Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 38 references

Twist-Induced Beam Steering and Blazing Effects in Photonic Crystal Devices

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Twisted bilayer photonic crystals steer light by a structural blazing effect, where a shared slant angle routes power into a twist-controlled diffraction order.

desk verdict A genuinely useful physical explanation for twist-steered bilayer photonic crystals, backed by extensive optimization, though the quantitative support is a fitted heuristic rather than a derivation. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.11263 v1 pith:6IZT56DC submitted 2024-12-15 physics.optics

Nicolas Roy , Beicheng Lou , Shanhui Fan , Alexandre Mayer , Michaël Lobet This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.optics
keywords beamsteeringtwistedbilayerphotoniccrystalsblazedgratingsdiffractionorderparticleswarmoptimizationrigorouscoupledwaveanalysisstructuralblazingmodel
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

This paper tries to establish why optimized twisted bilayer photonic crystals steer light so efficiently: the reason is structural blazing, not intricate freeform dielectric engineering. The authors show that optimized designs share a common slant angle, and a two-layer model in which each layer blazes into a successive diffraction order reproduces the main behavior of full electromagnetic simulations. If this is right, designing a beam-steering device reduces to selecting a blaze angle matched to the target diffraction order, and the established toolbox of blazed-grating design becomes directly applicable.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the structural blazing model: each layer's unit cell is replaced by a tilted parallelogram of dielectric index $n_4=2$ on a background $n_2=\sqrt{2}$, and each diffraction event is treated independently. Blazing is identified with specular reflection off the parallelogram's slanted face, $\theta_b=\theta_i-2\gamma$, where $\gamma$ is the slant angle; setting $\theta_b$ equal to the grating-equation diffraction angle gives $\gamma_b=22.5^\circ$ for the first layer. The model then tracks the beam through a vectorial reflection formula for the second layer and assigns each layer a Gaussian transmission $t_i(\theta)=A e^{-(\theta-\theta_{ib})^2/2\sigma^2}$, fitted to single-layer RCWA, with total transmission $t=t_1 t_2$. This two-step product reproduces the broad performance landscape, predicts the optimal slant angle near $23^\circ$, and explains the efficiency drop at large twist angles.

