Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 30 references

Scalable intensity-based photonic matrix-vector multiplication processor using single-wavelength time-division-multiplexed signals

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read The paper demonstrates that a scalable photonic matrix-vector multiplier can run on single-wavelength intensity-modulated light with $O(N)$ modulators, and a 32-channel silicon chip executes CNN convolution at 93.47% accuracy.

desk verdict Solid static SOI MZI characterization, but the paper never demonstrates the time-division-multiplexed vector encoding, so the central 'TDM photonic MVM processor' claim is not supported by the experiments. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.18194 v2 pith:DB6GS446 submitted 2025-01-30 physics.optics cs.ETphysics.app-ph

Chengli Chai , Rui Tang , Makoto Okano , Kasidit Toprasertpong , Shinichi Takagi , Mitsuru Takenaka This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.opticscs.ETphysics.app-ph
keywords photonicmatrix-vectormultiplicationtime-divisionmultiplexingintensitymodulationsingle-wavelengthsiliconphotonicsMach-ZehnderinterferometerconvolutionalneuralnetworkMNIST
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper aims to show that time-division multiplexing removes the usual need for coherent detection or multiple wavelengths in photonic matrix-vector multiplication. A single laser wavelength is modulated in time to encode the input vector; the optical train is split into 32 channels, each row-modulated by a Mach-Zehnder interferometer, and photodetectors with electronic integrators accumulate the products. The authors fabricated this on a silicon-on-insulator platform and used it to execute the convolution layer of a CNN for handwritten-digit recognition, reporting 93.47% accuracy on 1500 images versus 94.93% for a computer-only baseline. If the claim stands, matrix-vector multiplication can scale to large matrices with $O(N)$ modulators rather than $O(N^2)$, simplifying photonic accelerators.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is the two-stage intensity-modulation time-division-multiplexing scheme. A single-wavelength continuous-wave source is modulated in time to encode an $M$-element vector; this signal is split into $N$ channels, each followed by a Mach-Zehnder interferometer (a tunable intensity modulator) representing one row of the $N\times M$ matrix. Photodetectors convert the twice-modulated optical powers to photocurrents, and electronic integrators accumulate them, performing the multiply-accumulate operation (photoelectric multiplication). The fabricated chip calibrates each MZI via a lookup table from applied thermo-optic power to transmittance, and the 32 convolution kernels are flattened into a $32\times 9$ matrix for execution.

What would settle it

Drive all 32 phase shifters continuously at their CNN-inference power levels for one hour, then repeat the 100-configuration, 3200-point random test with the original lookup tables; if the measured $R^2$ drops materially (for example below the value consistent with the reported 93.47% accuracy), or if a single MZI's transmittance changes when the other 31 are heated, the calibrated-intensity assumption is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central result is a demonstration that a TDM-based photonic matrix-vector multiplication processor works with single-wavelength, intensity-only signals, eliminating coherent detection. The vector entries are encoded sequentially as light intensity at one wavelength, split into $N$ parallel channels, and multiplied by the rows of the weight matrix encoded in $N$ tunable Mach-Zehnder interferometers (MZIs). The photocurrents integrated over the modulation cycle represent the output vector. Over 3200 measured points from 100 random configurations, the normalized output powers match the expected values with $R^2 = 0.9939$. Using the chip to perform the convolution operations in the CNN yields a classification accuracy of 93.47% on 1500 MNIST images.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the calibrated mapping from each phase shifter's power to its light transmission stays accurate while all 32 phase shifters are driven together during inference; the paper does not measure drift, thermal crosstalk, or detector nonlinearity over the measurement period.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Replacing the proof-of-concept thermo-optic phase shifters with high-speed electro-optic modulators (already demonstrated beyond 110 GHz) projects computation speeds around $2.82\times 10^{13}$ OPS with $N=128$.
  • Scaling to larger matrices keeps the modulator count linear in $N$, unlike coherent or intensity-based architectures that need $N^2$ modulators.
  • The measured $R^2 = 0.9939$ over 3200 random configurations indicates that the chip's output faithfully tracks the calibrated matrix entries, enough to run CNN inference.
  • Because the multiplication uses only intensity, phase stability and coherence length of the laser no longer affect the computation, simplifying packaging and control.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A fast version of this architecture would replace static thermo-optic calibration with dynamic control; the current lookup tables are static, so thermal crosstalk between simultaneously driven phase shifters is a natural failure mode not quantified here.
  • The 1.5-percentage-point accuracy gap between chip inference (93.47%) and computer-only inference (94.93%) is a combined measure of calibration error, thermal drift, and measurement noise; comparing against a simulated fixed-point model of the chip would isolate these contributions.
  • Since the integrators are electronic, the vector length $M$ is limited by the integrator bandwidth and the modulator extinction ratio; the paper does not quantify this trade-off, so the scalable claim for very large $M$ rests on electronic readout performance.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes and fabricates a 32-channel silicon photonic processor intended to perform matrix-vector multiplications (MVM) using single-wavelength intensity-modulated time-division-multiplexed (TDM) signals. The authors describe the operating principle, characterize the thermo-optic MZI weight banks, report a high static linearity (R² = 0.9939 over 3200 points), and use the chip to perform the convolution layer of a CNN for MNIST digit recognition, reporting 93.47% accuracy on 1500 images. The central claim is that this constitutes a scalable TDM-based photonic MVM processor requiring no coherent detection or multiple wavelengths.

