MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413940245 · doi:10.1364/ol.572775

Carbon nanotube emission enhancement in a silicon photonic crystal nanobeam cavity

2025· article· en· W4413940245 on OpenAlexaff
Jianhao Zhang, Jean‐René Coudevylle, Carlos Alonso Ramos, Daniele Melati, Delphine Marris‐Morini, Éric Cassan, Arianna Filoramo, Nicolas Dubreuil, Laurent Vivien

Bibliographic record

VenueOptics Letters · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotonic and Optical Devices
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
FundersAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsCarbon nanotubeMaterials scienceSiliconOpticsPhotonicsOptoelectronicsNanotechnologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, we demonstrate a substantial enhancement in photoluminescence from semiconducting single-walled carbon nanotubes through integration with a small-mode-volume silicon photonic crystal nanobeam cavity. Our design approach enables precise control of the cavity resonance over a wavelength range exceeding 30 nm, effectively covering the emission spectrum of semiconducting single-walled carbon nanotubes while maintaining stable optical performance. The fabricated nanobeam cavities, embedded with polymer-sorted semiconducting single-walled carbon nanotubes, exhibit low modal volumes of V = 0.07(λ/n)3, facilitating strong light–matter interaction characterized by high coupling efficiency and a Purcell factor on the order of 10000(λ/n)3 at a wavelength of 1570 nm. This hybrid integration exploits the robust light–matter interaction properties of the cavity, leading to a pronounced increase in emission intensity from the carbon nanotubes.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 venueOptics LettersSame topicPhotonic and Optical DevicesFrench-language works237,207