What would settle it

Compute or measure the transmission of the reduced parallelogram structure at slant angles far from $22.5^\circ$, and of an optimized device with its slant deliberately removed; if the figure of merit does not peak near $\gamma\approx23^\circ$, or if a straight-edged unslanted device matches the slanted one's performance, the blazing explanation fails. A more specific check: the model predicts a steep transmission drop above about 45 degrees of twist, so a device that maintains high efficiency there without any $z$-dependent slant would refute the mechanism.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that high-performance twist-controlled beam steering in bilayer photonic crystals is carried by a bilayer blazing effect. Each layer is effectively a slanted grating: the first layer routes normally incident light into the $(+1)$ diffraction order at about $-45^\circ$, and the second layer, sharing the same slant, routes that beam into the $(-1)$ order so it emerges along the normal. For the targeted order $(+1,-1)$ this requires a slant angle near $22.5^\circ$, matching the range found in the optimized devices; twisting the second layer rotates the output wavevector, with polar angle $\theta(\alpha)=\arcsin(2(\lambda/\Lambda)\sin(\alpha/2))$, while preserving the blazing condition for moderate twists. With this mechanism the optimized devices reach above 90% efficiency for TE and TM polarizations over twist angles $0$ to $30^\circ$, and near 90% averaged over $0$ to $60^\circ$ when left- and right-handed circular polarizations are included.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that each layer's transmission depends only on the angular mismatch between its blaze angle and the diffraction angle, through a Gaussian fit to a single isolated layer, so inter-layer coupling and multiple reflections are neglected and the model visibly misses secondary RCWA features near $\gamma\approx-20^\circ$ and $0^\circ$.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A beam-steering device can be built from simple slanted dielectric layers: a single parallelogram-like grating already yields roughly 70% figure of merit, and optimized versions push this above 90%.
  • The design rule transfers across polarizations: the same blazing geometry works for TE, TM, left- and right-handed circular polarizations with near-90% average efficiency over the 0 to 60 degree twist range.
  • Because undesired diffraction orders are canceled by blazing, the device inherits the beam-quality advantages of blazed gratings while adding the twist-based tunability those gratings normally lack.
  • For the mirror-symmetric order $(-1,+1)$, the optimal slant reverses sign, so the same principle covers both steering directions.
  • Above about 30 degrees of twist, the blaze and diffraction angles diverge, predicting the observed steep efficiency decline; designs with a $z$-dependent slant angle can partially counteract this.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The blazing interpretation suggests a scaling design rule: for any wavelength and lattice pitch satisfying $\Lambda\lesssim\lambda$, the required slant is set by the intermediate diffraction angle, so devices can be redesigned for other wavelengths by rescaling geometry rather than re-optimizing.
  • The reduced model's misses near $\gamma\approx-20^\circ$ and $0^\circ$ indicate secondary blazing paths off other faces; accounting for these with a multi-reflection model could extend accurate predictions to large twist angles and recover the remaining efficiency gap.
  • The same specular-blazing argument may transfer to twisted bilayer structures for acoustic or elastic waves, where slanted interfaces also redirect transmitted power into selected diffraction orders.
  • The impedance-matching thin edges found in optimized designs are a separate mechanism layered on top of blazing; combining a blazed core with anti-reflection edges could yield devices that stay near maximum efficiency across the full 0 to 60 degree range.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript optimizes twisted bilayer photonic crystal slabs for twist-controlled beam steering. Three parameterizations (mini-layers, homogeneous ellipses, inhomogeneous ellipses) are optimized with surrogate-assisted PSO and extended RCWA; the best designs reach 90-91 percent average transmission into the (+1,-1) order across twist angles up to 60 degrees. The authors observe a common slant angle in optimized devices and propose that the devices operate by a sequential bilayer blazing mechanism: the first layer blazes into order +1 and the second layer blazes into order -1, with the twist controlling the output angle. A reduced parallelogram model with a Gaussian misalignment transmission model predicts an optimal slant of roughly 23 degrees, consistent with the optimized structures, and the authors conclude that blazing, rather than intricate freeform dielectric engineering, is the operative principle.

