Analysis of Degree of Polarization as a Control Signal in PMD Compensation Systems Aided by Polarization Scrambling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The performance of degree of polarization (DOP) is investigated as a control signal in polarization-mode dispersion (PMD) compensation systems aided by polarization scrambling. The relation between the input and output polarization states of a signal propagating through a polarization scrambler and a PMD-induced optical fiber is described by a 3 times 3 Stokes transfer matrix. The average DOP of the output signal over a period of polarization scrambling is derived as an alternative to the conventional DOP-based control signal, i.e., minimum DOP. In the presence of first- and all-order PMDs, the performance of the average and minimum DOPs in monitoring of differential group delay (DGD) for different data formats (i.e., RZ and NRZ) is evaluated. The performance of the two control signals are further investigated by calculating the outage probability of a feedforward first-order PMD compensation system. The results show that the average DOP outperforms the minimum DOP and also gives a wider DGD monitoring range.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".