MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Microring Modulator Detuning for Optimal Optical 4-PAM Transmitter Performance Metrics

2024· article· en· W4409992448 on OpenAlexaff
Ali Sadr, Anthony Chan Carusone

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransmitterElectro-optic modulatorOptical modulation amplitudeComputer scienceOptical performance monitoringOptical filterModulation (music)Electronic engineeringWavelength-division multiplexingPhase modulationOptical modulatorPhysicsOptoelectronicsTelecommunicationsOptical amplifierOpticsEngineeringAcousticsPhase noise

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Microring modulator (MRM)-based optical transmitters are of interest for communication at data rates beyond 10 Gbps offering compact size and improved energy efficiency compared to Mach-Zehnder modulators, particularly for wavelength-division multiplexing (WDM) transceivers. However, the resonance wavelength of MRMs is susceptible to process and temperature variations, potentially deviating significantly from the laser wavelength within a free spectral range (FSR). To address this challenge, it is essential to optimally adjust and detune the MRM resonance wavelength and stabilize it against temperature fluctuations. This detuning has notable impacts on critical optical transmitter metrics, including optical modulation amplitude (OMA), extinction ratio (ER), and level separation mismatch ratio (RLM). This paper investigates the influence of MRM resonance detuning on these metrics, uncovering essential trade-offs between them and providing valuable insights for the design and optimization of MRM-based optical transmitters.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOptical Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207