2024
DOI: 10.1364/josab.507268
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Advances in machine learning optimization for classical and quantum photonics

M. Sanchez,
C. Everly,
P. A. Postigo

Abstract: The development and optimization of photonic devices and various other nanostructure electromagnetic devices present a computationally intensive task. Much optimization relies on finite-difference time-domain or finite element analysis simulations, which can become very computationally demanding for finely detailed structures and dramatically reduce the available optimization space. In recent years, various inverse design machine learning (ML) techniques have been successfully applied to realize previously une… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2024
2024
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 152 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, compared with conventional physics-based device modeling and design approach, broad adoption of data-driven ML methods is still constrained due to the presence of a number of technical challenges (e.g., the burden of generating gigantic amount of labeled data through simulations and physical experiments to train ML models 5 , risk of unexpected device behavior since ML models even if trained using carefully-assembled data sets may contain singular points at which their predictions can diverge 66 , inflexibility of the ML-based approach since even minor device modifications may require generation of entire training data from the scratch 66 , etc.) as well as various persisting non-technological barriers including explainability and accountability issues 67 , expert workforce limitations, absence of essential standardization frameworks 68 , etc., as mentioned in Table 1 .…”
Section: Prospective Solutions For Non-technological Limiting Factorsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, compared with conventional physics-based device modeling and design approach, broad adoption of data-driven ML methods is still constrained due to the presence of a number of technical challenges (e.g., the burden of generating gigantic amount of labeled data through simulations and physical experiments to train ML models 5 , risk of unexpected device behavior since ML models even if trained using carefully-assembled data sets may contain singular points at which their predictions can diverge 66 , inflexibility of the ML-based approach since even minor device modifications may require generation of entire training data from the scratch 66 , etc.) as well as various persisting non-technological barriers including explainability and accountability issues 67 , expert workforce limitations, absence of essential standardization frameworks 68 , etc., as mentioned in Table 1 .…”
Section: Prospective Solutions For Non-technological Limiting Factorsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Particularly compelling is their application in deep learning and pattern recognition, where PNNs harness the parallel processing capabilities of light to execute intricate neural network operations at remarkable speeds, facilitating swift inference and training tasks that strain conventional electronic systems [ 24 , 25 , 26 ]. Moreover, PNNs boast exceptional energy efficiency owing to the minimal losses inherent in photonics, rendering them well-suited for deployment in energy-constrained settings and portable devices.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%