MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405183554 · doi:10.1364/ol.542575

Self-balanced and self-phase-corrected electro-optic sampling in a birefringent crystal

2024· article· en· W4405183554 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueOptics Letters · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicOptical and Acousto-Optic Technologies
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsOpticsBirefringenceSelf-phase modulationPhase (matter)Materials scienceNonlinear opticsPhysicsLaser

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mid-to-far-infrared (IR) spectral content is recorded using the novel self-balanced and self-phase-corrected electro-optical (EO) sampling arrangement. Self-balancing guarantees that the electric field emerging from the EO crystal yields a signal of zero via a Wollaston prism and balanced photodetector (i.e., without a wave plate following the EO crystal) in the absence of the electric field being sampled. Moreover, self-phase-correction ensures a nearly frequency-independent phase difference between the probe electric field pulse and the electric field pulse generated within the EO crystal via second-order nonlinear optical interactions. The self-balanced and self-phase corrected arrangement has the potential to yield enhancement of EO signals recorded using previously investigated birefringent crystals (implemented within traditional EO sampling geometries) and deliver optimum EO signal strengths when considering unexplored birefringent crystals.

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.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.893
Threshold uncertainty score0.895

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.236 · 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