Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33440826›Full record

ReviewNanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2021

Role of Nanoimprint Lithography for Strongly Miniaturized Optical Spectrometers.

Hartmut Hillmer, Carsten Woidt, André Istock, Aliaksei Kobylinskiy, Duc Toan Nguyen, Naureen Ahmed, Robert Brunner, Thomas Kusserow

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Hartmut HillmerInstitute of Nanostructure Technologies and Analytics (INA) and Center for Interdisciplinary Nanostructure Science and Technology (CINSaT), University of Kassel, 34132 Kassel, Germany.
Carsten WoidtInstitute of Nanostructure Technologies and Analytics (INA) and Center for Interdisciplinary Nanostructure Science and Technology (CINSaT), University of Kassel, 34132 Kassel, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-6742-3604
André IstockInstitute of Nanostructure Technologies and Analytics (INA) and Center for Interdisciplinary Nanostructure Science and Technology (CINSaT), University of Kassel, 34132 Kassel, Germany.
Aliaksei KobylinskiyInstitute of Nanostructure Technologies and Analytics (INA) and Center for Interdisciplinary Nanostructure Science and Technology (CINSaT), University of Kassel, 34132 Kassel, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-7194-3805
Duc Toan NguyenInstitute of Nanostructure Technologies and Analytics (INA) and Center for Interdisciplinary Nanostructure Science and Technology (CINSaT), University of Kassel, 34132 Kassel, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-5794-3948
Naureen AhmedInstitute of Nanostructure Technologies and Analytics (INA) and Center for Interdisciplinary Nanostructure Science and Technology (CINSaT), University of Kassel, 34132 Kassel, Germany.
Robert BrunnerApplied Optics, Department SciTec, University of Applied Sciences Jena, Carl-Zeiss-Promenade 2, 07745 Jena, Germany.
Thomas KusserowInstitute of Nanostructure Technologies and Analytics (INA) and Center for Interdisciplinary Nanostructure Science and Technology (CINSaT), University of Kassel, 34132 Kassel, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Optical spectrometers and sensors have gained enormous importance in metrology and information technology, frequently involving the question of size, resolution, sensitivity, spectral range, efficiency, reliability, and cost. Nanomaterials and nanotechnological fabrication technologies have huge potential to enable an optimization between these demands, which in some cases are counteracting each other. This paper focuses on the visible and near infrared spectral range and on five types of optical sensors (optical spectrometers): classical grating-based miniaturized spectrometers, arrayed waveguide grating devices, static Fabry-Pérot (FP) filter arrays on sensor arrays, tunable microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) FP filter arrays, and MEMS tunable photonic crystal filters. The comparison between this selection of concepts concentrates on (i) linewidth and resolution, (ii) required space for a selected spectral range, (iii) efficiency in using available light, and (iv) potential of nanoimprint for cost reduction and yield increase. The main part of this review deals with our own results in the field of static FP filter arrays and MEMS tunable FP filter arrays. In addition, technology for efficiency boosting to get more of the available light is demonstrated.

Indexed as

detector arraysFabry–Pérot filtersinterferometerslinewidthminiaturizationnanoimprintoptical spectrometersphotonic nanomaterialstunable MEMS

Identifiers

PMID33440826
PMCPMC7827089

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.