| Title |
Dissipatively coupled waveguide networks for coherent diffusive photonics
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nature Communications, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1038/s41467-017-02048-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sebabrata Mukherjee, Dmitri Mogilevtsev, Gregory Ya. Slepyan, Thomas H. Doherty, Robert R. Thomson, Natalia Korolkova |
| Abstract |
A photonic circuit is generally described as a structure in which light propagates by unitary exchange and transfers reversibly between channels. In contrast, the term 'diffusive' is more akin to a chaotic propagation in scattering media, where light is driven out of coherence towards a thermal mixture. Based on the dynamics of open quantum systems, the combination of these two opposites can result in novel techniques for coherent light control. The crucial feature of these photonic structures is dissipative coupling between modes, via an interaction with a common reservoir. Here, we demonstrate experimentally that such systems can perform optical equalisation to smooth multimode light, or act as a distributor, guiding it into selected channels. Quantum thermodynamically, these systems can act as catalytic coherent reservoirs by performing perfect non-Landauer erasure. For lattice structures, localised stationary states can be supported in the continuum, similar to compacton-like states in conventional flat-band lattices. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 20% |
| Belarus | 1 | 10% |
| Germany | 1 | 10% |
| Italy | 1 | 10% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 4 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 70% |
| Scientists | 3 | 30% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 38 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 9 | 24% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 8% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 6 | 16% |
| Unknown | 7 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Physics and Astronomy | 23 | 61% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Chemical Engineering | 1 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 8 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 December 2017.
All research outputs
#4,752,591
of 24,010,679 outputs
Outputs from Nature Communications
#34,033
of 50,791 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#97,999
of 446,276 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Communications
#961
of 1,465 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,010,679 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 50,791 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 56.2. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 446,276 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,465 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.