Significance. If fully demonstrated, the architecture would be a useful simplification over prior TDM schemes that rely on coherent detection or wavelength-division multiplexing, potentially reducing the modulator count to O(N) for an N×M matrix. The static characterization of the 32-channel chip is careful and the reported R² is strong. However, the experimental section does not actually demonstrate time-division multiplexed operation: the setup uses continuous-wave light, DC-driven phase shifters, and power meters, with no input intensity modulator, no clock, and no synchronization, and the accumulation step is performed on a computer. The central claim is therefore not substantiated by the presented experiments, despite the soundness of the underlying idea.

major comments (3)
  1. [Results, Fig. 3 and Fig. 4(c)] The described experimental setup does not implement the TDM scheme of Fig. 1. The input is continuous-wave light, all phase shifters are driven by a DC power supply, and outputs are read by multichannel optical power meters; there is no input intensity modulator, no timing clock, and no synchronization. The R² = 0.9939 result is a static test: 100 random MZI configurations under a constant input, comparing output powers with lookup-table predictions. In the CNN inference, the paper states that the accumulation is performed on a computer by directly summing the measured outputs, but it does not explain how the nine elements of each convolution patch were encoded as a time-multiplexed optical vector. As written, the 93.47% accuracy is consistent with performing the entire MVM in software using measured static transmittances. To support the central claim, the authors must provide time-resolved TDM data (e.g., waveforms showing sequential vector encoding and synchronized matrix rows) or explicitly report the optical-encoding and timing setup used for the convolution experiments.
  2. [Results, CNN classification] The classification accuracy of 93.47% is based on a single run of 1500 images with no repeated trials or error bars. Given the computer-only baseline of 94.93%, the difference of 1.46 percentage points corresponds to roughly 2.2 binomial standard errors, so the claim of 'high operation fidelity' would be considerably strengthened by multiple independent runs and a paired statistical test.
  3. [Eq. (3) and Fig. 6] The OPS estimate assumes f = 80 kHz with a switching time of 12.5 µs cited from a silicon mode switch [28]; however, the thermo-optic phase shifters used in this chip are not characterized for speed, and no experimental clock or time-division operation is demonstrated. The high projected values such as 2.82×10^13 OPS are purely hypothetical and should be explicitly labeled as projections rather than demonstrated performance.
minor comments (4)
  1. [CNN description] The equations for the attention layer and weighted output appear without equation numbers (empty parentheses), making them awkward to reference and reducing the clarity of the description.
  2. [Results, setup description] The paper should clearly state that the experimental demonstration used external power meters and computer-side accumulation, and that photodetectors and electronic integrators were not integrated or used; this avoids overclaiming that the full MVM was performed on-chip.
  3. [Results, Fig. 4(c)] Please specify the normalization procedure used for the measured output powers before comparing with expected values, since this affects the interpretation of the reported R².
  4. [References] References [15] and [25] are preprints; please indicate their status as arXiv preprints in the reference list to avoid ambiguity.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: calibration consistency check and MNIST benchmark are independent of the lookup-table inputs.

