Performance and limitations of quasi-phase matching semiconductor waveguides with picosecond pulses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Quasi-phase matched (QPM) second-order nonlinear optical processes in compound semiconductors are attractive for frequency conversion because of their large nonlinear susceptibilities and their mature fabrication processes that permit monolithic integration with pump lasers and other optical elements. Using quantum well intermixing (QWI), we have fabricated domain-disordered QPM (DD-QPM) waveguides in GaAs/AlGaAs superlattices and have previously demonstrated continuous-wave (CW) Type-I second-harmonic generation (SHG) and pulsed Type-II SHG. CW experiments were complicated by Fabry-Perot resonances and thermal bistability. Experiments using a 2-ps pulsed system were affected by third-order nonlinear effects, group-velocity mismatch (GVM), and poor spectral overlap with the conversion bandwidth. A better evaluation of the conversion efficiency may, however, be determined by using longer pulses in order to avoid these complications. By this, the effective CW conversion efficiency and χ(2) modulation can be ascertained. In this paper, we demonstrate SHG in DD-QPM waveguides with reduced parasitic effects by using 20 ps pulses. The waveguide structure consisted of a core layer of GaAs/Al0.85Ga0.15As superlattice into which QPM gratings with a period of 3.8 μm were formed using QWI by As2+ ion implantation. For a Type-I phase matching wavelength of 1583.4 nm, average second-harmonic (SH) powers produced were as high as 2.5 μW for 2 ps pulses and 3.5 μW for 20-ps pulses. At low input powers, the SHG average power conversion efficiency of the 2-ps system was more than 10 times larger than the 20 ps system. As power was increased, the SH power saturated and conversion efficiency decreased to nearly equal to the 20-ps system which remained consistent over the same power range. This is attributed to a reduction in third-order nonlinear effects, a smaller pulse spectral width that overlaps better with the conversion bandwidth, and less pulse walkoff for the 20-ps pulses. Thus, by using 20-ps pulses over 2-ps pulses, we achieved similar output SH powers and potentially higher SH powers are possible since there was no observed saturation at high input power.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".