Determination of off-axis diffraction efficiency for fresnel microlenses using rigorous coupled wave analysis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Miniature diffractive lenses are an integral part of many modern optical systems; from optical disc pick-up heads to optical interconnects. Large feature size diffractive lenses are easily modeled using simple scalar diffraction theory. However, as the feature size of diffractive lenses becomes smaller the theoretical modeling of the systems becomes more complex; a rigorous diffractive theory becomes necessary. This thesis will determine the difference in analyzing a diffractive minilens with either a scalar or rigorous diffraction theory for a free-space optical interconnect with fast Fresnel lenses. The analysis is done for minilenses with f/# of 2.9 to 8. The results of the analysis show that there is a great amount of non-uniformity in the diffraction efficiency. In particular, for fast lenses, the diffraction efficiency dropped significantly from the center of the lens to the outer edge of the lens. There was no significant polarization sensitivity in the lenses. An experiment was conducted that supported the theoretical results.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it