full rationale

The paper's central claim—93.47% MNIST classification accuracy using a 32-channel intensity-only processor—is grounded in an external benchmark (MNIST labels) that was not used to fit any hardware parameter, so it is not circular. The R^2=0.9939 test, reported as 'The measured powers were normalized and compared with the expected values,' is a consistency check of the MZI lookup tables on random configurations not used to build the lookup tables; it is a standard calibration validation rather than a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction. The CNN accuracy is reported separately against a computer-only baseline (94.93% vs. 93.47%), giving independent content. Self-citations (refs. 7, 13, 14, 15) are background citations to earlier related architectures and do not supply a uniqueness theorem, ansatz, or load-bearing premise for the present result. The paper does contain an important experimental-support gap: it states 'Continuous-wave light at a wavelength of 1.55 µm is injected into the chip' and 'All phase shifters on the chip are driven by a 40-channel direct current (DC) power supply,' and later 'For simplicity, the accumulation operation is performed on a computer by directly summing the measured outputs,' indicating that the time-division-multiplexed vector encoding and on-chip accumulation described in Fig. 1 were not directly demonstrated in the reported setup. The paper also notes that thermo-optic phase shifters are used 'only for proof-of-concept purposes.' These passages weaken the claim that a TDM photonic MVM was experimentally realized, but they describe missing or indirect evidence, not a derivation that reduces to its own inputs by construction. Therefore the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central experimental claim rests on standard photodetection physics, calibration stability, and assumptions about the CNN test subset; no new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (1)
  • Assumed clock frequency f = 80 kHz for the OPS estimate = 80 kHz
    Used with Eq. (3) to estimate 5.12e6 OPS; chosen from the thermo-optic switching time in reference [28], not measured on this chip.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Photocurrent is proportional to the product of the optical powers of two cascaded intensity modulations (photoelectric multiplication).
    Invoked in the operation principle, Fig. 1, and the Results paragraph; assumes operation below detector saturation and no coherent interference between the two modulations.
  • domain assumption MZI lookup tables calibrated before inference remain stable during the CNN experiment.
    The chip is configured using measured power-to-transmittance lookup tables; any drift, thermal crosstalk, or hysteresis during the CNN run would change the effective weights. Location: Results, MZI characterization and CNN inference.
  • domain assumption The 1500 MNIST test images used for the accuracy comparison are representative and processed identically for computer and chip inference.
    Accuracy is reported for 1500 images with no selection criterion, error bars, or repeat count; a biased subset would change the headline comparison. Location: Results, CNN classification paragraph.
  • standard math Standard silicon photonics assumptions: MMI splitters divide light equally, edge couplers have stated losses, and phase variations do not corrupt intensity measurements.
    Used throughout the device fabrication and measurement sections; these are standard assumptions for SOI photonics. Location: Results, device fabrication and setup.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Scalable intensity-based photonic matrix-vector multiplication processor using single-wavelength time-division-multiplexed signals." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DB6GS446

@misc{pith2026250118194,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Scalable intensity-based photonic matrix-vector multiplication processor using single-wavelength time-division-multiplexed signals},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DB6GS446}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.18194}
}
read the original abstract

Photonic integrated circuits provide a compact platform for ultrafast and energy-efficient matrix-vector multiplications (MVMs) in the optical domain. Recently, schemes based on time-division multiplexing (TDM) have been proposed as scalable approaches for realizing large-scale photonic MVM processors. However, existing demonstrations rely on coherent detection or multiple wavelengths, both of which complicate their operations. In this work, we demonstrate a scalable TDM-based photonic MVM processor that uses only single-wavelength intensity-modulated optical signals, thereby avoiding coherent detection and enabling simplified operations. A 32-channel processor is fabricated on a Si-on-insulator (SOI) platform and used to experimentally perform convolution operations in a convolutional neural network (CNN) for handwritten digit recognition, achieving a classification accuracy of 93.47% for 1500 images.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.18194 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Operation principle of this scheme. A single-wavelength input light is modulated by an optical intensity modulator, which generates an M-element vector x by sequentially encoding each element onto the light intensity. These TDM signals are equally split into N channels and further modulated by N modulators, each generating one row in an N × M matrix W. The two intensity modulations perform the multiplication between… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. (a) Schematic structure of the 32-channel processor. (b) A microscope image of the 32-channel processor fabricated on an SOI platform [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

