MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391859595 · doi:10.1364/ofs.2023.w2.5

Improved Closed-Loop Slow-Light Temperature Sensor With Millidegree Resolution for Laser Cooling

2023· article· en· W4391859595 on OpenAlexaff
Enkeleda Balliu, Lauris Talbot, Chun-Wei Chen, Benjamin Frey, Bailey Meehan, Thomas W. Hawkins, John Ballato, Tommy Boilard, Martin Bernier, Michel J. F. Digonnet

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicOptical properties and cooling technologies in crystalline materials
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLoop (graph theory)Temperature measurementMaterials scienceOpticsTemperature controlClosed loopLaserResolution (logic)Laser coolingOptoelectronicsControl theory (sociology)PhysicsComputer scienceEngineeringMathematicsThermodynamicsControl (management)Artificial intelligenceControl engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For applications such as laser cooling of doped fibers, where it is critical to measure accurately the temperature of a cooled fiber that is very close to room temperature, it is paramount to develop a reliable, very short (mm) fiber temperature sensor with millikelvin resolution and very little drift. We report a second generation of a unique slow-light fiber Bragg grating (FBG) temperature sensor that meets these stringent requirements. Experiments and modeling establish that its temperature response depends only on well-known material constants of the silica FBG and the response of the probe laser’s wavelength controller. The response is independent of the linewidth of the slow-light resonance, hence different FBGs and/or resonances have the exact same response. Examples of measured cooling in optically pumped Yb-doped fibers show that more reliable thermal contact with the cooled fiber is obtained by wrapping the FBG and the cooled fiber.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

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 science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOptical properties and cooling technologies in crystalline materialsFrench-language works237,207