Facile integration of electro-optic SiO<sub>2</sub>/ITO heterointerfaces in MIS structures for CMOS-compatible plasmonic waveguide modulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
By taking advantage of the absence of diffraction limit restrictions in plasmonic structures, strong modal confinement is made possible, paving the way for improved optical processes and miniaturized photonic circuit integration. Indium tin oxide (ITO) has emerged as a promising plasmonic material that serves as a relatively low-carrier density Drude metal by its electro-optic tunability and versatility as an integrative oxide. We herein demonstrate the facile integration of SiO2/ITO heterointerfaces into metal–insulator–semiconductor (MIS) electro-optic structures. The first MIS device employs a SiO2/ITO heterostructure grown on thin polycrystalline titanium nitride (poly-TiN) and capped at the ITO side with thin aluminum (Al) film contact electrode. The TiN interlayer acts as a bottom electrode, forming a metal–insulator–semiconductor-metal (MISM) heterojunction device, and grows directly on (100)-oriented silicon (Si). This MISM device enables one to examine the electrical properties of semiconductive ITO layers. The second MIS device incorporates a semiconductive ITO layer with a SiO2 dielectric spacer implemented on a silicon-on-insulator (SOI) platform, forming a graded-index coupled hybrid plasmonic waveguide (CHPW) modulator. This device architecture represents a crucial step towards realizing plasmonic modulation using oxide materials. The CHPW device performance presented herein provides a proof-of-concept that demonstrates the advantages offered by such device topology to perform optical modulation via charge carrier dispersion. The graded-index CHPW can be dynamically reconfigured for amplitude, phase, or 4-quadrature amplitude modulation utilizing a triode-like biasing strategy. It exhibited extinction ratio (ER) and insertion loss (IL) levels of around 1 dB/μm and 0.128 dB/μm, respectively, for a 10 μm waveguide length.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".