MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408506372 · doi:10.1364/josab.557849

Laser resonator with a defective Jones matrix designed with the polar decomposition theorem

2025· article· en· W4408506372 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Marie-Céline Gauthier Danve, Shawn Lapointe, Jean-Francois Bisson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Optical Society of America B · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotonic and Optical Devices
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsResonatorPolar decompositionPolarDecompositionLaserMatrix (chemical analysis)OpticsPhysicsMaterials scienceMathematicsQuantum mechanicsChemistryComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The polar decomposition theorem (PDT) makes it possible to express any Jones matrix as a combination of a pure polarizer and a pure retarder. We establish the relations that these two elements must have to produce a defective Jones matrix, where two polarization eigenstates coalesce into a single state to create an exceptional point (EP). We present a laser resonator whose structure directly derives from the PDT and whose round-trip Jones matrix, J RT , becomes defective for some values of the control parameters. We show conditions wherein J RT commutes with the time-reversal ( T ) operator. J RT transitions from exact T symmetry, where the eigenvectors of the Jones matrix and the time reversal operator are shared and eigenvalues are real, to broken T symmetry, where eigenvectors are distinct, and eigenvalues are a pair of complex conjugates. The EP, located at the boundary between the two regimes, is characterized by a local maximum in the round-trip mode loss and a dip in the degree of polarization of the eigenstates.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.222
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 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Optical Society of America BSame topicPhotonic and Optical DevicesFrench-language works237,207