30 extracted references · 28 canonical work pages

  1. [17]

    Large-scale optical neural networks based on photoelectric multiplication,

    R. Hamerly, L. Bernstein, A. Sludds, M. Soljačić, and D. Englund, "Large-scale optical neural networks based on photoelectric multiplication," Phys. Rev. X 9, 021032 (2019)

    work page 2019

  2. [25]

    Integrated lithium niobate photonic computing circuit based on efficient and high-speed electro-optic conversion,

    Y. Hu, Y. Song, X. Zhu, X. Guo, S. Lu, Q. Zhang, L. He, C. A. A. Franken, K. Powell, H. Warner, D. Assumpcao, D. Renaud, Y. Wang, L. Magalhães, V. Rosborough, A. Shams-Ansari, X. Li, R. Cheng, K. Luke, K. Yang, G. Barbastathis, M. Zhang, D. Zhu, L. Johansson, A. Beling, N. Sinclair, and M. Loncar, "Integrated lithium niobate photonic computing circuit bas...

    arXiv 2024

  3. [28]

    3×10 Gb/s silicon three -mode switch with 120° hybrid based unbalanced Mach-Zehnder interferometer,

    R. B. Priti, G. Zhang, and O. Liboiron -Ladouceur, "3×10 Gb/s silicon three -mode switch with 120° hybrid based unbalanced Mach-Zehnder interferometer," Opt. Express 27, 14199 –14212 (2019)

    work page 2019

  4. [1]

    Deep learning with coherent nanophotonic circuits,

    Y. Shen, N. C. Harris, S. Skirlo, M. Prabhu, T. Baehr -Jones, M. Hochberg, X. Sun, S. Zhao, H. Larochelle, D. Englund, and M. Soljačić, "Deep learning with coherent nanophotonic circuits," Nat. Photonics 11, 441–446 (2017)

    work page 2017

  5. [2]

    III -V/Si hybrid optical modulators based on MOS capacitor,

    M. Takenaka, Q. Li, S. Ohno, F. Boeuf, K. Toprasertpong, and S. Takagi, "III -V/Si hybrid optical modulators based on MOS capacitor," in Integrated Photonics Platforms: Fundamental Research, Manufacturing and Applications (SPIE, 2020), Vol. 11364, paper 1136402

    work page 2020

  6. [3]

    Photonics for artificial intelligence and neuromorphic computing,

    B. J. Shastri, A. N. Tait, T. Ferreira de Lima, W. H. P. Pernice, H. Bhaskaran, C. D. Wright, and P. R. Prucnal, "Photonics for artificial intelligence and neuromorphic computing," Nat. Photonics 15, 102–114 (2021)

    work page 2021

  7. [4]

    Photonic matrix multiplication lights up photonic accelerator and beyond,

    H. Zhou, J. Dong, J. Cheng, W. Dong, C. Huang, Y. Shen, Q. Zhang, M. Gu, C. Qian, H. Chen, Z. Ruan, and X. Zhang, "Photonic matrix multiplication lights up photonic accelerator and beyond," Light Sci. Appl. 11, 30 (2022)

    work page 2022

  8. [5]

    Large-scale photonic chiplet Taichi empowers 160 -TOPS/W artificial general intelligence,

    Z. Xu, T. Zhou, M. Ma, C. Deng, Q. Dai, and L. Fang, "Large-scale photonic chiplet Taichi empowers 160 -TOPS/W artificial general intelligence," Science 384, 202–209 (2024)

    work page 2024

Show all 30 references
  1. [6]

    Optimal design for universal multiport interferometers,

    W. R. Clements, P. C. Humphreys, B. J. Metcalf, W. S. Kolthammer, and I. A. Walsmley, "Optimal design for universal multiport interferometers," Optica 3, 1460–1465 (2016)

    2016

  2. [7]

    Ten -port unitary optical processor on a silicon photonic chip,

    R. Tang, R. Tanomura, T. Tanemura, and Y. Nakano, "Ten -port unitary optical processor on a silicon photonic chip," ACS Photonics 8, 2074–2080 (2021)