Significance. If the blazing interpretation is correct, it provides a simple design rule for twisted bilayer beam-steering devices and connects freeform inverse design to a classical optical principle. The paper's strengths include the large-scale optimization study (4.5 million candidates, 450,000 RCWA simulations), the demonstration of high average efficiency over a 60-degree control range for multiple polarizations, and the use of field maps to visualize the blazing process. The reduced model is a useful starting point, but its quantitative support is heuristic; the geometric blazing angle of 22.5 degrees is parameter-free, while the predicted figure-of-merit optimum depends on a fitted Gaussian factorization. The central physical picture is plausible but not yet established to the standard that would make the reduced model a quantitative predictive tool.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3, Eq. (10)] The central quantitative argument for blazing relies on the factorized transmission t = t1(θ2b−θ2) t2(θ3b−θ3), where each ti is a Gaussian with amplitude and width A, σ fitted to single-layer RCWA. This ansatz neglects inter-layer coupling, multiple reflections, and azimuthal mismatch of the 3D wavevectors, and the paper acknowledges (Fig. 3E) that it misses RCWA features near γ≈0° and γ≈−20°. Because the same model is used both to identify the structural optimum at γ≈23° and to argue that the slant is essential, the conclusion is only as strong as the fit. Please provide a direct validation of the factorization, for example by comparing the single-layer and bilayer RCWA transmissions for the reduced structure, or by testing a modified reduced structure in which the two layers are detuned from the blazing condition; this would show whether the product ansatz is doing the work.
  2. [§3, Eqs. (5)–(7)] The analytic derivation of the second-layer blaze condition contains a sign inconsistency. Equation (5) gives θ2,+1 ≈ −45°, but the text states that the second diffraction event occurs with an incidence at θ2 = 45° and uses θ3b = θ2 − 2γ = 0° with γ = 22.5°. If the same sign convention is used, θ2 = −45° gives θ3b = −90°, not 0°. Please clarify the sign convention for the second layer (for example, a mirror orientation of the slant or a change of reference for the polar angle) and show explicitly that the vectorial reflection law in Eq. (8) yields θ3b = 0° for the untwisted case. As written, the sequential blazing condition is not transparent.
  3. [§3, Eq. (9)] The claim that the model predicts the optimal slant at γ≈23° should distinguish between the parameter-free geometric prediction (γ=22.5° from Eq. (7)) and the fitted product model. The Gaussian parameters A and σ are obtained by fitting the same RCWA method that is used for the benchmark, and the figure-of-merit optimum in Fig. 3(E) is therefore not an independent prediction. Please state this distinction explicitly and report how the predicted optimum shifts as σ is varied over its uncertainty; this would quantify how much of the conclusion is carried by the fit.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 5] The data availability heading is followed by no text; please add a statement describing access to designs, simulation scripts, and any supplementary data.
  2. [Throughout] There are several typos: Altough (Sec. 1), developpement and impendence (Sec. 3), compelexity (Sec. 3), and Resarch (Acknowledgements).
  3. [Fig. 3] The caption and text disagree on what Fig. 3(E) shows: the main text describes it both as a comparison with the optimal device in the ellipses template and as a figure of merit for different slant angles of the reduced model. Please align the caption with the displayed panels and define all curves.
  4. [Eq. (9)] Equation (9) writes ti(θ) but Eq. (10) passes θ2b−θ2 as the argument; define ti as a function of the misalignment Δθ = θ − θib and use consistent notation.
  5. [Sec. 2 vs. Abstract] The abstract reports TE and TM polarizations while Sec. 2 says the figure of merit is averaged over X, Y, RCP, and LCP; please clarify the correspondence between these polarization labels.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the geometric blazing condition independently predicts the optimized slant, and the Gaussian fit is calibrated on single-layer RCWA, not on the bilayer prediction it benchmarks.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is that optimized twisted-bilayer devices operate by a bilayer blazing mechanism. The load-bearing derivation is geometric, not fitted: the blaze angle relation (Eq. 6), the alignment condition (Eq. 7), and the vectorial reflection formula (Eq. 8) are derived from specular reflection against a slanted surface and are compared with the grating equation (Eq. 3). This yields an analytical optimal slant of 22.5 degrees, which is then checked against the numerically observed range of 15-24 degrees; the agreement is an independent prediction. The Gaussian model in Eq. 9 does contain parameters A and sigma fitted to single-layer RCWA simulations, and Eq. 10 multiplies two such Gaussians to estimate bilayer transmission. However, this is a heuristic reduced model benchmarked against bilayer RCWA, not a quantity fitted to the bilayer data that is then relabeled as a prediction. The fitted parameters do not determine the location of the optimal slant angle, which comes from the geometric blazing condition. The paper also explicitly acknowledges the model's limitations, including missed RCWA features near gamma about 0 and -20 degrees due to neglected surfaces and incidence-side blazing. These limitations affect quantitative accuracy and should be assessed as correctness risk, but they do not make the derivation circular. Self-citations to prior work on twisted bilayer photonic crystals and extended RCWA provide computational methodology and context, but no load-bearing argument in this paper reduces to an unverified self-citation or to an imported uniqueness theorem. Overall, the central blazing explanation has independent geometric content and is tested against full-wave simulations rather than being equivalent to its inputs by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central mechanism rests on two fitted parameters (A and sigma) in the quantitative transmission model, plus several modeling assumptions, most notably that blazing is reflective and that layer transmissions factorize. The geometric blazing condition itself is not fitted, but the quantitative predictions of efficiency versus twist angle depend on the fitted Gaussian and the independence assumption.

