MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312734777 · doi:10.1051/epjconf/202226601010

State-of-the-art and next-generation integrated photonic design

2022· article· en· W4312734777 on OpenAlexaff
James Pond, Xu Wang, Zeqin Lu, Federico Duque Gomez, Ahsan Ul Alam, Sebastian Gitt, Dylan McGuire, Jeff F. Young, Gilles Lamant

Bibliographic record

VenueEPJ Web of Conferences · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotonic and Optical Devices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaAnsys (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotonicsComputer scienceSchematicWorkflowComputer architecturePhotonic integrated circuitMultiplexingBandwidth (computing)Electronic engineeringSystems engineeringEngineeringTelecommunicationsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The relentless need for higher bandwidth, lower power and lower cost data communications has driven tremendous innovation in integrated photonics in recent years. This innovation has been supported by state-of-the-art electronic-photonic design automation (EPDA) workflows, which enable process design kit (PDK) centred schematic driven design and layout, as well as statistically enabled electro-optical simulation. In addition, custom components can be introduced and optimized for a specific foundry process using advanced methods such as photonic inverse design and machine learning. While much of the innovation has been motivated by data communications, it has enabled a variety of different applications such as sensing, integrated LiDAR and quantum information technologies. We discuss the latest innovations in EPDA workflows and show how a silicon photonic ring-based wavelength demultiplexing (WDM) system can be easily designed, simulated and implemented. In addition, we discuss the extension of these workflows to support the design and simulation of quantum photonic devices, enabling designers to consider the effects of realistic sources and manufacturing imperfections when designing quantum building blocks to meet specific fidelity and fault tolerance thresholds.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.667
Threshold uncertainty score0.411

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.186 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEPJ Web of ConferencesSame topicPhotonic and Optical DevicesFrench-language works237,207