Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 35 references

Low-loss Sb$_2$S$_3$ Optical Phase Shifter Enabled by Optimizing Sputtering Conditions

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read By reducing sputtering power, Sb2S3 films become near-stoichiometric and transparent at telecom wavelengths, yielding an optical phase shifter with only 0.33 dB of loss per π phase shift at 1.55 μm.

desk verdict A useful process–property study that identifies sputtering power as a knob for Sb2S3 stoichiometry and shows a good (not record) phase-shifter result; the title overclaims causality, but the core material science is solid. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.10752 v2 pith:IVNM2QJP submitted 2025-05-15 physics.optics physics.app-ph

Yuto Miyatake , Tomohiro Anda , Yosuke Wakita , Kotaro Makino , Shogo Hatayama , Makoto Okano , Kasidit Toprasertpong , Shinichi Takagi
show 1 more author
Mitsuru Takenaka
This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.opticsphysics.app-ph
keywords Sb2S3opticalphaseshifterchangematerialsputteringoptimizationstoichiometrysiliconphotonicsnear-infraredopticsnon-volatile
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

With lower sputtering power and lower argon flow, sputtered $\mathrm{Sb_2S_3}$ films land closer to the 40:60 Sb:S stoichiometric composition, and that compositional control determines how transparent the crystallized film is at telecom wavelengths. The paper establishes this by Rutherford backscattering composition analysis, Raman spectroscopy, and spectroscopic ellipsometry on films deposited at 10, 30, and 50 W, then confirms it in working devices: a phase shifter made from the 10 W film reaches 0.33 dB loss per $\pi$ phase shift at 1.55 $\mu\mathrm{m}$, one of the lowest values reported for $\mathrm{Sb_2S_3}$ in the near infrared. A sympathetic reader would care because this is a selenium-free, non-volatile phase-change material that could be integrated into silicon photonics without toxic elements.

What carries the argument

The machinery is the link between sputtering conditions and film stoichiometry, read through three measurements. Rutherford backscattering gives absolute Sb and S atomic fractions and shows the Sb-rich trend with power; Raman spectroscopy gives bonding evidence, with Sb–Sb modes at 113 and 150 cm$^{-1}$ appearing as power increases; spectroscopic ellipsometry, fitted with one Tauc–Lorentz plus one Gaussian oscillator, yields the refractive index and extinction coefficient spectra. The decisive numbers are the wavelengths where the crystalline extinction coefficient vanishes: below 910 nm for 30 W and at 824 nm for 10 W, versus not at all up to 1688 nm for 50 W. Device-level loss and phase shift are extracted from straight waveguides and add-drop micro-ring resonators of different shifter lengths, giving loss per unit length and phase shift per unit length at 1.55 $\mu\mathrm{m}$.