free parameters (2)
  • Gaussian amplitude A = not reported
    Amplitude of the transmission-misalignment Gaussian in eq. 9, fitted to single-layer RCWA simulations.
  • Gaussian width sigma = approximately 17 degrees
    Standard deviation of the transmission-misalignment Gaussian in eq. 9, fitted to single-layer RCWA simulations.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Blazing occurs by reflection off the slanted surface, not by refraction.
    Stated as 'From empirical analysis, blazing in the system occurs by reflection.' This underpins eq. 6 and the entire structural model.
  • domain assumption The two layers' diffraction events are independent and the total transmission factorizes as t = t1 * t2.
    Eq. 10 assumes each layer's transmission depends only on angular misalignment, neglecting inter-layer coupling, multiple reflections, and blazing against other surfaces.
  • ad hoc to paper The transmission as a function of misalignment has a Gaussian shape.
    Eq. 9 is a phenomenological choice, not derived from first principles; its parameters are fitted.
  • domain assumption With Lambda less than or similar to lambda, only three diffraction orders propagate.
    Used to justify focusing on orders (0,0), (-1,1), and (1,-1); follows from k_z in eq. 1 becoming complex.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Twist-Induced Beam Steering and Blazing Effects in Photonic Crystal Devices." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/6IZT56DC

@misc{pith2026241211263,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Twist-Induced Beam Steering and Blazing Effects in Photonic Crystal Devices},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/6IZT56DC}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.11263}
}
read the original abstract

Twisted bilayer photonic crystals introduce a twist between two stacked photonic crystal slabs, enabling strong modulation of their electromagnetic properties. The change in the twist angle strongly influences the resonant frequencies and available propagating diffraction orders with applications including sensing, lasing, slow light or wavefront engineering. In this work, we design and analyze twisted bilayer crystals capable of steering light in a direction controlled by the twist angle. In order to achieve beam steering, the device efficiently routes input power into a single, twist-dependent, transmitted diffraction order. The outgoing light then follows the orientation of this diffraction order, externally controlled by the twist angle. The optimization is performed using high-efficiency heuristic optimization method which enabled a data-oriented approach to further understand the design operation. The optimized device demonstrates an efficiency above 90% across twist angles ranging from 0 to 30 degrees for both TE and TM polarizations. Extending the optimization to include left- and right-handed polarizations yields overall accuracy nearing 90% when averaged across the entire 0 to 60 degrees control range. Finally, we show how the device resembles blazed gratings by effectively canceling the undesired diffraction orders. The optimized devices exhibit a shared slant dependent on the selected diffraction order. Our analysis is supported by a structural blazing model arising from the data-oriented statistical analysis.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.11263 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. (A) Illustration of the twisted bilayer photonic crystal used for beam steering. (B,C) Gratings [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. (A) Performance of the different templates considered as a function of the number of free parameters. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. (A) Scheme of the reduced structural model. (B) Field map for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

38 extracted references · 38 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Grigoropoulos, Junqiao Wu, and Jie Yao

    Tiancheng Zhang, Kaichen Dong, Jiachen Li, Fanhao Meng, Jingang Li, Sai Munagavalasa, Costas P. Grigoropoulos, Junqiao Wu, and Jie Yao. Twisted moir´ e photonic crystal enabled optical vortex generation through bound states in the continuum. Nature Communications, 14(1):6014, Sep 2023

    work page 2023

  2. [2]

    Experimental probe of twist angle–dependent band structure of on-chip optical bilayer photonic crystal

    Haoning Tang, Beicheng Lou, Fan Du, Mingjie Zhang, Xueqi Ni, Weijie Xu, Rebekah Jin, Shanhui Fan, and Eric Mazur. Experimental probe of twist angle–dependent band structure of on-chip optical bilayer photonic crystal. Science Advances, 9(28):eadh8498, 2023

    work page 2023

  3. [3]

    Modeling the optical properties of twisted bilayer photonic crystals

    Haoning Tang, Fan Du, Stephen Carr, Clayton DeVault, Olivia Mello, and Eric Mazur. Modeling the optical properties of twisted bilayer photonic crystals. Light: Science & Applications , 10(1):157, 2021

    work page 2021

  4. [4]

    Chau Nguyen, and Hai Son Nguyen

    Dung Xuan Nguyen, Xavier Letartre, Emmanuel Drouard, Pierre Viktorovitch, H. Chau Nguyen, and Hai Son Nguyen. Magic configurations in moir´ e superlattice of bilayer photonic crystals: Almost-perfect flatbands and unconventional localization. Phys. Rev. Res., 4:L032031, Aug 2022

    work page 2022

  5. [5]

