MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011857656 · doi:10.1364/josab.22.001829

Spectral self-imaging phenomena in sampled Bragg gratings

2005· article· en· W2011857656 on OpenAlexafffund
José Azaña, Chinhua Wang, Lawrence R. Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Optical Society of America B · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Fiber Optic Sensors
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of TorontoInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
FundersUniversité Laval
KeywordsTalbot effectOpticsInverse problemSpectral imagingInterference (communication)Fiber Bragg gratingPhysicsReflection (computer programming)GratingInverseDispersion (optics)MathematicsComputer scienceOptical fiberMathematical analysisTelecommunicationsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a detailed study of spectral self-imaging phenomena, namely, integer and fractional Talbot effects, observed in the reflection response of chirped sampled fiber Bragg gratings (C-SFBGs). The basic condition for observing spectral self-imaging effects is first derived heuristically, and an intuitive interpretation of the problem based on the notion of multislit interference is also provided. We then present a rigorous analysis of the spectral self-imaging problem in C-SFBGs, including the formal derivation of the conditions for observing the different spectral Talbot effects. This analysis reveals the existence of new effects, in particular, inverse integer and fractional self-images, which are described here for the first time, to our knowledge. Moreover, we also show that the grating physical parameters need to satisfy additional conditions in order for one to be able to observe spectral self-imaging phenomena in C-SFBGs. We also evaluate the impact of deviations from these ideal conditions on the reflection spectrum of a real device. We confirm our theoretical predictions by using numerical simulations, and we report the first experimental observation of fractional spectral Talbot effects in C-SFBGs. Besides their intrinsic physical interest, the results presented constitute the basis for exploiting the spectral self-imaging effect for practical applications, e.g., to optimize the design of SFBGs for applications requiring periodic comb filters with low in-band dispersion.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.363
Threshold uncertainty score0.424

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.212 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations22
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Optical Society of America BSame topicAdvanced Fiber Optic SensorsFrench-language works237,207