Design automation of photonic resonator weights
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
Neuromorphic photonic processors based on resonator weight banks are an emerging candidate technology for enabling modern artificial intelligence (AI) in high speed analog systems. These purpose-built analog devices implement vector multiplications with the physics of resonator devices, offering efficiency, latency, and throughput advantages over equivalent electronic circuits. Along with these advantages, however, often come the difficult challenges of compensation for fabrication variations and environmental disturbances. In this paper, we review sources of variation and disturbances from our experiments, as well as mathematically define quantities that model them. Then, we introduce how the physics of resonators can be exploited to weight and sum multiwavelength signals. Finally, we outline automated design and control methodologies necessary to create practical, manufacturable, and high accuracy/precision resonator weight banks that can withstand operating conditions in the field. This represents a road map for unlocking the potential of resonator weight banks in practical deployment scenarios.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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