What would settle it

Measure the absorption of a crystalline Sb2S3 film at 1550 nm directly—by photothermal deflection spectroscopy, or by comparing waveguide transmission against a scattering-only baseline—and check whether the extinction coefficient is zero; any nonzero value would overturn the claim that the low loss comes from transparency rather than residual absorption.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that off-stoichiometry, not an intrinsic property of $\mathrm{Sb_2S_3}$, is the main source of the residual near-infrared extinction seen in crystalline $\mathrm{Sb_2S_3}$ films. RBS shows films sputtered at 30 and 50 W are Sb-rich (Sb:S = 43.2:56.8 and 43.8:56.2 at.%) while the 10 W film is slightly S-rich (38.8:61.2), and Raman spectra reveal Sb–Sb bonding modes appearing at higher power. The 10 W crystalline film's extinction coefficient reaches zero at 824 nm, so it is transparent at 1550 nm, whereas the 50 W film remains absorbing across the whole measured range to 1688 nm. In fabricated silicon waveguides, the optimized film gives a crystalline-state loss of 0.013 dB/$\mu\mathrm{m}$ and a phase shift of 0.041 $\pi/\mu\mathrm{m}$, combining to 0.33 dB/$\pi$ at 1550 nm.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the ellipsometric fitting model—one Tauc–Lorentz oscillator plus one Gaussian oscillator—correctly determines that crystalline Sb2S3 has zero absorption at 1550 nm; if weak sub-gap absorption is hiding below the model's sensitivity, part of the measured 0.013 dB/μm loss is absorption, not scattering, and the material is not truly transparent there.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A $\mathrm{Sb_2S_3}$ phase shifter with 0.33 dB/$\pi$ at 1550 nm is competitive with the best selenium-containing phase shifters while avoiding selenium, so it becomes a realistic non-volatile building block for silicon photonic circuits.
  • Because crystalline $\mathrm{Sb_2S_3}$ is effectively transparent at the operating wavelength, the device performs near-pure phase modulation: switching changes refractive index without modulating intensity.
  • The 10 W film's strong visible-light absorption makes it suitable for laser-writing and amorphization, so the same low-loss film can act as a rewritable platform for arbitrary optical components.
  • Adopting the optimized sputtering condition (10 W, 18 sccm) is a directly transferable recipe for other groups making $\mathrm{Sb_2S_3}$ photonics, which should reduce the spread of reported losses.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If off-stoichiometry is the common cause of residual near-infrared absorption in chalcogenide phase-change films, the same power-and-flow optimization should transfer to $\mathrm{Sb_2Se_3}$ and GSTS films, potentially lowering their losses without changing material chemistry.
  • The measured phase shift (0.041 $\pi/\mu\mathrm{m}$) being smaller than the simulated value (0.067 $\pi/\mu\mathrm{m}$) suggests the active film is roughly 12 nm rather than 20 nm; a thicker film would shorten the device but trade in some loss, a trade-off the paper leaves unquantified.
  • A direct absorption measurement on the crystalline film—rather than an ellipsometric model—would separate scattering from sub-gap absorption and determine how much headroom remains in the 0.33 dB/$\pi$ figure.
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

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports a study of RF-magnetron-sputtered Sb2S3 films for low-loss optical phase shifters at 1.55 μm. The authors use RBS to show that the film composition approaches stoichiometric Sb2S3 as sputtering power and Ar flow are reduced, and Raman spectra corroborate the absence of Sb-Sb bonding at low power. Spectroscopic ellipsometry with a Tauc-Lorentz plus Gaussian model indicates that the extinction coefficient of crystalline Sb2S3 vanishes at shorter wavelengths for lower sputtering power, motivating a 10 W, 18 sccm deposition condition. The authors fabricate Si waveguides with a 20-nm-thick Sb2S3 cladding layer and measure a crystalline-state loss of 0.013 dB/μm and a phase shift of 0.041 π/μm, yielding a loss per π phase shift of 0.33 dB/π at 1.55 μm. The result is benchmarked against prior Sb2S3, Sb2Se3, GST, and GSTS phase shifters.

Significance. If the result holds, the paper provides a useful Se-free, non-volatile phase-shifter material for NIR silicon photonics and a practical recipe for sputtering near-stoichiometric Sb2S3. The manuscript has clear strengths: the RBS, Raman, and ellipsometry data are internally consistent; the headline loss per phase shift is a direct device measurement rather than a fitted extrapolation; and the comparison table and benchmark figures aggregate prior work in a transparent way. The authors also explicitly acknowledge the scatter in cross-laboratory comparisons, which is commendable. However, the central causal claim that sputtering-condition optimization enables the low-loss device is not directly evidenced, and the headline metric is extracted from very few points without uncertainty analysis. These issues are load-bearing for the paper's main claim and require revision.

