All-dielectric silicon microring resonators with deeply sub-diffractive mode volumes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We report an approach to achieve deeply sub-diffractive mode volumes in all-dielectric ring resonators. Specifically, we leverage simultaneous usage of nanostructured subwavelength metamaterial waveguides and excitation of standing wave rather than traveling wave whispering gallery mode (WGM) resonances. This enables the mode volume to be reduced by factors greater than 10 to 100 compared to a diffraction-limited silicon microring resonator. We also highlight how a combination of diffractive mode volume scaling and sub-diffractive near-field intensity scaling indicates a lower limit for the sub-diffractive all-dielectric mode volume, $V_{\text{min}}'$, which scales in proportion to the mode order times the refractive index raised to the seventh power, i.e., $V_{\text{min}}' \sim m n^{-7}$. Through both numerical modeling and experimental characterization, we systematically investigate the modal properties of metawaveguide ring resonators comprised of Si and SiO$_2$. The sub-diffractive devices are experimentally shown to support standing wave resonances with high intrinsic quality factors, on the order of $10^4$ to $10^5$. These metamaterial ring resonators present a promising WGM platform for interfacing wavelength-scale optics with sub-wavelength matter.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".