MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Differential Nonlinear Absorption of an Elliptically Polarized Femtosecond Vortex Beam in Tellurite Glass-=SUP=-*-=/SUP=-

2020· article· en· W4239065734 on OpenAlexaff
A.M. Alshehria, El Sayed Yousefa, A.A. Alshahrania, Akram Ibrahima, Nafis Ahmada, V.R. Bhardwajb

Bibliographic record

VenueЖурнал технической физики · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicGlass properties and applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFemtosecondOpticsMaterials scienceBeam (structure)Elliptical polarizationAbsorption (acoustics)LaserLinear polarizationPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present differential nonlinear absorption of an elliptically polarized femtosecond laser vortex beam carrying an angular momentum of l = -1 in tellurite glass. Transmission measurements were utilized to measure the nonlinear absorption of the glass on a shot-by-shot basis, and to investigate the modification threshold for the beam. Additionally, the effect of pulse energy on the polarization ellipse was investigated. The results revealed a reduction in the ellipticity as the incident pulse energy was increased. Non-rotation of the ellipsoid indicated that there is no change in the third order nonlinear susceptibility (chi (3) ) of the telluride glass upon irradiation by the femtosecond beam. The transmission of multiple pulses through the same spot revealed that although an effect was evident for the first ten pulses, the subsequent pulses had no effect. The transmission of a complete cycle of increasing and decreasing pulse energies revealed no hysteresis of the femtosecond laser vortex beam in tellurite glass in contrast to that reported for Gaussian beams in silica glass. Keywords: vortex beam, tellurite glass, nonlinear absorption.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.201
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0030.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueЖурнал технической физикиSame topicGlass properties and applicationsFrench-language works237,207