MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2568156616 · doi:10.1088/1361-6455/50/2/024002

Phase retrieval approach for an accurate reconstruction of an arbitrary optical waveform in the petahertz optical oscilloscope

2017· article· en· W2568156616 on OpenAlexaff
Kyung Taec Kim, Kyungseung Kim, T. J. Hammond

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics B Atomic Molecular and Optical Physics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicLaser-Matter Interactions and Applications
Canadian institutionsJoint Attosecond Science LaboratoryUniversity of Ottawa
FundersInstitute for Basic Science
KeywordsOscilloscopePhysicsWaveformPhase (matter)Phase retrievalOpticsFourier transform

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract An arbitrary optical waveform can be measured using the technique called the ‘petahertz optical oscilloscope’ in which an electron trajectory in the process of high harmonic generation is used as a fast temporal gate. In the petahertz optical oscilloscope, a signal laser pulse that needs to be measured is superposed on a fundamental laser pulse that generates high harmonic radiation. The addition of the signal laser pulse slightly modifies the amplitude and phase of the harmonic radiation, which have information on the signal field. While these changes are imposed in the generation medium, the harmonic radiation is measured at the detector. Thus, one needs a special technique to find the phase modulation in the medium using the variation of the spatially-resolved harmonic spectrum measured at the far field. We find that a simple estimation using the deflection angle of the harmonic radiation is not accurate enough for a broadband signal pulse. Here we introduce a phase retrieval approach for the reconstruction of the broadband signal pulse. Our calculations show that the broadband signal pulse can be accurately reconstructed using the phase retrieval approach.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.330
Threshold uncertainty score0.627

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics B Atomic Molecular and Optical PhysicsSame topicLaser-Matter Interactions and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207