Simulation and Experiment of the Trapping Trajectory for Janus Particles in Linearly Polarized Optical Traps
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The highly focused laser beam is capable of confining micro-sized particle in its focus. This is widely known as optical trapping. The Janus particle is composed of two hemispheres with different refractive indexes. In a linearly polarized optical trap, the Janus particle tends to align itself to an orientation where the interface of the two hemispheres is parallel to the laser propagation as well as the polarization direction. This enables a controllable approach that rotates the trapped particle with fine accuracy and could be used in partial measurement. However, due to the complexity of the interaction of the optical field and refractive index distribution, the trapping trajectory of the Janus particle in the linearly polarized optical trap is still uncovered. In this paper, we focus on the dynamic trapping process and the steady position and orientation of the Janus particle in the optical trap from both simulation and experimental aspects. The trapping process recorded by a high speed camera coincides with the simulation result calculated using the T-matrix model, which not only reveals the trapping trajectory, but also provides a practical simulation solution for more complicated structures and trapping motions.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".