major comments (4)
  1. [§3 and Title] The title and Abstract claim that optimizing sputtering conditions enables the low-loss phase shifter, but every device result in §3 is obtained from a single sputtering condition (10 W, 18 sccm Ar). The power dependence of the material figure of merit is established only from blanket-film ellipsometry (§2.2, Fig. 5), and the device-level benchmark in Fig. 11 pools results from different laboratories, tools, and integration schemes, with large scatter that the authors themselves acknowledge. Because the measured 0.33 dB/π could in principle reflect fabrication quality (sidewall roughness, conformality, capping-layer effects) rather than the stoichiometry improvement, the causal claim is not directly evidenced by the presented data. A device-level comparison across at least one higher sputtering power, or a substantially softened causal claim, is required.
  2. [§3.2 and §3.3] The headline figures of merit are extracted from very few data points with no stated uncertainties. The crystalline-state loss per unit length (0.013 dB/μm) is obtained from straight-waveguide measurements with phase-shifter lengths up to 100 μm (Fig. 9(d)), and the phase shift per unit length (0.041 π/μm) is obtained from only two micro-ring lengths, 10 μm and 20 μm (Fig. 10(d)). No error bars, numbers of repeated devices, or fit residuals are reported. Since the loss per π phase shift is derived from the ratio of these two slopes, the absence of uncertainty analysis makes it impossible to judge whether the value 0.33 dB/π is statistically distinct from neighboring values in Table 1. Please report per-length statistics, numbers of measured devices, and confidence intervals.
  3. [§2.2 and §3.2] The claim that crystalline Sb2S3 has exactly zero extinction coefficient at 1550 nm is a property of the chosen oscillator model (one Tauc-Lorentz and one Gaussian oscillator), not a model-independent measurement. If weak sub-gap absorption exists below the model's sensitivity, the measured 0.013 dB/μm waveguide loss would be partly absorption, weakening the assertion in §3.2 that the excess loss is dominated by scattering at surfaces and grain boundaries. A model-free validation (for example, calorimetric or photothermal measurements on the film, or a cutback series with different mode overlap) would substantiate the material-level transparency claim; alternatively, the scattering-dominance statement should be explicitly labeled as an assumption.
  4. [§3.3] The reconciliation of the measured phase shift with simulation by postulating a 12-nm Sb2S3 thickness is not securely grounded. The RBS thicknesses (13.5-14.0 nm) and ellipsometric thicknesses (18-20 nm) are for blanket films, not for the actual device in the waveguide window, and the 'agreement' with RBS is invoked only after the discrepancy is observed. This gives a circular flavor to the simulation comparison. The measured phase shift per unit length does not depend on this assumption, so the discussion should be reframed as a hypothesis and supported by a direct thickness measurement (e.g., TEM on the device cross-section) or removed.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§2.2, §3.2] Section numbering is duplicated: '2.2 Characterization of Optical Properties' repeats '2.2 Analysis of Composition', and §3.2 is used twice ('Measurement Setup' and 'Measurement of Loss'). Please renumber.
  2. [§3.2] Figure callouts are inconsistent: the text refers to Fig. 8(a)-(c) for the straight-waveguide images and spectra, but the actual figure for these data is Fig. 9(a)-(d). Please correct the cross-references.
  3. [§3.4] The sentence 'The sputtering powers reported in [14], [31], and [32] are 27 sccm, 20 sccm, and 30 sccm' appears to mix units; sccm is a flow rate, not a power. Please verify the original reports and correct the wording and axis label in Fig. 11.
  4. [§2.1] The text says the Ar-flow-dependent atomic concentrations are 'plotted as a function of the sputtering power' in Fig. 3(b), but the scan variable is Ar flow. The caption or axis label should be corrected to avoid confusion.
  5. [Appendix B] The ellipsometry fit residuals are not shown; a plot of the measured versus fitted Ψ and Δ spectra, or at least a discussion of the MSE values from Tables 2 and 3 in the main text, would help support the strong k=0 conclusion at 1550 nm.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the loss per π is a direct device measurement, and each supporting characterization is an independent input.

