MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2105819017 · doi:10.1109/jlt.2002.802226

Channel addition/removal response in Raman fiber amplifiers: modeling and experimentation

2002· article· en· W2105819017 on OpenAlexaff
M. Karásek, Mourad Menif

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Lightwave Technology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOscilloscopeAmplifierOpticsSIGNAL (programming language)Materials scienceAmplified spontaneous emissionRaman amplificationOptical fiberOptical amplifierDispersion (optics)PhysicsLaserOptoelectronicsComputer scienceDetector

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, we investigate, both theoretically and experimentally, transient effects in Raman fiber amplifiers (RFA) caused by channel addition/removal. A comprehensive large-signal numerical model of RFA, which incorporates time variation effects and the downstream and upstream propagation of multiple signals, pumps, and amplified spontaneous emission components, has been used for the theoretical analysis. The effect of pumping scheme, pump power, the length and type of Raman fiber, and number of added and/or dropped channels on the dynamics of surviving channel power fluctuations has been studied. In our experimental setup, signals from two laser diodes (LDs) were transmitted through counterdirectionally pumped RFA consisting of 15.6 km of dispersion compensating fiber (DCF). To simulate channel addition/removal, one signal was square-wave-modulated at 500 Hz. At the output of the RFA, the signal of the continuous-wave LD was selected with an optical bandpass filter, and power fluctuations of the surviving channel were recorded with a high-speed digital oscilloscope. Power fluctuations as high as 0.45 dB with typical saturated amplifier overshoots were observed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations45
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Lightwave TechnologySame topicOptical Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207