MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Rapid Prototyping of Silicon Nitride Integrated Photonics Platforms for Visible to Mid-IR Circuits

2025· article· en· W4413462013 on OpenAlexaff
Batoul Hashemi, Cameron M. Naraine, Niloofar Majidian Taleghani, Jocelyn Bachman, Cameron Horvath, Bruno L. Segat Frare, Hamidu M. Mbonde, Pooya Torab Ahmadi, Stefanie Markevich, Kevin Setzer, Alexandria McKinlay, Khadijeh Miarabbas Kiani, Renjie Wang, P. Ravi Selvaganapathy, Peter Mascher, Andrew P. Knights, Jens H. Schmid, Pavel Cheben, Mirwais Aktary, Jonathan D. B. Bradley

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotonic and Optical Devices
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaApplied Nanotools (Canada)McMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotonicsPhotonic integrated circuitSilicon photonicsElectronic circuitOptoelectronicsSiliconSilicon nitrideIntegrated opticsComputer scienceMaterials scienceEngineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Silicon photonics (SiP) has emerged as a leading platform in integrated photonics enabling a variety of applications including high-speed communications, quantum photonics, gyroscopes, and light detection and ranging (LIDAR)[1]. SiP is well suited for operation in the O, S, and C telecommunications bands. However, silicon has fundamental material limitations that restrict its uses in visible (VIS) and near-infrared (NIR) applications, such as microscopy, augmented reality, and biological sensing [2]. As an alternative to silicon-on-insulator (SOI), silicon nitride (SiN)-based platforms have gained success in recent years and are now being offered by foundries through multi-project wafer (MPW) fabrication runs [2], [3].

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.234 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPhotonic and Optical Devices→French-language works237,207→