full rationale

The central result, 0.33 dB/π at 1.55 μm, is derived by directly measuring loss per unit length (0.013 dB/μm from length-dependent straight-waveguide transmission) and phase shift per unit length (0.041 π/μm from microring resonance shifts), then taking their ratio; no fitted parameter is renamed as this prediction. The composition trend (RBS) and optical-constant trend with sputtering power (spectroscopic ellipsometry) are independent inputs, and the choice of 10 W is based on those data. The ellipsometric model's Tauc-Lorentz oscillator imposes k=0 below its fitted band gap, so the statement that crystalline Sb2S3 is transparent at 1550 nm is model-dependent; however, this interpretation is used only to attribute the measured waveguide loss to scattering rather than absorption, and it does not enter the extraction of the headline loss per phase shift. The post-hoc 12-nm thickness assumption in Sec. 3.3 reconciles the simulated phase shift with the measured one but is not used to produce the measured phase shift or the final figure of merit. No load-bearing self-citation or imported-uniqueness argument appears: prior works [10] and [12] are cited as demonstrations and for benchmark equations, not as constraints that force the present result. The lack of same-lab device-level comparison across sputtering powers is an evidence limitation for the causal title claim, not circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central figure of merit (0.33 dB/π) is a measured quantity, but its interpretation as a transparent crystalline state rests on ellipsometry model fits and a post-hoc thickness assumption. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • Sb2S3 film thickness in phase shifter = ~12 nm (target 20 nm)
    In Section 3.3, the authors assume the actual Sb2S3 thickness is about 12 nm to reconcile the measured phase shift (0.041 π/μm) with the simulated value (0.067 π/μm) based on a 20-nm film. The thickness is not directly measured on the device.
  • Ellipsometry oscillator parameters (Tauc-Lorentz and Gaussian) = Not listed; MSEs 6.8-11.5
    The optical constants in Section 2.2 are obtained by fitting a Gen-Osc model with one Tauc-Lorentz and one Gaussian oscillator to ellipsometric data. The resulting extinction coefficient spectra, and the claim that k=0 at 1550 nm, depend on this parametric fit.
  • Loss per unit length and phase shift per unit length slopes = 0.007 and 0.013 dB/μm; 0.041 π/μm
    These are extracted as slopes of linear fits through a few measured points (waveguides up to 100 μm long; MRRs with 10 and 20 μm phase shifters). They are treated as measurements, but the fits themselves introduce uncertainty not reported.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Rutherford backscattering spectrometry provides accurate atomic concentrations of Sb and S in the thin Sb2S3 films.
    Used in Section 2.2 to establish the composition trends that motivate the choice of 10 W deposition.
  • domain assumption The ellipsometric model with one Tauc-Lorentz and one Gaussian oscillator correctly represents the Sb2S3 optical constants over 193-1688 nm.
    Used in Section 2.2 to conclude that k vanishes at 824 nm for the 10 W crystalline film, placing the material's transparency at 1550 nm.
  • domain assumption Annealing at 310 °C for 5 min after 270 °C for 5 min fully crystallizes the Sb2S3 films for all deposition conditions.
    Stated in Section 2.1; the phase shifter loss and phase shift measurements rely on complete switching between amorphous and crystalline states.
  • domain assumption The MRR resonance wavelength shift is caused only by the refractive index change of Sb2S3, with no significant thermal, stress, or chemical contributions during measurement.
    Used in Section 3.3 to convert resonance shifts into phase shift per unit length.
  • domain assumption The residual loss of the crystalline phase shifter beyond the Si waveguide propagation loss is due to light scattering, not absorption, because the extinction coefficient is zero.
    Invoked in Section 3.2 to explain the measured 0.013 dB/μm crystalline-state loss; it presumes the ellipsometry-based k=0 is valid in the device.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Low-loss Sb$_2$S$_3$ Optical Phase Shifter Enabled by Optimizing Sputtering Conditions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/IVNM2QJP

@misc{pith2026250510752,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Low-loss Sb$_2$S$_3$ Optical Phase Shifter Enabled by Optimizing Sputtering Conditions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/IVNM2QJP}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.10752}
}
abstract

