MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391638816 · doi:10.1149/ma2023-02341630mtgabs

(Invited) Near-Field Optics and Its Applications in Nanophotonic Devices: A Review

2023· review· en· W4391638816 on OpenAlexaff
Victor Wong, Giovanni Fanchini

Bibliographic record

VenueECS Meeting Abstracts · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNear-Field Optical Microscopy
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNanophotonicsField (mathematics)PhysicsEngineering physicsOpticsNanotechnologyMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In our presentation, we will offer an overview of aperture-type scanning near field optical microscopy (SNOM) – a family of nano-optical imaging techniques derived from scanning probe microscopy which are capable of subwavelength resolution, and the development of three dimensional (3D) SNOM methods undertaken by our group to locally image the distribution of the electromagnetic radiation in the proximity of nanoparticles and nano-objects.[1] We will discuss a few applications in which we took advantage of 3D-SNOM to design specific optical nanosystems for light harvesting device applications. Specific case studies that will be presented include the design of plasmonic thin-film solar cells enhanced by random arrays of copper nanoparticles,[2] and the use of 3D-SNOM for characterizing evanescent waveguides self-assembled from of copper nanoparticles assembled on thin films of graphene.[3] In the final part of our talk, we will we present near-field scanning thermoreflectance imaging (NeSTRI), a new pump-probe technique invented in our group (see Figure 1) in which an aperture-type SNOM is used to contactlessly determine the thermal conductivity of inhomogeneous thin films and low-dimensional systems at the nanoscale for heat-spreading and thermoelectric applications.[4,5] These examples well represent the versatility of SNOM imaging and its potential for designing an even wider family of nano-optical devices. [1] P Bazylewski, S Ezugwu, G Fanchini, Applied Sciences 7 (2017) 973 [2] S Ezugwu, H Ye, G Fanchini, Nanoscale 7 (2016) 252-260 [3] T Ouyang, A Akbari-Sharbaf, J Park, R Bauld, MG Cottam, G Fanchini, RSC Advances 5 (2015) 98814-98821 [4] S Ezugwu, S Kazemian, DYW Choi, G Fanchini, Nanoscale 9 (2017) 4097-4106 [5] S Kazemian, S Ezugwu, G Fanchini, Proc. SPIE 10926, Quantum Sensing and Nano Electronics and Photonics XVI, 109260L (1 February 2019); doi: 10.1117/12.2509828 Figure 1

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.009

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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 venueECS Meeting AbstractsSame topicNear-Field Optical MicroscopyFrench-language works237,207