Cited by 43Metamaterials and Metasurfaces ApplicationsAdvanced optical system designPlasmonic and Surface Plasmon Research

Inverse design of optical elements based on arrays of dielectric spheres

Open access
Zhan, Alan, Fryett, Taylor K., Colburn, Shane, Majumdar, Arka·2018·Applied Optics

Abstract

Arrays of wavelength scale scatterers are a promising platform for designing optical elements with a compact footprint. The large number of degrees of freedom in this system allows for unique and plentiful functionalities. However, the many variables also create a complex design problem. While intuitive forward design methods work for simple optical elements, they often fail to produce complicated elements, especially those involving multiple elements. We present an inverse design methodology for large arrays of wavelength scale spheres based on both adjoint optimization or sensitivity analysis and generalized multi-sphere Mie theory as a solution to the design problem. We validate our methodology by designing two sets of optical elements with scatterers on sub-wavelength and super-wavelength periodic grids. Both sets consist of a singlet and a doublet lens with one and two layers of spheres respectively designed for 1550 nm. The designed NA is ∼0.33 (∼0.5) for the sub-wavelength (super-wavelength) periodic structure. We find that with the sub-wavelength periodicity, the full width at half-maximum of the focal spot produced by the singlet and doublet is smaller than that produced by an ideal lens with the same geometric parameters. Finally, we simulate a realistic experimental scenario for the doublet, where the spheres are placed on a substrate with the same refractive index. We find the performance is similar, but with lower intensity at the focal spot and larger spot size. The method described here will simplify the design procedure for complicated multi-functional optical elements and or scatterer array-based volume optics based on a specified figure of merit.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1364/ao.57.001437

Cites

53 of 53 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Topology optimization has been used to design photonic crystals, integrated photonics devices, and metamaterials with superior performance metrics than those based on conventional designs.

    “This technique has been used to design photonic crystals [15], integrated photonics devices [16,17], and metamaterials [18–24] with superior performance metrics than those based on conventional designs.”

    From Robust design of topology-optimized metasurfaces (2019) · cites this paper as [23]

    The Introduction (p. 2) describes gradient-based inverse design of dielectric-sphere arrays by optimizing sphere radii, supporting the metamaterial-related design example to which this citation is attached. It does not describe the method as topology optimization or establish superior performance metrics relative to conventional designs. The paper does not address the separately cited photonic-crystal and integrated-photonics examples. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 54 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [36]36. sensitivity analysis. II. FDTD case," IEEE Transactions on Magnetics 37 (2001).
  2. [49]49. A. A. Maznev and O. B. Wright, "Upholding the diffraction limit in the focusing of light and sound," in ArXiv e-prints, (2016).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zhan, A., Fryett, T. K., Colburn, S., & Majumdar, A.
Affiliations
University of Washington (US)
Corresponding author
  • Zhan, Alan
  • Fryett, Taylor K.
  • Colburn, Shane
  • Majumdar, Arka
Venue
Applied Optics
Published
2018-02-16
Volume
57
Issue
6
Pages
1437
ISSN
  • 0003-6935 (ISSN-L)
  • 1559-128X
  • 2155-3165
OpenAlex
W2789174688
Cited by
43
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 3
FWCI
2.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Applied Optics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
University of Washington (UW), Seattle
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Electronic, Optical and Magnetic Materials › Metamaterials and Metasurfaces Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Advanced optical system design
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Plasmonic and Surface Plasmon Research
Keywords
inverse design, adjoint-based optimization, sensitivity analysis, singlet lens, doublet lens, numerical aperture, focal spot size, 1550 nm

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review