By quantitatively evaluating the atomic concentrations of sputtered Sb$_2$S$_3$ films with different sputtering powers and Ar flows, we reveal that a sputtered Sb$_2$S$_3$ film becomes close to the stoichiometric composition as the sputtering power and Ar flow decrease. We characterize the optical properties of Sb$_2$S$_3$ and show that the lower sputtering power leads to a better figure of merit of Sb$_2$S$_3$ as an optical phase shifter in the near infrared (NIR) range. Based on these results, we achieve a loss per phase shift of 0.33 dB/$\pi$ at a wavelength of 1.55 $\mu$m, one of the lowest losses among Sb$_2$S$_3$ phase shifters in the NIR range.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

35 extracted references · 35 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Phase -change materials for non-volatile photonic applications,

    M. Wuttig, H. Bhaskaran, and T. Taubner, "Phase -change materials for non-volatile photonic applications," Nat. Photonics 11(8), 465–476 (2017)

    work page 2017

  2. [2]

    On -chip integrated photonic devices based on phase change materials,

    M. S. Nisar, X. Yang, L. Lu, J. Chen, and L. Zhou, "On -chip integrated photonic devices based on phase change materials," Photonics 8(6), 205 (2021)

    work page 2021

  3. [3]

    Roadmap for phase change materials in photonics and beyond,

    P. Prabhathan, K. V. Sreekanth, J. Teng, J. H. Ko, Y. J. Yoo, H.-H. Jeong, Y. Lee, S. Zhang, T. Cao, C.-C. Popescu, B. Mills, T. Gu, Z. Fang, R. Chen, H. Tong, Y. Wang, Q. He, Y. Lu, Z. Liu, H. Yu, A. Mandal, Y. Cui, A. S. Ansari, V. Bhingardive, M. Kang, C. K. Lai, M. Merklein, M. J. Müller, Y. M. Song, Z. Tian, J. Hu, M. Losurdo, A. Majumdar, X. Miao, X...

    work page 2023

  4. [4]

    Integrated all-photonic non-volatile multi-level memory,

    C. Ríos, M. Stegmaier, P. Hosseini, D. Wang, T. Scherer, C. D. Wright, H. Bhaskaran, and W. H. P. Pernice, "Integrated all-photonic non-volatile multi-level memory," Nat. Photonics 9(11), 725–732 (2015)

    work page 2015

  5. [5]

    Small-sized optical gate switch using Ge2Sb2Te5 phase -change material integrated with silicon waveguide,

    Y. Ikuma, Y. Shoji, M. Kuwahara, X. Wang, K. Kintaka, H. Kawashima, D. Tanaka, and H. Tsuda, "Small-sized optical gate switch using Ge2Sb2Te5 phase -change material integrated with silicon waveguide," Electron. Lett. 46(5), 368 (2010)

    work page 2010

  6. [6]

    Miniature multilevel optical memristive switch using phase change material,

    H. Zhang, L. Zhou, L. Lu, J. Xu, N. Wang, H. Hu, B. M. A. Rahman, Z. Zhou, and J. Chen, "Miniature multilevel optical memristive switch using phase change material," ACS Photonics 6(9), 2205–2212 (2019)

    work page 2019

  7. [7]

    Nonvolatile Electrically Reconfigurable Integrated Photonic Switch Enabled by a Silicon PIN Diode Heater,

    J. Zheng, Z. Fang, C. Wu, S. Zhu, P. Xu, J. K. Doylend, S. Deshmukh, E. Pop, S. Dunham, M. Li, and A. Majumdar, "Nonvolatile Electrically Reconfigurable Integrated Photonic Switch Enabled by a Silicon PIN Diode Heater," Adv. Mater. 32(31), e2001218 (2020)

    work page 2020

  8. [8]

    Broadband nonvolatile electrically controlled programmable units in silicon photonics,