    A. A. Arkhipova, Y. V. Kartashov, S. K. Ivanov, S. A. Zhuravitskii, N. N. Skryabin, I. V. Dyakonov, A. A. Kalinkin, S. P. Kulik, V. O. Kompanets, S. V. Chekalin, F. Ye, V. V. Konotop, L. Torner, and V. N. Zadkov. Observation of linear and nonlinear light localization at the edges of moir´ e arrays. Phys. Rev. Lett., 130:083801, Feb 2023. 10

    work page 2023

  6. [6]

    Localization and delocalization of light in photonic moir´ e lattices

    Peng Wang, Yuanlin Zheng, Xianfeng Chen, Changming Huang, Yaroslav V Kartashov, Lluis Torner, Vladimir V Konotop, and Fangwei Ye. Localization and delocalization of light in photonic moir´ e lattices. Nature, 577(7788):42–46, January 2020

    work page 2020

  7. [7]

    Hu, Shanhui Fan, Eric Mazur, and Haoning Tang

    Xueqi Ni, Yuan Liu, Beicheng Lou, Mingjie Zhang, Evelyn L. Hu, Shanhui Fan, Eric Mazur, and Haoning Tang. Three-dimensional reconfigurable optical singularities in bilayer photonic crystals. Phys. Rev. Lett., 132:073804, Feb 2024

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    Magic-angle lasers in nanostructured moir´ e superlattice.Nature Nanotechnology, 16(10):1099–1105, October 2021

    Xin-Rui Mao, Zeng-Kai Shao, Hong-Yi Luan, Shao-Lei Wang, and Ren-Min Ma. Magic-angle lasers in nanostructured moir´ e superlattice.Nature Nanotechnology, 16(10):1099–1105, October 2021

    work page 2021

Show all 38 references
  1. [9]

    Reconfigurable moir´ e nanolaser arrays with phase synchronization

    Hong-Yi Luan, Yun-Hao Ouyang, Zi-Wei Zhao, Wen-Zhi Mao, and Ren-Min Ma. Reconfigurable moir´ e nanolaser arrays with phase synchronization. Nature, 624(7991):282–288, December 2023

    2023

  2. [10]

    GaN magic angle laser in a merged moir´ e photonic crystal.ACS Photonics, 10(9):3001–3007, September 2023

    Alexander Raun, Haoning Tang, Xueqi Ni, Eric Mazur, and Evelyn L Hu. GaN magic angle laser in a merged moir´ e photonic crystal.ACS Photonics, 10(9):3001–3007, September 2023

    2023

  3. [11]

    Demonstration of focus-tunable diffractive moir´ e- lenses

    Stefan Bernet, Walter Harm, and Monika Ritsch-Marte. Demonstration of focus-tunable diffractive moir´ e- lenses. Opt. Express, 21(6):6955–6966, Mar 2013

    2013

  4. [12]

    On-chip multidimensional dynamic control of twisted moir´ e photonic crystal for smart sensing and imaging, 2023

    Haoning Tang, Beicheng Lou, Fan Du, Guangqi Gao, Mingjie Zhang, Xueqi Ni, Evelyn Hu, Amir Yacoby, Yuan Cao, Shanhui Fan, and Eric Mazur. On-chip multidimensional dynamic control of twisted moir´ e photonic crystal for smart sensing and imaging, 2023

    2023

  5. [13]

    Highly sensitive torsion sensor based on directional coupling in twisted photonic crystal fiber

    Feng Zhang, Shen Liu, Ying Wang, Yijian Huang, Xizhen Xu, Cailing Fu, Tiesheng Wu, Changrui Liao, and Yiping Wang. Highly sensitive torsion sensor based on directional coupling in twisted photonic crystal fiber. Applied Physics Express, 11(4):042501, 2018

    2018

  6. [14]

    Moir´ e chiral metamaterials

    Zilong Wu and Yuebing Zheng. Moir´ e chiral metamaterials. Advanced Optical Materials, 5(16):1700034, 2017

    2017

  7. [15]

