MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399391580 · doi:10.1364/ao.527243

Coherent homodyne detection for amplified cross-beam electric-field induced second harmonic

2024· article· en· W4399391580 on OpenAlexafffund
Jean‐Baptiste Billeau, Patrick Cusson, Arthur Dogariu, Denis V. Seletskiy, Stephan Reuter

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Optics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSpectroscopy and Laser Applications
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersInstitut TransMedTechNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsElectric fieldOpticsPhysicsSIGNAL (programming language)Signal beamHomodyne detectionDirect-conversion receiverHarmonicBeam (structure)Local oscillatorAcousticsPhase noiseComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The electric-field induced second harmonic (E-FISH) signal sensing is commonly used as a nonlinear optical technique to probe electric fields inside a plasma region. Cross-beam E-FISH is being investigated to improve spatial resolution by defining the interaction volume via a controlled geometry of two overlapping noncolinear optical beams. This drastic reduction in interaction length of the electric field and laser region results in a significant signal reduction. To overcome this signal reduction, we introduce coherent amplification of the cross-beam E-FISH signal by mixing the low E-FISH signal with a phase-locked bright local oscillator. We demonstrate enhancement of the signal. By introducing a local oscillator we can now derive the polarity of the measured electric field through the phase of the homodyne signal. To illustrate the technique, we, for the first time, to the best of our knowledge, measure the magnitude and the direction of the electric field in a cold atmospheric pressure plasma jet, which dynamically follows the profile of the applied bias current.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.932

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations9
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied OpticsSame topicSpectroscopy and Laser ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207