MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2522248426 · doi:10.1364/oe.24.022682

Optical back propagation for compensating nonlinear impairments in fiber optic links with ROADMs

2016· article· en· W2522248426 on OpenAlexaff
Xiaojun Liang

Bibliographic record

VenueOptics Express · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Network Technologies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWavelength-division multiplexingOpticsMultiplexerQuadrature amplitude modulationOptical fiberOptical add-drop multiplexerTransmission (telecommunications)Fiber-optic communicationNode (physics)PhysicsOptical communicationMultiplexingFiber optic splitterOptical performance monitoringTelecommunicationsComputer scienceWavelengthFiber optic sensorChannel (broadcasting)Bit error rateAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An optical back propagation (OBP) technique is investigated to compensate for nonlinear impairments in fiber optic communication systems with reconfigurable optical add-drop multiplexers (ROADMs). An OBP module consisting of an optical phase conjugator (OPC), amplifiers and dispersion-decreasing fibers (DDFs) fully compensates for the nonlinear impairments of a transmission fiber. The OBP module can be placed after each transmission fiber (inline OBP case) or at each network node (node OBP case). For a wavelength division multiplexing (WDM) system with 2400 km transmission distance and 32-quadrature amplitude modulation (QAM) format, inline OBP and node OBP bring Q-factor improvements of 4.9 dB and 5.6 dB as compared with linear compensation, respectively. In contrast, receiver-side digital back propagation (DBP) only provides 1.3 dB Q-factor gain, due to its incapability of mitigating inter-channel nonlinear effects in fiber optic networks.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations10
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOptics ExpressSame topicOptical Network TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207