MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030368313 · doi:10.1117/12.628682

Erbium-doped phosphosilicate fiber amplifiers: a comparison of configurations for the optimization of noise figure and conversion efficiency

2005· article· en· W2030368313 on OpenAlexaff
Li Qian, R. J. Bolen

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNoise figureFiber amplifierErbium doped fiber amplifierComputer scienceOptical amplifierNoise (video)Materials scienceAmplifierErbiumOptoelectronicsDopingWavelength-division multiplexingFiberOpticsCMOSPhysicsArtificial intelligenceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Extending the amplification bandwidth of erbium-doped fiber amplifiers (EDFAs) is one of the most cost-effective means of expanding the fiber transmission capacity. In conventional aluminosilicate EDFAs, gain drops sharply beyond 1605nm. Several new or modified erbium host materials have been used to extend the amplification band to beyond the conventional L-band, such as tellurite, bismuth-oxide, antimony silicate, P-doped aluminosilicate, and phosphosilicate EDFAs. Although tellurite and bismuth-oxide based EDFAs have wider bandwidths compared to that of demonstrated phosphosilicate (P-Si) EDFAs, P-Si EDFAs have been shown to provide better noise performance when the gain bandwidth is extended to 1620 nm. In addition, unlike tellurite or bismuth-oxide fibers, P-Si EDF does not exhibit increased nonlinearity or weakened reliability, compared to conventional aluminosilicate EDFs. Furthermore, phosphosilicate erbium fiber is compatible with other silica fibers and can be fusion spliced to the standard SMF silica fiber with high return loss and extremely low splice loss. These properties make the P-Si EDF a top contender for commercial extended L-band EDFAs. One key issue in the design of the extended L-band amplifiers is the optimization of power conversion efficiency while keeping the noise figure low. In this paper, we explore various amplifier configurations and compare their performances experimentally. We report high-power P-Si EDFAs with simultaneous improvement of PCE and NF by a combination of a single-pass low-noise stage with one or two double-pass high-efficiency stages. The best configuration yields high power (22dBm), low NF (5.5dB maximum over 1570-1620 nm band), and high efficiency (27% overall PCE after gain flattening).

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.536
Threshold uncertainty score0.786

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations7
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicOptical Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207