MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225133295 · doi:10.1515/joc-2021-0264

An investigation and analysis of plasmonic modulators: a review

2022· review· en· W4225133295 on OpenAlexaff
Diksha Chauhan, Zen Sbeah, Ram Prakash Dwivedi, Jean‐Michel Nunzi, Mohindra Singh Thakur

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Optical Communications · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersShoolini University of Biotechnology and Management Sciences
KeywordsPlasmonMaterials scienceOptoelectronicsOptical modulatorModulation (music)Lithium niobateNanotechnologyPhase modulationOpticsPhysicsPhase noise

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Plasmonics is an emerging and very advantageous technology which provides high speed and tiny size devices for fulfilling the demand of today’s high-speed world. SPPs are the information carrying elements in plasmonics, which are capable of breaking the diffraction limit. Plasmonics technology has shown its application in uncountable nanophotonic applications like switching, filtering, light modulation, sensing and in many more fields. Modulators are the key components of integrated photonic system. Various modulators which work on different effects are discussed in this study for providing a universal idea of modulators to researchers. Some useful plasmonic active materials are also discussed which are used in most of plasmonic modulators and other active devices. Previously, many researchers have worked on many kinds of modulators and switches, which operate on different kind of operating principles. For providing an overview about plasmonic modulators, their classification and their operation, we have discussed the state of art of some previously introduced modulators and switches which operates on electro-refractive effects and include electro-optic effect, Pockels effect, free charge carrier dispersion effect, phase change effect, elasto-optic effect, magneto-optic effect, and thermo-optic effect. Instead of different effects used in plasmonic switches and modulators different active materials like liquid crystals, graphene, vanadium di-oxide, chalcogenides, polymers, indium tin oxide, bismuth ferrite, barium titanate, and lithium niobate are also explained with their properties. Additionally, we also compared modulators based on different effects in terms of their design characteristics and performances.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations18
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Optical CommunicationsSame topicOptical Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207