    R. Chen, Z. Fang, J. E. Fröch, P. Xu, J. Zheng, and A. Majumdar, "Broadband nonvolatile electrically controlled programmable units in silicon photonics," ACS Photonics 9(6), 2142–2150 (2022)

    work page 2022

Show all 35 references
  1. [9]

    Plasmonic nanogap enhanced phase -change devices with dual electrical -optical functionality,

    N. Farmakidis, N. Youngblood, X. Li, J. Tan, J. L. Swett, Z. Cheng, C. D. Wright, W. H. P. Pernice, and H. Bhaskaran, "Plasmonic nanogap enhanced phase -change devices with dual electrical -optical functionality," Sci. Adv. 5(11), eaaw2687 (2019)

    2019

  2. [10]

    Non -volatile compact optical phase shifter based on Ge 2Sb2Te5 operating at 2.3 µm,

    Y. Miyatake, C. P. Ho, P. Pitchappa, R. Singh, K. Makino, J. Tominaga, N. Miyata, T. Nakano, K. Toprasertpong, S. Takagi, and M. Takenaka, "Non -volatile compact optical phase shifter based on Ge 2Sb2Te5 operating at 2.3 µm," Opt. Mater. Express 12(12), 4582 (2022)

    2022

  3. [11]

    Broadband transparent optical phase change materials for high -performance nonvolatile photonics,

    Y. Zhang, J. B. Chou, J. Li, H. Li, Q. Du, A. Yadav, S. Zhou, M. Y. Shalaginov, Z. Fang, H. Zhong, C. Roberts, P. Robinson, B. Bohlin, C. Ríos, H. Lin, M. Kang, T. Gu, J. Warner, V. Liberman, K. Richardson, and J. Hu, "Broadband transparent optical phase change materials for h...

    2019

  4. [12]

    Proposal of low -loss non-volatile mid-infrared optical phase shifter based on Ge 2Sb2Te3S2,

    Y. Miyatake, K. Makino, J. Tominaga, N. Miyata, T. Nakano, M. Okano, K. Toprasertpong, S. Takagi, and M. Takenaka, "Proposal of low -loss non-volatile mid-infrared optical phase shifter based on Ge 2Sb2Te3S2," IEEE Trans. Electron Devices 70(4), 2106–2112 (2023)

    2023

  5. [13]

    A new family of ultralow loss reversible phase‐change materials for photonic integrated circuits: Sb 2 S 3 and Sb 2 Se 3,

    M. Delaney, I. Zeimpekis, D. Lawson, D. W. Hewak, and O. L. Muskens, "A new family of ultralow loss reversible phase‐change materials for photonic integrated circuits: Sb 2 S 3 and Sb 2 Se 3," Adv. Funct. Ma ter. 30(36), 2002447 (2020)

    2020

  6. [14]

    Non‐volatile reconfigurable integrated photonics enabled by broadband low‐loss phase change material,

    Z. Fang, J. Zheng, A. Saxena, J. Whitehead, Y. Chen, and A. Majumdar, "Non‐volatile reconfigurable integrated photonics enabled by broadband low‐loss phase change material," Adv. Opt. Mater. 9(9), 2002049 (2021)

    2021

  7. [15]

    Towards low loss non-volatile phase change materials in mid index waveguides,

    J. Faneca, I. Zeimpekis, S. T. Ilie, T. D. Bucio, K. Grabska, D. W. Hewak, and F. Y. Gardes, "Towards low loss non-volatile phase change materials in mid index waveguides," Neuromorph. Comput. Eng. 1(1), 014004 (2021)

    2021

  8. [16]

    Reconfigurable InP waveguide components using the Sb2S3 phase change material,

    L. Lu, S. F. G. Reniers, Y. Wang, Y. Jiao, and R. E. Simpson, "Reconfigurable InP waveguide components using the Sb2S3 phase change material," J. Opt. 24(9), 094001 (2022)

    2022

  9. [17]

    Non-volatile electrically programmable integrated photonics with a 5 -bit operation,

