MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367173111 · doi:10.1364/ol.489289

Linearly polarized fiber amplifier with narrow linewidth of 5 kW exhibiting a record output power and near-diffraction-limited beam quality

2023· article· en· W4367173111 on OpenAlexaff
Yanshan Wang, Wanjing Peng, Hang Liu, Xiaobo Yang, Hongming Yu, Yao Wang, Jue Wang, Yujun Feng, Yinhong Sun, Yi Ma, Qingsong Gao, Tang Chun

Bibliographic record

VenueOptics Letters · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhotonic Crystal and Fiber Optics
Canadian institutionsCanadian Association of Emergency Physicians
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLaser linewidthOpticsMaterials scienceExtinction ratioAmplifierLaser beam qualityOptoelectronicsPhysicsLaserWavelength

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, a narrow-linewidth polarization-maintaining (PM) all-fiber amplifier with near-diffraction-limited beam quality and record output power is presented. First, a 4.45-kW PM fiber amplifier with a 3-dB linewidth of 0.08 nm and root mean square (rms) linewidth of 0.22 nm is achieved based on optimized phase modulation. However, the sideband of the spectrum broadens significantly during the amplification process, which is mainly caused by the additional intensity variation of the injected signal. Meanwhile, an up to 5.04-kW linearly polarized fiber laser with a relatively stable spectral bandwidth is achieved by effectively suppressing spectral broadening. At the maximum output power, the rms linewidth is 0.2 nm, the beam quality factor M 2 is less than 1.3, the polarization extinction ratio (PER) is 16.5 dB, and the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) is approximately 53 dB. The further power scaling of the amplifier is mainly limited by the pump power. To the best of our knowledge, this is the maximum output power of a narrow linewidth linearly polarized fiber amplifier to date.

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 score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations33
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOptics LettersSame topicPhotonic Crystal and Fiber OpticsFrench-language works237,207