OSA's Digital Library

Optics Express

Optics Express

  • Editor: C. Martijn de Sterke
  • Vol. 20, Iss. 3 — Jan. 30, 2012
  • pp: 2548–2555
« Show journal navigation

Degree of phase-space separability of statistical pulses

Sergey A. Ponomarenko  »View Author Affiliations


Optics Express, Vol. 20, Issue 3, pp. 2548-2555 (2012)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/OE.20.002548


View Full Text Article

Acrobat PDF (738 KB)





Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


   


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools

Share
Citations

Abstract

We introduce the concept of phase-space separability degree of statistical pulses and show how it can be determined using a bi-orthogonal decomposition of the pulse Wigner distribution. We present explicit analytical results for the case of chirped Gaussian Schell-model pulses. We also demonstrate that chirping of the pulsed source serves as a powerful tool to control coherence and phase-space separability of statistical pulses.

© 2012 OSA

1. Introduction: Wigner function description of statistical pulses

The acute recent interest in femtosecond pulses and pulse sources [1

1. T. Brabec and F. Krausz, “Intense few-cycle laser fields: Frontiers of nonlinear optics,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 72, 545–591 (2000). [CrossRef]

] has triggered resurgence of activity in the field of ultrafast statistical optics [2

2. P. Pääkkönen, J. Turunen, P. Vahimaa, A. T. Friberg, and F. Wyrowski, “Partially coherent Gaussian pulses,” Opt. Commun. 204, 53–58 (2002). [CrossRef]

11

11. S. A. Ponomarenko, “Complex Gaussian representation of statistical pulses,” Opt. Express 19, 17086–17091 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. The latter should come as no surprise as statistical properties of ultrashort pulses impose ultimate limits on the performance and accuracy of the state-of-art fiber-optical communication systems, for instance; not to mention that spontaneous emission noise degrades the output coherence of optical amplifiers [12

12. G. P. Agrawal, Fiber-Optic Communication Systems, 3rd ed., (Wiley, New York, NY2002). [CrossRef]

]. To date then, there has been extensive research done on modeling statistical properties of realistic sources of ultrashort pulses [2

2. P. Pääkkönen, J. Turunen, P. Vahimaa, A. T. Friberg, and F. Wyrowski, “Partially coherent Gaussian pulses,” Opt. Commun. 204, 53–58 (2002). [CrossRef]

, 3

3. H. Lajunen, J. Tervo, J. Turunen, P. Vahimaa, and F. Wyrowski, “Spectral coherence properties of temporarily modulated stationary light sources,” Opt. Express 11, 1894–1899 (2003). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. The fundamental issues of defining and measuring the spectrum of statistical pulses [4

4. S. A. Ponomarenko, G. P. Agrawal, and E. Wolf, “Energy spectrum of a nonstationary ensemble of pulses,” Opt. Lett. 29, 394–396 (2004). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] and formulating coherence theory of periodic statistical pulse trains [5

5. V. Torres-Company, H. Lajunen, and A. T. Friberg, “Cohrence theory of noise in ultrashort pulse trains,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 24, 1441–1450 (2007). [CrossRef]

, 6

6. B. Davis, “Measurable coherence theory for statistically periodic fields,” Phys. Rev. A 76, 043843 (2007). [CrossRef]

] have been addressed. Due to its relevance for fiber optical communications, the propagation of ultrashort statistical pulses in linear [13

13. Q. Lin, L. Wang, and S. Zhu, “Partially coherent light pulse and its propagation,” Opt. Commun. 219, 65–70 (2003). [CrossRef]

,14

14. M. Brunel and S. Coëtlemec, “Fractional-order Fourier formulation of the propagation of partially coherent light pulses,” Opt. Commun. 230, 1–5 (2004). [CrossRef]

] and nonlinear [15

15. H. Lajunen, V. Torres-Company, J. Lancis, E. Silvestre, and P. Andrés, “Pulse-by-pulse method to characterize partially coherent pulse propagation in instanteneous nonlonear media,” Opt. Express 18, 14979–14991 (2011). [CrossRef]

