MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4327711019 · doi:10.1117/12.2655968

Prediction of medium chemical concentration with micro-ring resonators and deep learning

2023· article· en· W4327711019 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas Mikhail, Raghi S. El Shamy, Mohamed A. Swillam, Xun Li

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Chemical Sensor Technologies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConvolutional neural networkArtificial neural networkResonatorNoise (video)Computer scienceBiological systemGaussian noiseMean squared errorArtificial intelligenceMaterials sciencePattern recognition (psychology)MathematicsOptoelectronicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new approach for determining the concentration composition of a multi-element media using a micro-ring resonator (MRR) is proposed which allows for noise removal as well as moderately higher average accuracy. This method uses two neural networks, namely a convolutional neural network (CNN) and a deep neural network (DNN). The CNN differentiates the transmission spectrum from the noise. This spectrum is used to obtain selected features before being fed into the DNN, which determines the concentration of each chemical in the analyte. Both models are trained to work with a silicon on-insulator ring resonator operating between the infrared wavelengths of λ=1.46 μm to λ=1.6μm on mixtures of water, ethanol, methanol, and propanol by using simulation data obtained from finite difference eigenmode, although the same approach can be used with other designs and chemical combinations. The CNN was trained using the MRR transmission spectra superimposed with white Gaussian noise as well as Poisson noise to mimic various noise sources, while the DNN underwent training on the extracted features. Average Root-Mean-Square Error was for a range of concentrations from 0.0357-75% is 5.531%.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.218

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Chemical Sensor TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207