MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4231677018 · doi:10.1002/0471219282.eot350

Optical Switches

2003· other· en· W4231677018 on OpenAlexaff
K. L. Eddie Law

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotonic and Optical Devices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultiplexerOptical add-drop multiplexerOptical cross-connectOptical switchOptical pathComputer scienceOptical networkingBroadbandOptical Transport NetworkOptical performance monitoringPassive optical networkOptical engineeringComputer networkMultiwavelength optical networkingTelecommunicationsElectronic engineeringWavelength-division multiplexingMultiplexingOptoelectronicsFiber optic splitterOptical fiberEngineeringPhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Extensive research has been focused on constructing the next‐generation all‐optical broadband IP networks. The design goal is to avoid having any optical‐electrical‐optical conversions in a signal path. Therefore, the optical switches are to be the core part of all‐optical networks. An optical switch may cover optical cross connects and optical add‐drop multiplexers. In this article, we focus on the design of large‐scale optical cross connects (OXCs). There are passive and active OXCs. The path settings in networks are pre‐configured if passive OXCs, made with arrayed waveguide gratings (AWGs), are used. Active OXCs enable networks to set up paths dynamically. There are several new and promising technologies developed for the active OXCs. This article is focused on micro‐electromechanical systems (MEMS), liquid crystals and thermo‐bubble‐based switches. Their future deployments will definitely have a considerable impact on all‐optical IP networks.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.282

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0840.027

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.193 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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