UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY Towards Macroscopic Quantum Effects Using Optomechanical and Optical Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this thesis, I studied two different approaches which are promising for creating macroscopic quantum superpositions. The first approach, which is the main focus of this thesis, is based on optomechanical sys-tems. The basic challenge to realize quantum effects in optomechanical systems, is considered to be the weak optomechanical coupling rate compared to the decoherence rates of the system caused by the cavity and mechanical damping. To enhance the optomechanical coupling it has been suggested to pump the cavity with coherent laser light [1]. By this method the strong coupling regime in which the optomechanical coupling rate exceeds all decoherence rates has been demonstrated very recently [2, 3]. It is also known that the optomechanical systems may exhibit nonlinear behaviours such as bistability. After introducing the basic ideas of optomechanical systems in chapter 1, in chapter 2 we studied the connection between optomechanical entanglement and bistability. In chapter 3, we studied the drawback of using a laser to enhance the interaction. We stud-ied the effect of the laser phase noise, as an additional decoherence channel, on the optome-
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".