] dispersive media has also been explored. Further, several approaches have been recently advanced to synthesize novel partially coherent pulses from uncorrelated–or partially correlated–superpositions of elementary pulses in time [7

7. P. Vahimaa and J. Turunen, “Independent-elementary-pulse representation for non-stationary fields,” Opt. Express 14, 5007–5012 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] and frequency [8

8. A. T. Friberg, H. Lajunen, and V. Torres-Company, “Spectral elementary-coherence-function representation for partially coherent light pulses,” Opt. Express 15, 5160–5165 (2007). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. In addition, several phase-space approaches to partially coherent pulse representation were discussed in the literature [9

9. J. Ojeda-Castaneda, J. Lancis, C. M. Gomez-Sarabia, V. Torres-Company, and P. Andrés, “Ambuguity function analysis of pulse train propagation: applications to temporal Lau filtering,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 242268–2273 (2007). [CrossRef]

,10

10. M. A. Alonso, “Wigner functions in optics: describing beams as ray bundles and pulses as particle ensembles,” Adv. Opt. Photon. 3, 272–365 (2011). [CrossRef]

]. Lately, a general phase-space approach has been put forward to describe partially coherent pulse synthesis from complex Gaussian pulses [11

11. S. A. Ponomarenko, “Complex Gaussian representation of statistical pulses,” Opt. Express 19, 17086–17091 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. A key feature of the complex Gaussian representation is its versatility: It can be used to either generate new partially coherent pulses or represent the ones with known cross-correlation functions in terms of statistically uncorrelated Gaussian pulses.

In this work, we show that a Wigner distribution based phase-space representation for statistical pulses provides a natural context to define a measure of their phase-space separability. Next, we show how the introduced degree of phase-space separability can be determined using a bi-orthogonal decomposition of the Wigner distribution of the pulse. We then discuss the way the new measure changes on chirped pulse propagation in linear dispersive media. Our results are directly relevant for temporal imaging with ultrashort pulses which involves temporal lenses, chirping the pulses, and dispersive delay lines, e. g., linear optical fibers [16

16. B. H. Kolner and M. Nazarathy, “Temporal imaging with a time lens,” Opt. Lett. 14, 630–632 (1989). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. To make our results more instructive, we specialize to a representative case of chirped Gaussian Schell-model pulses for which closed-form analytical results can be obtained. It follows from our results that chirping ultrashort partially coherent pulses can provide a potent tool for controlling their degrees of coherence and phase-space separability.

To set the stage, we consider an ensemble of random pulses {E(t)} and decompose the electric field E(t) into a slowly-varying envelope U(t) and a carrier wave [17

17. Although the slowly-varying envelope approximation breaks down for few-cycle long femtosecond pulses, the decomposition into the envelope and carrier wave makes sense even in this case, see Ref. [21] for details.

] such that
E(t)=U(t)eiωct,
(1)
where ωc is a deterministic carrier frequency of the pulse. The second-order statistical properties of the ensemble {U(t)} are specified by the cross-correlation function
Γ(t1,t2)=U*(t1)U(t2),
(2)
where the angle brackets denote ensemble averaging. The Wigner distribution (WD) of the ensemble is then defined as
𝒲(t,ω)=dτΓ(tτ/2,t+τ/2)eiωτ,
(3)
where we introduced the variables t = (t1 + t2)/2 and τ = t1t2. The intensity I(t) and spectrum S(ω) of the pulse are determined by the appropriate marginals of the Wigner distribution viz.,
I(t)=dω𝒲(t,ω);S(ω)=dt𝒲(t,ω).
(4)
Many phase space characteristics of the pulses, such as the position of the pulse center (in time), central frequency of the envelope, rms temporal and spectral widths etc., can be determined as the corresponding moments of I or S. Notice also that it follows at once from Eqs. (2) and (3) that fully as well as partially temporarily and/or spectrally coherent pulses can be treated in the same way using the Wigner distribution, the fully coherent case being just the limiting situation when the cross-correlation function factorizes.

