MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407931459 · doi:10.1088/1402-4896/adba19

Generative tandem neural network for optimization of nanophotonic color splitters

2025· article· en· W4407931459 on OpenAlexafffund
Didulani Acharige, Eric Johlin

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysica Scripta · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic Imaging
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceNanophotonicsSplitterExtrapolationTopology optimizationTandemArtificial neural networkInverseArtificial intelligenceTopology (electrical circuits)OpticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Tandem neural networks have seen success in the inverse design of nanophotonic structures. However, unlike other generative inverse design approaches, these networks typically suffer from a significant limitation as they are single input single output networks with zero diversity. To address this limitation we propose a novel single input, multiple output tandem network specifically for the inverse design of color splitter nanophotonic structures. The color splitters can separate and redirect different colors of light into spatially separated pixels, thereby replacing the color filters used in digital cameras to mitigate absorptive losses. We additionally combine iterative transfer learning approaches to allow training on a small dataset of higher quality samples created through topology optimization, with the training based on a labeled dataset of just 128 labelled samples. The forward network is shown to work well in both interpolation and extrapolation, while a deficiency in the performance of the inverse network in extrapolation can be overcome by use of an additional genetic algorithm optimization. Overall, the tandem network combined with genetic optimization allows significant improvement in the performance of the nanophotonic structures, even compared to traditional gradient-based topology optimization. This technique promises more effective and resource-efficient approach at general optimization, marking a significant advance in the algorithmic design of nanophotonic devices.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysica ScriptaSame topicPhotoacoustic and Ultrasonic ImagingFrench-language works237,207