Kayvan Mirza | Optinvent: Why does a 250 mAh battery make waveguide efficiency a system-level, not just optical, spec?
10:22 - 11:52
Other snippets from this talk
Summary of the clip:
Why does a 250 mAh battery make waveguide efficiency a system-level, not just optical, spec?
Optical efficiency is a system-level requirement, not just an optics metric. These glasses carry tiny 250 milliamp-hour batteries that must be worn all day, while a smartphone typically has 3,300. That is orders of magnitude bigger, and smartphones have more room to dissipate heat. So AI glasses get throttled: AI and streaming capabilities are limited, defeating the purpose of the product. Waveguide efficiency directly determines what AI glasses can do.
Both diffractive and glass reflective waveguides have issues. To place the virtual image at something less than infinity, say two meters, as the Meta Ray-Ban display does, they both need a push-pull lens. That adds weight, adds complexity and adds cost, and the talk says this is something that needs to be got rid of. Ophthalmic integration is the related problem, and it is an issue when you have a glass waveguide.
Efficiency sits on the key-parameter list beside colour. Comparing waveguides only at the optics misses the point: what matters is what the whole system can sustain on 250 milliamp-hours across a day. Glass reflective and diffractive both carry the push-pull lens penalty, and glass adds an ophthalmic-integration penalty, so neither escapes the system-level efficiency budget that dictates how much AI and streaming the product can actually run.
In this short video, you can learn:
* Optical efficiency is a system-level requirement because the 250 milliamp-hour battery has to last all day, not merely win an optics comparison.
* Diffractive and glass reflective waveguides both need a push-pull lens to move the virtual image closer than infinity, for example two meters, which adds weight, complexity and cost.
* Ophthalmic integration is an issue with glass waveguides, and efficiency ultimately sets how much AI and streaming the product can run.
📋 **Clip Abstract** Optical efficiency is reframed as a system-level requirement: with 250 milliamp-hour batteries against a smartphone's 3,300, waveguide loss decides how much AI and streaming survives thermal throttling. Both diffractive and glass reflective waveguides need a push-pull lens for sub-infinity virtual image distances, and glass adds an ophthalmic-integration problem.
About the speaker:
* Speaker: Kayvan Mirza
* Company: Optinvent
* Event: Eindhoven 2026
* Location: High Tech Campus, Eindhoven
#PushPullLens, #GlassWaveguide, #OphthalmicIntegration, #MilliampHourBudget, #ARWaveguides, #SmartGlasses
This is a highlight of the presentation:
Molded Polymer Relfective 2D Waveguide - A breakthrough for consumer AR
More Highlights from the same talk.
07:43 - 09:48
Why can't diffractive waveguides ride semiconductor-style scaling to a $100 display cost?
Why can't diffractive waveguides ride semiconductor-style scaling to a $100 display cost?
For 2D waveguides, a glass sandwich ends up quite complex and costly. In diffractive, there is a cost floor. The semiconductor scaling claim is true and not true. Take a 300-millimeter glass wafer: high refractive index, very low TTV, very high surface quality. These are expensive. There are 24 dies per wafer—about 20 to 25 dies—and that determines a cost floor. That is a structural limit.
Waveguides have to have a certain size, so you cannot put more dies on the wafer. There is no Moore's law in optics, because we are not going to shrink the waveguides. The things could range from cheaper, lower quality up to 3,000 dollars. Take 2,000 dollars: that gives a cost floor of 83 dollars. We are talking about 100 dollars for the whole display function, as the keynote said we need to hit.
From the nanoimprint perspective, that is all great. But from the cost floor of the substrate, the semiconductor analogy does not work. Semiconductors have cheaper wafers; that is not the case here. There is no Moore's law in optics. The structural limit remains: waveguides must be a certain size, and the expensive glass wafer yields only about 20 to 25 dies. So the diffractive cost floor persists.
In this short video, you can learn:
* A 300-millimeter high-RI glass wafer with very low TTV and high surface quality yields only about 20 to 25 dies, setting a structural cost floor for diffractive 2D waveguides.
* Because waveguides must physically be a certain size, there is no Moore's law in optics and die count cannot scale like semiconductors.
* A $2,000 substrate example gives an $83 cost floor, leaving little room to reach the $100 whole-display-function target stated in the keynote.
📋 **Clip Abstract** Diffractive 2D waveguides face a substrate-driven cost floor, not semiconductor-style scaling. A 300-millimeter high-RI glass wafer with about 20 to 25 dies and a $2,000 substrate example yielding an $83 cost floor shows why the $100 whole-display target is structurally difficult.
About the speaker:
* Speaker: Kayvan Mirza
* Company: Optinvent
* Event: Eindhoven 2026
* Location: High Tech Campus, Eindhoven
#GlassWafer, #HighRIGlass, #DiffractiveWaveguide, #CostFloor, #AROptics, #DisplayManufacturing
15:54 - 17:31
4 g, 1.7 mm, 85% transmittance, 5,000 nits per lumen at 50° FOV — what still falls short?