    R. Chen, Z. Fang, C. Perez, F. Miller, K. Kumari, A. Saxena, J. Zheng, S. J. Geiger, K. E. Goodson, and A. Majumdar, "Non-volatile electrically programmable integrated photonics with a 5 -bit operation," Nat. Commun. 14(1), 3465 (2023)

    2023

  10. [18]

    Deterministic quasi - continuous tuning of phase-change material integrated on a high-volume 300-mm silicon photonics platform,

    R. Chen, V. Tara, M. Choi, J. Dutta, J. Sim, J. Ye, Z. Fang, J. Zheng, and A. Majumdar, "Deterministic quasi - continuous tuning of phase-change material integrated on a high-volume 300-mm silicon photonics platform," npj Nanophotonics 1(1), 1–9 (2024)

    2024

  11. [19]

    Sb 2S3 as a low- loss phase-change material for mid-IR photonics,

    A. Biegański, M. Perestjuk, R. Armand, A. Della Torre, C. Laprais, G. Saint-Girons, V. Reboud, J.-M. Hartmann, J.-H. Tortai, A. Moreau, J. Lumeau, T. Nguyen, A. Mitchell, C. Monat, S. Cueff, and C. Grillet, "Sb 2S3 as a low- loss phase-change material for mid-IR photonics," Op...

    2024

  12. [20]

    Electrically -switchable foundry-processed phase change photonic devices,

    C. Ríos, Y. Zhang, Q. Du, C.-C. Popescu, M. Shalaginov, P. Miller, C. M. Roberts, M. Kang, K. A. Richardson, S. An, C. Fowler, H. Zhang, T. Gu, S. A. Vitale, and J. Hu, "Electrically -switchable foundry-processed phase change photonic devices," in Active Photonic Platforms XII...

    2021

  13. [21]

    Magnetron -sputtered and thermal - evaporated low-loss Sb-Se phase-change films in non-volatile integrated photonics,

    K. Lei, M. Wei, Z. Chen, J. Wu, J. Jian, J. Du, J. Li, L. Li, and H. Lin, "Magnetron -sputtered and thermal - evaporated low-loss Sb-Se phase-change films in non-volatile integrated photonics," Opt. Mater. Express 12(7), 2815 (2022)

    2022

  14. [22]

    Ultra -compact nonvolatile phase shifter based on electrically reprogrammable transparent phase change materials,

    C. Ríos, Q. Du, Y. Zhang, C. -C. Popescu, M. Y. Shalaginov, P. Miller, C. Roberts, M. Kang, K. A. Richardson, T. Gu, S. A. Vitale, and J. Hu, "Ultra -compact nonvolatile phase shifter based on electrically reprogrammable transparent phase change materials," PhotoniX 3(1), 1–13 (2022)

    2022

  15. [23]

    Ultra -low-energy programmable non -volatile silicon photonics based on phase-change materials with graphene heaters,

    Z. Fang, R. Chen, J. Zheng, A. I. Khan, K. M. Neilson, S. J. Geiger, D. M. Callahan, M. G. Moebius, A. Saxena, M. E. Chen, C. Rios, J. Hu, E. Pop, and A. Majumdar, "Ultra -low-energy programmable non -volatile silicon photonics based on phase-change materials with graphene hea...

    2022

  16. [24]

    Non -Volatile Optical Switch Element Enabled by Low-Loss Phase Change Material,

    X. Yang, L. Lu, Y. Li, Y. Wu, Z. Li, J. Chen, and L. Zhou, "Non -Volatile Optical Switch Element Enabled by Low-Loss Phase Change Material," Adv. Funct. Mater. 33(42), 2304601 (2023)

    2023

  17. [25]

    Monolithic back-end-of-line integration of phase change materials into foundry-manufactured silicon photonics,

