Angle-resolved polarization control of surface plasmon resonance in superimposed metallic gratings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Gold-coated and in-plane single, double, and triple superimposed gratings were fabricated on azobenzene thin films, and their surface plasmon resonance (SPR) behavior was numerically simulated and experimentally validated. Single gratings exhibited strong SPR peaks only when the incident light polarization was aligned with the grating vector, double gratings redistributed the SPR light across multiple polarizations due to the reflection symmetry at lattice intersections, and triple gratings, having their vectors oriented in-plane at 60° increments, formed triangular lattices that supported robust, polarization-independent SPR excitation. Polarization-resolved transmission spectra and contour plots showed excellent agreement with numerical simulations, with minor deviations arising from fabrication tolerances. These results demonstrate a scalable method for tailoring polarization responses and establish triple gratings as a pathway to polarization-independent SPR devices. This approach simplifies optical configurations and broadens applications in biosensing, imaging, and integrated photonics.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".