MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408792189 · doi:10.1109/jlt.2025.3554096

Inverse-Designed 90-Degree Silicon Nitride Bends for the C Band

2025· article· en· W4408792189 on OpenAlexafffund
Julián L. Pita, Narges Dalvand, Michaël Ménard

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Lightwave Technology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicGaN-based semiconductor devices and materials
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCMC Microsystems
KeywordsDegree (music)Silicon nitrideInverseSiliconMaterials scienceInverse problemOptoelectronicsOpticsElectronic engineeringEngineeringMathematicsPhysicsAcousticsMathematical analysisGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We demonstrate the use of inverse design to achieve high-efficiency, compact$90^{\circ }$bends with radii as small as$6 \,{\mu }\mathrm{m}$with silicon nitride waveguides. These bends are designed for the TE polarization of single-mode waveguides with a cross-section of$850 \,{\mathrm{nm}}$×$400 \,{\mathrm{nm}}$, optimized for the C-band. Both simulations and experimental results confirm that the freeform bends obtained through inverse design outperform conventional circular and Euler bends across four footprint sizes ranging from$6$×$6 \,{\mu }\mathrm{m}^{2}$to$21$×$21 \,{{\mu }\mathrm{m}}^{2}$. All inverse-designed bends were fabricated using an e-beam lithography process and designed with a minimum feature size of 160 nm, ensuring maximum compatibility with commercial optical lithography processes and viability for large-scale production. Simulations for the$6 \,{\mu }\mathrm{m}$radius bends show that the best freeform bend exhibits an average loss of$1.62 \,{\mathrm{dB}}$across the entire C-band, compared to$2.88 \,{\mathrm{dB}}$for circular bends and$3.46 \,{\mathrm{dB}}$for Euler bends. Experimental results align well with simulations, with measured losses of$1.89 \,{\mathrm{dB}}$,$2.86 \,{\mathrm{dB}}$, and$3.44 \,{\mathrm{dB}}$for the freeform, circular, and Euler bends, respectively. For the$11 \,{\mu }\mathrm{m}$bending radius, one of the freeform structures demonstrated low losses of$0.18 \,{\mathrm{dB}}$, representing reductions by factors of up to$6.6$and$1.8$times compared to Euler and circular bends, respectively. For the$16 \,{\mu }\mathrm{m}$and$21 \,{\mu }\mathrm{m}$radii, the best freeform bends achieved average losses of$0.08 \,{\mathrm{dB}}$and$0.11 \,{\mathrm{dB}}$per$90^{\circ }$bend across the$1530 \,{\mathrm{nm}}$to$1565 \,{\mathrm{nm}}$wavelength range. These results highlight the potential of inverse design to enable significantly more compact routing in silicon nitride photonic chips, facilitating the development of high-density photonic circuits.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Lightwave TechnologySame topicGaN-based semiconductor devices and materialsFrench-language works237,207