    Tunable guided resonance in twisted bilayer photonic crystal

    Beicheng Lou and Benjamin Wang and Jesse A Rodr´ ıguez and Mark Cappelli and Shanhui Fan. Tunable guided resonance in twisted bilayer photonic crystal. Science Advances, 8(48):eadd4339, 2022

    2022

  8. [16]

    On-chip multi-degree-of-freedom control of two-dimensional materials

    Haoning Tang, Yiting Wang, Xueqi Ni, Kenji Watanabe, Takashi Taniguchi, Pablo Jarillo-Herrero, Shanhui Fan, Eric Mazur, Amir Yacoby, and Yuan Cao. On-chip multi-degree-of-freedom control of two-dimensional materials. Nature, 632(8027):1038–1044, Aug 2024

    2024

  9. [17]

    Mems-tunable dielectric metasurface lens

    Ehsan Arbabi, Amir Arbabi, Seyedeh Mahsa Kamali, Yu Horie, MohammadSadegh Faraji-Dana, and Andrei Faraon. Mems-tunable dielectric metasurface lens. Nature Communications, 9(1):812, Feb 2018

    2018

  10. [18]

    Atwater, and Hossein Mosallaei

    Ali Forouzmand, Mohammad Mahdi Salary, Ghazaleh Kafaie Shirmanesh, Ruzan Sokhoyan, Harry A. Atwater, and Hossein Mosallaei. Tunable all-dielectric metasurface for phase modulation of the reflected and transmitted light via permittivity tuning of indium tin oxide. Nanophotonics...

    2019

  11. [19]

    Intelligent beam steering for wireless communication using pro- grammable metasurfaces

    Nouman Ashraf, Taqwa Saeed, Hamidreza Taghvaee, Sergi Abadal, Vasos Vassiliou, Christos Liaskos, Andreas Pitsillides, and Marios Lestas. Intelligent beam steering for wireless communication using pro- grammable metasurfaces. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Syst...

    2023

  12. [20]

    High-performance optical beam steering with nanophotonics

    Sam Lin, Yixin Chen, and Zi Jing Wong. High-performance optical beam steering with nanophotonics. Nanophotonics, 11(11):2617–2638, 2022

    2022

  13. [21]

    Highly tunable cascaded metasurfaces for continuous two-dimensional beam steering

    Lingyun Zhang, Li Zhang, Rongbo Xie, Yibo Ni, Xiaoyu Wu, Yuanmu Yang, Fei Xing, Xiaoguang Zhao, and Zheng You. Highly tunable cascaded metasurfaces for continuous two-dimensional beam steering. Advanced Science, 10(24):2300542, 2023. 11

    2023

  14. [22]

    Free-space beam steering with twisted bilayer photonic crystal slabs

    Beicheng Lou, Haoning Tang, Fan Du, Guangqi Gao, Eric Mazur, and Shanhui Fan. Free-space beam steering with twisted bilayer photonic crystal slabs. ACS Photonics, 11(9):3636–3643, Sep 2024

    2024

  15. [23]

    Granet, Boris Gralak, S´ ebastien Guenneau, Daniel Maystre, Andr´ e Nicolet, Brian Stout, Fr´ ed´ eric Zolla, Benjamin Vial, and Evgeni Popov

    Tryfon Antonakakis, Fadi Baida, Abderrahmane Belkhir, Kirill Cherednichenko, Shane Cooper, Richard Craster, Guillaume Dem´ esy, John Desanto, G. Granet, Boris Gralak, S´ ebastien Guenneau, Daniel Maystre, Andr´ e Nicolet, Brian Stout, Fr´ ed´ eric Zolla, Benjamin Vial, and Evg...