4 g, 1.7 mm, 85% transmittance, 5,000 nits per lumen at 50° FOV — what still falls short?
A low-birefringence polymer waveguide weighs 4 grams at 1.7 mm thick, with 17 mm eye relief. It projects a two-metre virtual image distance without any push-pull lenses, because that function is performed inside the waveguide itself. That removes the lens stack, which the speaker ties directly to lower complexity, lower cost and lower weight. These are the headline achievements reported so far for the molded reflective approach.
Transmittance reaches 85%, and the presenter stresses this is a real image seen through the waveguide rather than an AI-generated stand-in; it is a parameter they can still play with. Efficiency has reached up to 5,000 nits per lumen at a 50-degree field of view. Those two figures describe a see-through combiner bright enough for real content.
Where it falls short is modulation transfer function: 30% today at 20 pixels per degree, against a 50% target, with 60% described as the eye limit. Brightness uniformity sits at 30%, and pupil swim is 0.12 degrees across the entire eye box. The presenter confirms they are not done and improve with every iteration.
In this short video, you can learn:
* 4 g, 1.7 mm, 17 mm eye relief and a two-metre virtual image are delivered without push-pull lenses, since the waveguide performs that function.
* Transmittance is 85% and efficiency reaches 5,000 nits per lumen at 50° FOV, with transmittance still a parameter they can play with.
* MTF is 30% at 20 pixels per degree against a 50% target and a 60% eye limit, brightness uniformity is 30%, and pupil swim is 0.12 degrees over the eye box.
📋 **Clip Abstract** A low-birefringence molded polymer reflective waveguide is 4 g and 1.7 mm thick, gives 17 mm eye relief and a two-metre virtual image without push-pull lenses, at 85% transmittance and up to 5,000 nits per lumen at 50° FOV. The remaining shortfalls are MTF at 30% for 20 pixels per degree versus a 50% target, brightness uniformity at 30%, and pupil swim of 0.12 degrees.
About the speaker:
* Speaker: Kayvan Mirza
* Company: Optinvent
* Event: Eindhoven 2026
* Location: High Tech Campus, Eindhoven
#MoldedPolymerWaveguide, #LowBirefringencePolymer, #NitsPerLumen, #PupilSwim, #ARWaveguides, #NearEyeDisplays
13:50 - 15:36
Which three fabrication breakthroughs enable high-precision injection-molded flat optics and waveguide performance?
Which three fabrication breakthroughs enable high-precision injection-molded flat optics and waveguide performance?
As far as they know, they are the only ones doing this in this kind of configuration. What makes it possible? Three fabrication breakthroughs. The first is unique high-precision tool-making: the tooling is super, super precise, and it is not at all state of the art. The second is a proprietary injection-molding technique—not just injection molding, but more—for making flat optics to very high precision. An industry-standard Fanuc 100-ton press is used, off the shelf, fine-tuned for the process.
The third breakthrough is specific thin-film coating and assembly processes, which they have worked very hard on to make sure coatings get in the right places. On the roadmap, improving tooling precision improves waveguide performance every time. Process maturity follows: this is a pilot line, and millions per year have not yet been made, but they will be, and the process will mature. Higher-index polymers are coming.
They are working with the world's best polymer manufacturers to get higher-index polymers and lower-birefringence polymers. These material improvements join higher tooling precision and process maturity on the roadmap. The combination matters because every tooling-precision gain improves waveguide performance, while scale will mature the pilot process. The current configuration is described as unique, and the fabrication route relies on the three breakthroughs: precise tool-making, proprietary injection molding, and thin-film coating and assembly.
In this short video, you can learn:
* Unique high-precision tool-making produces super-precise tooling that is not state of the art and directly affects waveguide performance when improved.
* A proprietary injection-molding technique uses an off-the-shelf industry-standard Fanuc 100-ton press fine-tuned for making flat optics to very high precision.
* Specific thin-film coating and assembly processes place coatings correctly, while higher-index, lower-birefringence polymers are being developed with the world's best polymer manufacturers.
📋 **Clip Abstract** Three fabrication breakthroughs—unique high-precision tool-making, a proprietary injection-molding technique, and specific thin-film coating and assembly processes—enable high-precision flat optics and waveguide performance. The roadmap improves tooling precision, matures the pilot line toward millions per year, and introduces higher-index, lower-birefringence polymers from the world's best polymer manufacturers.
About the speaker:
* Speaker: Kayvan Mirza
* Company: Optinvent
* Event: Eindhoven 2026
* Location: High Tech Campus, Eindhoven
#HighPrecisionTooling, #ProprietaryInjectionMolding, #ThinFilmCoating, #LowerBirefringencePolymers, #ARWaveguides, #FlatOptics