MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407250369 · doi:10.1088/2040-8986/adb3b9

Diffractive elements with multi-ring spectra

2025· article· en· W4407250369 on OpenAlexaff
Saifollah Rasouli, Davud Hebri, Seyed Mohammad Hasan Narimani, Sergey A. Ponomarenko

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Optics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicOptics and Image Analysis
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersInstitute for Advanced Studies in Basic Sciences
KeywordsOpticsRing (chemistry)Spectral linePhysicsAstronomyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We introduce pure amplitude almost periodic structures (APSs) with multi-ring spatial spectra, characterized by four degrees of freedom in the spectral domain: the number of rings, the number of impulses on each ring, the radius of each ring, and the angular positions of the impulses within a ring. A comprehensive mathematical framework is developed to describe the diffraction of arbitrary optical beams by such structures. This framework is theoretically validated and experimentally verified through the analysis of diffraction patterns produced under Gaussian beam illumination. The method is systematically tested on various APS configurations, including structures with one, two, three, and four rings, as well as different impulse arrangements within these rings, demonstrating its robustness and adaptability. Notably, each APS achieves a high diffraction efficiency, transferring approximately 1 / ( ( 2 N + 1 ) ( 2 N ) ) of the transmitted beam power to each impulse, where 2N represents the total number of impulses excluding the zero-diffraction order. This efficiency is significantly superior to that of conventional spatial light modulators. Additionally, a detailed comparison between theoretical predictions and experimental measurements of power ratios for the diffraction orders confirms the accuracy and reliability of our approach. The versatility of APS makes them highly suitable for a range of applications, including optical communications, optical tweezing, multi-particle trapping, screening, micro-manipulation, and microscopy. For example, APS-enhanced Gaussian lattice beams can improve imaging speed in fluorescence microscopy. Furthermore, their ability to enable three-dimensional optical multiple trapping and beam splitting positions APS as a powerful tool for advancing laser and optical research.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of OpticsSame topicOptics and Image AnalysisFrench-language works237,207