    2012

  16. [24]

    A review on fabrication of blazed gratings

    Jian Gao, Peng Chen, Lei Wu, Bingjun Yu, and Linmao Qian. A review on fabrication of blazed gratings. Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics , 54(31):313001, may 2021

    2021

  17. [25]

    Giant and high-resolution beam steering using slow-light waveguide amplifier

    Xiaodong Gu, Toshikazu Shimada, and Fumio Koyama. Giant and high-resolution beam steering using slow-light waveguide amplifier. Opt. Express, 19(23):22675–22683, Nov 2011

    2011

  18. [26]

    Cersonsky, James Antonaglia, Bradley D

    Rose K. Cersonsky, James Antonaglia, Bradley D. Dice, and Sharon C. Glotzer. The diversity of three- dimensional photonic crystals. Nature Communications, 12(1):2543, May 2021

    2021

  19. [27]

    Introduction to evolutionary computing

    Agoston E Eiben and James E Smith. Introduction to evolutionary computing . Springer, 2015

    2015

  20. [28]

    Particle swarm optimization

    Russell Eberhart and James Kennedy. Particle swarm optimization. In Proceedings of the IEEE interna- tional conference on neural networks , volume 4, pages 1942–1948. Citeseer, 1995

    1942

  21. [29]

    Hyperparameter control using fuzzy logic: Evolv- ing policies for adaptive fuzzy particle swarm optimization algorithm

    Nicolas Roy, Charlotte Beauthier, and Alexandre Mayer. Hyperparameter control using fuzzy logic: Evolv- ing policies for adaptive fuzzy particle swarm optimization algorithm. Evolutionary Computation , pages 1–30, 10 2024

    2024

  22. [30]

    Theory for twisted bilayer photonic crystal slabs

    Beicheng Lou, Nathan Zhao, Momchil Minkov, Cheng Guo, Meir Orenstein, and Shanhui Fan. Theory for twisted bilayer photonic crystal slabs. Phys. Rev. Lett., 126:136101, Mar 2021

    2021

  23. [31]

    Wiecha, Arnaud Arbouet, Christian Girard, and Otto L

    Peter R. Wiecha, Arnaud Arbouet, Christian Girard, and Otto L. Muskens. Deep learning in nano- photonics: inverse design and beyond. Photon. Res., 9(5):B182–B200, May 2021

    2021

  24. [32]

    Photonic-structure optimization using highly data-efficient deep learning: Application to nanofin and annular-groove phase masks

    Nicolas Roy, Lorenzo K¨ onig, Olivier Absil, Charlotte Beauthier, Alexandre Mayer, and Micha¨ el Lobet. Photonic-structure optimization using highly data-efficient deep learning: Application to nanofin and annular-groove phase masks. Phys. Rev. A , 109:013514, Jan 2024

    2024

  25. [33]

    Measuring the curse of dimensionality and its effects on particle swarm optimization and differential evolution

    Stephen Chen, James Montgomery, and Antonio Boluf´ e-R¨ ohler. Measuring the curse of dimensionality and its effects on particle swarm optimization and differential evolution. Applied Intelligence, 42:514–526, 2015

    2015

  26. [34]

    Principles of Optics: Electromagnetic Theory of Propagation, Interference and Diffraction of Light

    Max Born and Emil Wolf. Principles of Optics: Electromagnetic Theory of Propagation, Interference and Diffraction of Light . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 7 edition, 1999

    1999

  27. [35]

    Diffraction Gratings Handbook, eighth edition

    Christopher Palmer. Diffraction Gratings Handbook, eighth edition . 03 2020

    2020

  28. [36]

    Physically Based Rendering: From Theory to Imple- mentation

    Matt Pharr, Wenzel Jakob, and Greg Humphreys. Physically Based Rendering: From Theory to Imple- mentation. Morgan Kaufmann, 3rd edition, 2016

    2016

  29. [37]

    Optimal overlayer inspired by photuris firefly improves light-extraction efficiency of existing light-emitting diodes

    Annick Bay, Nicolas Andr´ e, Micha¨ el Sarrazin, Ali Belarouci, Vincent Aimez, Laurent A Francis, and Jean Pol Vigneron. Optimal overlayer inspired by photuris firefly improves light-extraction efficiency of existing light-emitting diodes. Optics Express, 21(101):A179–A189, 2013

    2013

  30. [38]

    Optimization by a genetic algorithm of the light-extraction efficiency of a gan light-emitting diode

    Alexandre Mayer and Annick Bay. Optimization by a genetic algorithm of the light-extraction efficiency of a gan light-emitting diode. Journal of Optics , 17(2):025002, 2015. 12

    2015

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.