Foundry-Processed Compact and Broadband Adiabatic Optical Power Splitters with Strong Fabrication Tolerance
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Optical power splitters play a crucial role as the fundamental building blocks for many integrated optical devices. They should have low losses, a broad bandwidth, and a high tolerance to fabrication errors. Adiabatic optical power splitters inherently possess these qualities while being compatible with foundry processes well suited for mass production. The long device lengths of adiabatic power splitters, however, are a limiting factor to achieve compact device sizes, which must be reduced. Here, we used a polynomial taper profile optimization algorithm to design 1 × 2 and 2 × 2 adiabatic power splitters with significantly shorter lengths than their adiabatic counterparts. The best-performing 1 × 2 and 2 × 2 power splitters had 20 μm and 16 μm coupling lengths, respectively. Our designs had minimum feature sizes ranging from 140 nm to 200 nm, and our measurements averaged across nine different chips showed excellent consistency in performance for devices with 180 nm and 200 nm minimum features. Both the 1 × 2 and 2 × 2 adiabatic optical power splitters had excess losses less than 0.7 dB over a 100 nm bandwidth, with a standard deviation lower than 0.3 dB. Furthermore, our measurements showed splitting ratios within 50 ± 3% over a 130 nm bandwidth. We also demonstrated the design of 1 × 2 power splitters with arbitrary splitting ratios, where splitting ratios ranging from 50:50 to 94:6 were achieved with standard deviations between 2% and 6%.
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.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it