2. Quantifying phase-space separability of statistical pulses

To address the first question, it is sufficient to recall that a common technique to generate statistical pulses involves temporal chopping of statistically stationary light fields [3

3. H. Lajunen, J. Tervo, J. Turunen, P. Vahimaa, and F. Wyrowski, “Spectral coherence properties of temporarily modulated stationary light sources,” Opt. Express 11, 1894–1899 (2003). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. We can consider, for instance, chopping a Gaussian correlated statistically stationary field with a Gaussian temporal modulation function. This procedure yields the so-called Gaussian Schell-model (GSM) source [2

2. P. Pääkkönen, J. Turunen, P. Vahimaa, A. T. Friberg, and F. Wyrowski, “Partially coherent Gaussian pulses,” Opt. Commun. 204, 53–58 (2002). [CrossRef]

] with the correlation function that can be transformed to
ΓGSM(t1,t2)=I(t1+t22)g(t1t2),
(11)
where both I and g are Gaussians. It follows at once from Eq. (3) and (11) that the WD of a GSM source has a separable form of Eq. (10). Thus, realistic statistical pulses belonging to a wide GSM class have separable WDs. Moreover, the cross-correlation function of any quasi-stationary source can be well approximated as
Γqs(t1,t2)I(t1+t22)γ(t1t2),
(12)
where I(t) is a “slowly-varying” intensity profile and γ(t) is a “fast” temporal degree of coherence. The WD of such sources are approximately separable as well.

Unfortunately, even if the WD of a source is separable, the WD of generated pulses need not be so as is seen from Eq. (9). In general, the pulse propagation even in a linear dispersive medium couples phase-space variables, providing additional impetus for our quest for a phase-space separability measure. To address this issue, we propose to expand the pulse WD in any transverse plane into a bi-orthogonal series as
𝒲(T,ω;z)=nλn(z)χn(T,z)ϕn(ω,z),
(13)
where the eigenvalues {λn} and eigenfunctions, {χn} and {ϕn}, are real due to reality of the WD. It is known [25

25. P. M. Morse and H. Feshbach, Methods of Theoretical Physics (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1953), Part I.

] that the two sets of eigenfunctions obey the Fredholm integral equations which, in our case, take the form
λn(z)ϕn(ω,z)=dT𝒲(T,ω;z)ϕn(T,z),
(14)
and
λn(z)χn(T,z)=dω𝒲(T,ω;z)χn(ω,z).
(15)
The suitably normalized eigenfunctions form an orthonormal set in the sense that
dxχn(x,z)ϕm(x,z)=δnm,x=T,ω.
(16)

We note that as the WD may take on negative values, the eigenvalues in the expansion (13) can be negative as well. The latter circumstance distinguishes Eq. (13) from the conventional coherent-mode decomposition of the cross-correlation function [26

26. L. Mandel and E. Wolf, Optical Coherence and Quantum Optics (Cambridge University Press, 1995).

]. Next, one can arrange the squares of the eigenvalues in decreasing order, λ02λ12λ22. Introducing the reduced eigenvalues νn(z)’s such that νn2=λn2/λ021, we can define the degree of phase-space separability of the pulse by the expression
ρ(z)=1n=0νn2(z).
(17)
It follows from the definition that the degree of separability is bound by unity, 0 ≤ ρ(z) ≤ 1, attaining its maximum if there is only the lowest-order eigenvalue present in the expansion (13). This corresponds to the ideal case of complete separability of the WD. Thus the proposed measure conforms to our intuitive perception of the degree of separability.

3. Degree of separability of chirped Gaussian Schell-model (CGSM) pulses

We will now illustrate the introduced concept using a particular example of chirped Gaussian Schell-model pulses. Not only does the latter serve as a rather representative case, but it enables us to obtain closed-form analytical results. Moreover, we can show explicitly in the case of CGSM pulses the way to control the WD’s degree of separability. CGSM pulses can be generated, for example, by transmitting GSM pulses through a time lens which imposes a quadratic phase chirp on the pulse [21

21. J. C. Diels and W. Rudolph, Ultrashort Laser Pulse Phenomena, 2nd ed. (Academic Press, Amsterdam2006).

].

