Möbius Laser Cavity Soliton Microcomb
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A highly promising approach to maintaining the integrity of a state under perturbations through nonlinear topological protection has been demonstrated in driven fibre loops [1]. This approach ensures that the state remains intact even in the presence of bifurcation induced by spontaneous symmetry breaking (SSB) in parametric generation. A key question is whether this topological protection can extend beyond parametric generation to complex states, such as lasing systems, that involve multiple nonlinear frequencies. A microresonator-filtered laser (Fig. 2a) offers flexibility in positioning the resonating laser modes within the microcavity (Fig. 2b) [2]. In a standard configuration, the Kerr microcavity aligns in group velocity with the lasing cavity. Lasing modes can be grouped as per their distinct detuning, enabling us to differentiate the stability and existence regions for specific groups of modes, which display different lasing thresholds. A simple method to move in this region is to adjust the laser cavity length so that the roundtrips of the two cavities are synchronised with different ratios. Their “birefringence”, quantified by FSR of the laser cavity, is a geometrical feature of the cavity and sets both a different carrier envelope offset (CEO) and lasing threshold for the two groups of modes. The two fields then have an effective opposite parity, i.e., a shift of π, thus realizing the Möbius topology.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".