    M. Wei, K. Xu, B. Tang, J. Li, Y. Yun, P. Zhang, Y. Wu, K. Bao, K. Lei, Z. Chen, H. Ma, C. Sun, R. Liu, M. Li, L. Li, and H. Lin, "Monolithic back-end-of-line integration of phase change materials into foundry-manufactured silicon photonics," Nat. Commun. 15(1), 2786 (2024)

    2024

  18. [26]

    On the nature of selenium toxicity and carcinostatic activity,

    J. E. Spallholz, "On the nature of selenium toxicity and carcinostatic activity," Free Radic. Biol. Med. 17(1), 45– 64 (1994)

    1994

  19. [27]

    Wide bandgap phase change material tuned visible photonics,

    W. Dong, H. Liu, J. K. Behera, L. Lu, R. J. H. Ng, K. V. Sreekanth, X. Zhou, J. K. W. Yang, and R. E. Simpson, "Wide bandgap phase change material tuned visible photonics," Adv. Funct. Mater. 29(6), 1806181 (2019)

    2019

  20. [28]

    Polarization-dependent Raman characterization of Stibnite (Sb[sub 2]S[sub 3]),

    P. Sereni, M. Musso, P. Knoll, P. Blaha, K. Schwarz, G. Schmidt, P. M. Champion, and L. D. Ziegler, "Polarization-dependent Raman characterization of Stibnite (Sb[sub 2]S[sub 3])," in AIP Conference Proceedings (AIP, 2010), 1267, pp. 1131–1132

    2010

  21. [29]

    In situ analysis of the crystallization process of Sb 2 S 3 thin films by Raman scattering and X -ray diffraction,

    R. Parize, T. Cossuet, O. Chaix -Pluchery, H. Roussel, E. Appert, and V. Consonni, "In situ analysis of the crystallization process of Sb 2 S 3 thin films by Raman scattering and X -ray diffraction," Mater. Des. 121, 1–10 (2017)

    2017

  22. [30]

    Effect of pressure on the Raman modes of antimony,

    Policies & Practices and P. Conduct, "Effect of pressure on the Raman modes of antimony," (2006)

    2006

  23. [31]

    Comparison and analysis of phase change materials-based reconfigurable silicon photonic directional couplers,

    T. Y. Teo, M. Krbal, J. Mistrik, J. Prikryl, L. Lu, and R. E. Simpson, "Comparison and analysis of phase change materials-based reconfigurable silicon photonic directional couplers," Opt. Mater. Express 12(2), 606 (2022)

    2022

  24. [32]

    Capping layer effects on Sb2S3-based reconfigurable photonic devices,

    T. Y. Teo, N. Li, L. Y. M. Tobing, A. S. K. Tong, D. K. T. Ng, Z. Ren, C. Lee, L. Y. T. Lee, and R. E. Simpson, "Capping layer effects on Sb2S3-based reconfigurable photonic devices," ACS Photonics 10(9), 3203–3214 (2023)

    2023

  25. [33]

    Rewritable color nanoprints in antimony trisulfide films,

    H. Liu, W. Dong, H. Wang, L. Lu, Q. Ruan, Y. S. Tan, R. E. Simpson, and J. K. W. Yang, "Rewritable color nanoprints in antimony trisulfide films," Sci. Adv. 6(51), eabb7171 (2020)

    2020

  26. [34]

    Rewritable photonic integrated circuit canvas based on low-loss phase change material and nanosecond pulsed lasers,

    F. Miller, R. Chen, J. Fröch, Z. Fang, V. Tara, S. Geiger, and A. Majumdar, "Rewritable photonic integrated circuit canvas based on low-loss phase change material and nanosecond pulsed lasers," Nano Lett. 24(23), 6844– 6849 (2024)

    2024

  27. [35]

    Reconfigurable free form silicon photonics by phase change waveguides,

    G. Shixin, R. Haonan, P. Jingzhe, R. Yang, Z. Zhenqing, Z. Shuang, and C. Tun, "Reconfigurable free form silicon photonics by phase change waveguides," Adv. Opt. Mater. 2402997 (2025)

    2025

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.