    2021

  3. [8]

    A Coherent Photonic Crossbar for Scalable Universal Linear Optics,

    G. Giamougiannis, A. Tsakyridis, Y. Ma, A. Totović, M. Moralis- Pegios, D. Lazovsky, and N. Pleros, "A Coherent Photonic Crossbar for Scalable Universal Linear Optics," J. Light. Technol. 41, 2425–2442 (2023)

    2023

  4. [9]

    Perfect linear optics using silicon photonics,

    M. Moralis -Pegios, G. Giamougiannis, A. Tsakyridis, D. Lazovsky, and N. Pleros, "Perfect linear optics using silicon photonics," Nat. Commun. 15, 5468 (2024)

    2024

  5. [10]

    Neuromorphic photonic networks using silicon photonic weight banks,

    A. N. Tait, T. F. de Lima, E. Zhou, A. X. Wu, M. A. Nahmias, B. J. Shastri, and P. R. Prucnal, "Neuromorphic photonic networks using silicon photonic weight banks," Sci. Rep. 7, 7430 (2017)

    2017

  6. [11]

    Parallel convolutional processing using an integrated photonic tensor core,

    J. Feldmann, N. Youngblood, M. Karpov, H. Gehring, X. Li, M. Stappers, M. Le Gallo, X. Fu, A. Lukashchuk, A. S. Raja, J. Liu, C. D. Wright, A. Sebastian, T. J. Kippenberg, W. H. P. Pernice, and H. Bhaskaran, "Parallel convolutional processing using an integrated photonic tenso...

    2021

  7. [12]

    Si microring resonator crossbar array for on -chip inference and training of the optical neural network,

    S. Ohno, R. Tang, K. Toprasertpong, S. Takagi, and M. Takenaka, "Si microring resonator crossbar array for on -chip inference and training of the optical neural network," ACS Photonics 9, 2614– 2622 (2022)

    2022

  8. [13]

    Integrated WDM - compatible optical mode division multiplexing neural network accelerator,

    R. Yin, H. Xiao, Y. Jiang, X. Han, P. Zhang, L. Chen, X. Zhou, M. Yuan, G. Ren, A. Mitchell, and Y. Tian, "Integrated WDM - compatible optical mode division multiplexing neural network accelerator," Optica 10, 1709–1718 (2023)

    2023

  9. [14]

    Symmetric silicon microring resonator optical crossbar array for accelerated inference and training in deep learning,

    R. Tang, S. Ohno, K. Tanizawa, K. Ikeda, M. Okano, K. Toprasertpong, S. Takagi, and M. Takenaka, "Symmetric silicon microring resonator optical crossbar array for accelerated inference and training in deep learning," Photonics Res. 12, 1681 –1688 (2024)

    2024

  10. [15]

    Waveguide -multiplexed photonic matrix -vector multiplication processor using multiport photodetectors,

    R. Tang, M. Okano, C. Zhang, K. Toprasertpong, S. Takagi, and M. Takenaka, "Waveguide -multiplexed photonic matrix -vector multiplication processor using multiport photodetectors," arXiv:2410.05956 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  11. [16]

    Control -free and efficient integrated photonic neural networks via hardware -aware training and pruning,

    T. Xu, W. Zhang, J. Zhang, Z. Luo, Q. Xiao, B. Wang, M. Luo, X. Xu, B. J. Shastri, P. R. Prucnal, and C. Huang, "Control -free and efficient integrated photonic neural networks via hardware -aware training and pruning," Optica 11, 1039–1049 (2024)

    2024

  12. [18]

    Delocalized photonic deep learning on the internet’s edge,

    A. Sludds, S. Bandyopadhyay, Z. Chen, Z. Zhong, J. Cochrane, L. Bernstein, D. Bunandar, P. B. Dixon, S. A. Hamilton, M. Streshinsky, A. Novack, T. Baehr -Jones, M. Hochberg, M. Ghobadi, R. Hamerly, and D. Englund, "Delocalized photonic deep learning on the internet’s edge," Sc...