The cross-correlation function of CGSM pulses can be written in the form
ΓCGSM(t1,t2)=Γ00exp[(1iC)t122tp2(1+iC)t222tp2(t1t2)22tc2],
(18)
where tp is a characteristic pulse width, tc is a pulse coherence time, C is a dimensionless chirp parameter, and Γ00 is a normalization constant. Using the definition of WD (3), we can express the WD of a CGSM pulse as
𝒲CGSM(t,ω)=𝒲00exp[t2tp2(1+C2teff22tp2)ω2teff22+Cteff2tp2ωt],
(19)
where
1teff2=1tp2+12tc2.
(20)
It can be readily inferred from Eq. (19) that because of phase chirping, the WD of a CGSM source is not separable.

The WD of a pulse generated by a CGSM source can be determined from Eqs. (7) and (19); the result can be represented as
𝒲CGSM(T,ω;z)=𝒲00exp[T2tp2(1+C2teff22tp2)ω2σ2(z)teff22+C(z)teff2tp2ωT].
(21)
Here we introduced the propagation factor σ(z) given by
σ2(z)=(1+Cβ2ztp2)2+2β22z2tp2teff2,
(22)
and the effective chirp parameter C(z) as
C(z)=C+β2ztp2(C2+2tp2teff2).
(23)

Eqs. (22) and (23) are generalizations to the case of partially coherent pulses of the corresponding expressions for fully coherent chirped Gaussian pulses [18

18. G. P. Agrawal, Nonlinear Fiber Optics, 4th ed. (Academic Press, Amsterdam, 2007).

]. The latter can be recovered from the former by letting teff=2tp which corresponds to tc → ∞. The evolution scenario of σ depends on the sign of 2. If 2 ≥ 0, σ increases monotonously with the propagation distance. On the other hand, if 2 < 0, the propagation factor attains a minimum,
σmin=2tp2/teff2C2+2tp2/teff2,
(24)
at the distance
z*=Cteff2/β2C2+2tp2/teff2.
(25)
This behavior is qualitatively sketched in Fig. 1. We also note that at z* the effective chirp is equal to zero–the accrued chirp on propagation in the medium unchirps the initial chirp of the opposite sign imposed by the time lens.

Fig. 1 Sketching the behavior of the propagation factor of a CGSM pulse as a function of dimensionless propagation distance Z = β2z/tp.

Next, we can conclude by comparing Eqs. (19) and (21) that the WD maintains its Gaussian shape, with the spectral part and the coupling term–the last term in the exponential function in Eq. (21)–scaling on propagation. Alternatively, we can work out the cross-correlation function by taking a Fourier transform of the WD with respect to ω. We arrive, after straightforward algebra, at the expression
ΓCGSM(s1,s2;z)=Γ00σ(z)exp[(s12+s22)2tp2σ2(z)(s1s2)22tc2σ2(z)+iC(z)2tp2σ2(z)(s12s22)].
(26)
It is clear from Eq. (26) that the propagation factor σ governs the dynamics of the pulse width and coherence time.

To determine the degree of separability, we use the following Mehler’s summation formula for Hermite polynomials [27

