A Random Optical Parametric Oscillator
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Optical parametric oscillators provide short coherent light pulses at widely tunable wavelengths. Their primary drawback is the requirement of precise cavity control, making such devices specially challenging to develop in long cavities, and with oscillation limited to a fixed repetition rate. Herein, exploiting the inherent disorder of the refractive index in single-mode fibres we developed the first random optical parametric oscillator - the parametric analogous of random lasers. Parametric amplification is provided by modulation instability through the Χ(3) non-linearity and feedback is given by Rayleigh scattering. The system is realised in a pulsed configuration, with extremely small (<0.001%) feedback. To enhance the weak feedback, a novel piecewise distributed random cavity is demonstrated. In contrast to conventional parametric oscillators, the emission is sustained at arbitrary rates and dispensing any kind of cavity control loop, resulting in a far more versatile device, representing an important step toward the development of stable and tunable - both in wavelength and repetition rate - parametric oscillators. The ultra-long cavity used in experiments (~5km) enabled the generation of four-wave mixing products between the pump and the singly-resonant oscillator, giving rise to a train of picosecond-pulses, which would find applications in ultra-fast optics.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".