MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4378766967 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2305.17620

Probing Ring Resonator Sensor Based on Vernier Effect

2023· preprint· en· W4378766967 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Wenwen Zhang, Hao Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotonic and Optical Devices
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCMC Microsystems
KeywordsVernier scaleResonatorBend radiusMultiplexerOpticsFree spectral rangeRADIUSInsertion lossMaterials scienceBendingMultiplexingElectronic engineeringComputer scienceEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Vernier effect has seen extensive application in optical structures, serving to augment the free spectral range (FSR). A substantial FSR is vital in a myriad of applications including multiplexers, enabling a broad, clear band comparable to the C-band to accommodate a maximum number of channels. Nevertheless, a large FSR often conflicts with bending loss, as it necessitates a smaller resonator radius, thus increase the insertion loss in the bending portion. To facilitate FSR expansion without amplifying bending loss, we employed cascaded and parallel racetrack resonators and ring resonators of varying radius that demonstrate the Vernier effect. In this study, we designed, fabricated, and tested multiple types of racetrack resonators to validate the Vernier effect and its FSR extension capabilities. Our investigations substantiate that the Vernier effect, based on cascaded and series-coupled micro-ring resonator (MRR) sensors, can efficiently mitigate intra-channel cross-talk at higher data rates. This is achieved by providing larger input-to-through suppression, thus paving the way for future applications.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.176
Teacher spread0.133 · 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 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 venuearXiv (Cornell University)→Same topicPhotonic and Optical Devices→French-language works237,207→