MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404227872 · doi:10.1364/ol.542171

Optimization of fs-laser-induced voxels in nonlinear materials via over-correction of spherical aberration

2024· article· en· W4404227872 on OpenAlexafffund
Jérôme Lapointe, Samuel Pouliot, Albert Dupont, Théo Guérineau, Joseph Gaulin, Jean-Luc Delarosbil, Jonathan Lafrenière-Greig, Stéphane Gagnon, Younès Messaddeq, Réal Vallée

Bibliographic record

VenueOptics Letters · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLaser Material Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Foundation for Innovation
KeywordsOpticsSpherical aberrationLaserLaser beamsNonlinear systemMaterials scienceRefractive indexNonlinear opticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this Letter, over-correction of spherical aberration is used to counteract nonlinear effects such as Kerr self-focusing and plasma effects, resulting in more spherical and small-sized femtosecond laser-inscribed voxels within nonlinear materials. By strategically redirecting marginal focusing rays toward the beginning of the laser modification zone, the induced plasma prevents any rays from causing a structural modification beyond this zone, irrespective of any focus elongation caused by nonlinear effects. The method has been effectively validated across a range of materials, including ZnS, ZnSe, BIG, GeS 4 , and SiO 2 . A significant outcome is the achievement of quasi-spherical and (sub-)micrometer voxels in highly nonlinear materials. These findings open avenues for single-mode active waveguides and high-resolution patterning within nonlinear materials. The experiments are performed using a microscope objective equipped with a correction collar, a widely available tool in laboratories, highlighting the potential and versatility of the technique.

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 score0.237
Threshold uncertainty score0.496

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOptics LettersSame topicLaser Material Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207