon photonicsOptical switchResonatorPhotonicsMaterials scienceOptoelectronicsEngineeringEmbedded system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Silicon photonics is an emerging technology allowing to take the advantage of high-speed light propagation to accelerate computing kernels in integrated systems. Micrometer-scale optical devices call for reconfigurable architectures to maximize resources utilization. Typical reconfigurable optical computing architectures involve micro-ring resonators for electro-optic modulation. However, such devices require voltage and thermal tuning to compensate for fabrication process variability and thermal sensitivity. This power-hungry calibration leads to significant static power overhead, thus limiting the scalability of optical architectures. In this paper, we propose to use non-volatile Phase Change Materials (PCM) elements to route optical signals only through the required resonators, hence saving calibration energy of bypassed resonators. The non-volatility of PCM elements allows maintaining the optical path. We investigate the efficiency of the PCM elements on the Reconfigurable Directed Logic (RDL) architecture. Results show that the static power is reduced by 32.8% on average and that 30% power saving is obtained from 158kHz reconfiguration frequency.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPhotonic and Optical Devices→French-language works237,207→