    2022

  13. [19]

    Realization of an integrated coherent photonic platform for scalable matrix operations,

    S. Rahimi Kari, N. A. Nobile, D. Pantin, V. Shah, and N. Youngblood, "Realization of an integrated coherent photonic platform for scalable matrix operations," Optica 11, 542 –551 (2024)

    2024

  14. [20]

    Netcast: low -power edge computing with WDM-defined optical neural networks,

    R. Hamerly, A. Sludds, S. Bandyopadhyay, Z. Chen, Z. Zhong, L. Bernstein, and D. Englund, "Netcast: low -power edge computing with WDM-defined optical neural networks," J. Light. Technol. 42, 7795–7806 (2024)

    2024

  15. [21]

    A teraFLOP photonic matrix multiplier using time-space-wavelength multiplexed AWGR -based architectures,

    C. Pappas, T. Moschos, M. Moralis-Pegios, G. Giamougiannis, A. Tsakyridis, M. Kirtas, N. Passalis, A. Tefas, and N. Pleros, "A teraFLOP photonic matrix multiplier using time-space-wavelength multiplexed AWGR -based architectures," in Optical Fiber Communication Conference (OFC...

    2024

  16. [22]

    A 160 TOPS multi - dimensional AWGR -based accelerator for deep learning,

    C. Pappas, T. Moschos, A. Prapas, A. Tsakyridis, M. Moralis - Pegios, K. Vyrsokinos, and N. Pleros, "A 160 TOPS multi - dimensional AWGR -based accelerator for deep learning," in Optical Fiber Communication Conference (OFC) 2024 (Optica Publishing Group, 2024), paper Th4C.3

    2024

  17. [23]

    Hypermultiplexed integrated-photonics-based tensor optical processor,

    S. Ou, K. Xue, L. Zhou, C. Lee, A. Sludds, R. Hamerly, K. Zhang, H. Feng, R. Kopparapu, E. Zhong, C. Wang, D. Englund, M. Yu, and Z. Chen, "Hypermultiplexed integrated-photonics-based tensor optical processor," arXiv:2401.18050 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  18. [24]

    120 GOPS Photonic tensor core in thin-film lithium niobate for inference and in situ training,

    Z. Lin, B. J. Shastri, S. Yu, J. Song, Y. Zhu, A. Safarnejadian, W. Cai, Y. Lin, W. Ke, M. Hammood, T. Wang, M. Xu, Z. Zheng, M. Al-Qadasi, O. Esmaeeli, M. Rahim, G. Pakulski, J. Schmid, P. Barrios, W. Jiang, H. Morison, M. Mitchell, X. Guan, N. A. F. Jaeger, L. A. Rusch, S. S...

    2024

  19. [26]

    Review of silicon photonics technology and platform development,

    S. Y. Siew, B. Li, F. Gao, H. Y. Zheng, W. Zhang, P. Guo, S. W. Xie, A. Song, B. Dong, L. W. Luo, C. Li, X. Luo, and G. -Q. Lo, "Review of silicon photonics technology and platform development," J. Light. Technol. 39, 4374–4389 (2021)

    2021

  20. [27]

    A simple and light - weight attention module for convolutional neural networks,

    J. Park, S. Woo, J. -Y. Lee, and I. S. Kweon, "A simple and light - weight attention module for convolutional neural networks," Int. J. Comput. Vis. 128, 783–798 (2020)

    2020

  21. [29]

    Slow -light silicon modulator with 110 -GHz bandwidth,

    C. Han, Z. Zheng, H. Shu, M. Jin, J. Qin, R. Chen, Y. Tao, B. Shen, B. Bai, F. Yang, Y. Wang, H. Wang, F. Wang, Z. Zhang, S. Yu, C. Peng, and X. Wang, "Slow -light silicon modulator with 110 -GHz bandwidth," Sci. Adv. 9, eadi5339 (2023)

    2023

  22. [30]

    Ultra -compact lithium niobate microcavity electro -optic modulator beyond 110 GHz,

    B.-C. Pan, H.-X. Liu, H.-C. Xu, Y.-S. Huang, H. Li, Z. -J. Yu, L. Liu, Y. -C. Shi, and D. -X. Dai, "Ultra -compact lithium niobate microcavity electro -optic modulator beyond 110 GHz," Chip 1, 100029 (2022)

    2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.