MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118516835 · doi:10.1139/p00-037

High-power 1.48 <i>µ</i>m phosphoro-silicate-fiber-based laser pumped by laser diodes

2000· article· en· W2118516835 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
V.I. Karpov, Wallace R. L. Clements, Evgenii M Dianov, S.B. Papernyi

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotonic Crystal and Fiber Optics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOpticsLaserFiber Bragg gratingFiber laserOptoelectronicsRaman spectroscopyRaman laserSlope efficiencyMaterials sciencePhysicsLaser power scalingOptical fiberResonatorRaman scattering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An all-fiber 1.48 µm generator based on a LD-pumped Yb-doped double-clad laser and cascaded Raman wavelength converter has been developed. Second-order Raman Stokes radiation was generated in a phosphosilicate-fiber resonator formed by two pairs of Bragg gratings. The Yb-doped double-clad fiber laser was pumped by seven laser diodes combined via a low-loss fused fiber coupler and provided 4.4 W at 1.06 µm at the input of the Raman converter. A slope efficiency of the Raman converter of 40% with respect to the power emitted by the double-clad Yb laser has been achieved. We obtained an output power of 1.5 W with a total optical-to-optical efficiency of 21%. It was found that four-wave mixing, initiated in the fiber by the high-intensity light, results in spectral broadening of the 1.48 µm radiation and leaking of the first-Stokes radiation from the resonator formed by the 1.24 µm Bragg gratings, thus reducing the efficiency of the first-to-second-Stokes conversion.PACS No.: 42.55Wd

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.169
Teacher spread0.164 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of PhysicsSame topicPhotonic Crystal and Fiber OpticsFrench-language works237,207