Now 5229 visitors
Today:0 Yesterday:0
Total: 147754 212S 50P 4R
2026-10-20, Week 43
Member Login
TACT Journal Homepage
Call for Paper
Committee
Find My Paper
Author Homepage
Statistics & History
Welcome Message
Paper Procedure
FAQ
Paper Archives
Outstanding Papers
Program & Proceedings
Presentation Platform
Hotel & Travel Info
Photo Gallery
Scheduler Login
Seminar
Archives Login
Sponsors




















Paper Number Author:
Paper Title
Keyword
Q&A Number **Select your question number !!
Questioner eMail:
Question
Answer
by
Author
Save Q&A

* Edit or answer any Q&A by selecting Q&A number Hyper Link below + Write button (Save)
ICACT20260376 Question.1
Questioner: kanampiumw@wssu.edu    2026-02-17 ¿ÀÈÄ 5:15:08
ICACT20260376 Answer.1
Answer by Auhor 1732955442@qq.com   2026-02-17 ¿ÀÈÄ 5:15:08
Chrome Click!!
You have stated that the choice of the 10 nanometers central air-hole defect is smaller than the guided wavelength. Is this 10 an arbitrary number or a result of considering the diminishing return effects? Thank you for your insightful question. The choice of a 110 nm (not 10 nm) central air-hole defect is not arbitrary, but rather the result of a careful optimization process that takes into account both physical principles and practical fabrication constraints. First, the dimension is deliberately chosen to be subwavelength (i.e., smaller than the operating wavelength) to enable the slot-waveguide effect, which relies on the discontinuity of the electric displacement field at high-index-contrast interfaces. This effect becomes significant only when the low-index region is sufficiently narrow—typically on the order of tens to hundreds of nanometers—to concentrate and enhance the optical field. Second, we considered diminishing returns in terms of optical confinement and modal loss. As the core size decreases below a certain threshold, the increase in field enhancement becomes marginal, while fabrication complexity and scattering losses rise significantly. Through systematic simulations, we found that 110 nm offers an optimal trade-off between strong field confinement and practical realizability, balancing performance with feasibility. Thus, the selected value is both physically motivated and numerically validated, ensuring that the fiber operates effectively within the subwavelength regime while remaining manufacturable with current technology.
ICACT20260376 Question.2
Questioner: kanampiumw@wssu.edu    2026-02-17 ¿ÀÈÄ 5:17:53
ICACT20260376 Answer.2
Answer by Auhor 1732955442@qq.com   2026-02-17 ¿ÀÈÄ 5:17:53
Chrome Click!!
Are there any trade-offs in choosing such a air-hole defect size? Yes, several important trade-offs exist: 1.Confinement vs. Loss: The 110 nm core enables strong subwavelength confinement via the slot-waveguide effect, but smaller cores increase scattering losses from surface roughness and inherent leakage losses. 2.Performance vs. Fabricability: This dimension optimizes field enhancement and polarization selectivity (ER = 43.393 dB), but demands nanoscale fabrication precision. Deviations of ¡¾10 nm would significantly alter modal properties. 3.Extinction Ratio vs. Insertion Loss: The proximity to the metal film that enables high ER (43.393 dB) also contributes to baseline loss for the desired polarization (IL = 1.553 dB). 4.Wavelength Flexibility: Optimal confinement occurs within specific wavelength ranges; performance degrades outside the designed band. The 110 nm value represents an optimal balance—small enough to leverage subwavelength effects, yet large enough to maintain practical fabricability and acceptable loss.