27. M. Abramowitz and I. A. Stegan, Handbook of Mathematical Functions (Dover, New York, 1972).

]
exp(x2+y22xyζ1ζ2)=1+ζ2ex2y2n=0ζn2nn!Hn(x)Hn(y),
(27)
where |ζ| ≤ 1. Next, we introduce the scaling factors a(z) and b(z) such that in the scaled variables = t/a(z) and ω̃ = ω/b(z), the WD of a CGSM takes the form
𝒲CGSM(T˜,ω˜;z)=𝒲00exp(T˜2+ω˜22T˜ω˜ζ(z)1ζ2(z)).
(28)
On comparing Eqs. (28) and (27), we conclude that the WD in the original variables can be expanded into a bi-orthogonal series (13) with the eigenvalues
λn(z)=𝒲00[1+ζ2(z)]a(z)b(z)ζ2n(z),
(29)
and the eigenfunctions
χn(T,z)=12nn!πa(z)eT2/a2(z)Hn[Ta(z)],
(30)
and
ϕn(ω,z)=12nn!πb(z)eω2/b2(z)Hn[ωb(z)].
(31)
In Eqs. (30) and (31), the scaling factors are given by the expressions
a(z)=2tp4/teff2(C2+2tp2/teff2)[1ζ2(z)],
(32)
and
b(z)=2σ2(z)[1ζ2(z)]teff2,
(33)
where
ζ2(z)=C2(z)σ2(z)(C2+2tp2/teff2),
(34)
and positive roots are assumed in Eqs. (32) and (33). We note in passing that the bi-orthogonal decomposition (13) should not be confused with the more familiar coherent-mode expansion of a GSM source [28

28. F. Gori, “Collett-Wolf sources and multimode lasers,” Opt. Commun. 34, 301–305 (1980). [CrossRef]

,29

29. A. Starikov and E. Wolf, “Coherent-mode representation of Gaussian Schell-model sources and their radiation fields,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. 72, 923–928 (1982). [CrossRef]

]. In our case, the eigenfunction sets {χn} and {ϕn} belong to different domains which is formally reflected in quite different scaling of a and b with the propagation distance.

Using Eqs. (34) and (29) in Eq. (17), we can show that the degree of separability turns out to be given by a remarkably simple expression
ρ(z)=σmin2/σ2(z).
(35)
The analysis of Eq. (35) reveals that the behavior of ρ as a function of the propagation distance qualitatively depends on the sign of the initial chirp. If C ≥ 0, the degree of phase separability monotonously decreases with the propagation distance. If, on the other hand, C < 0, ρ goes through a maximum attained at z = z*. These scenarios are exhibited in Fig. 2 where we present the behavior of ρ as a function of dimensionless propagation distance in the coherent case using three values of the chirp, C = 0 and C = ±1 for illustration. The influence of pulse coherence time on the evolution of ρ is illustrated in Fig. 3 for several values of tc and C = −1. Interestingly, the WD in the CGSM case becomes separable precisely at the distance where the pulses are the most compressed and least coherent. Chirping GSM pulses with a time lens then provides a powerful tool to control pulse coherence and phase-space separability at the same time.

Fig. 2 Degree of phase-space separability of a fully coherent CGSM pulse as a function of dimensionless propagation distance Z = β2z/tp for three values of the initial chirp: C = 0 and C = ±1.
Fig. 3 Degree of phase-space separability of a partially coherent CGSM pulse as a function of dimensionless propagation distance Z = β2z/tp; solid, tc = ∞, dotted, tc = tp and dashed tc=2tp/3. The initial chirp is C = −1.

References and links

1.

T. Brabec and F. Krausz, “Intense few-cycle laser fields: Frontiers of nonlinear optics,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 72, 545–591 (2000). [CrossRef]

2.

P. Pääkkönen, J. Turunen, P. Vahimaa, A. T. Friberg, and F. Wyrowski, “Partially coherent Gaussian pulses,” Opt. Commun. 204, 53–58 (2002). [CrossRef]

3.

H. Lajunen, J. Tervo, J. Turunen, P. Vahimaa, and F. Wyrowski, “Spectral coherence properties of temporarily modulated stationary light sources,” Opt. Express 11, 1894–1899 (2003). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

4.

S. A. Ponomarenko, G. P. Agrawal, and E. Wolf, “Energy spectrum of a nonstationary ensemble of pulses,” Opt. Lett. 29, 394–396 (2004). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

5.

V. Torres-Company, H. Lajunen, and A. T. Friberg, “Cohrence theory of noise in ultrashort pulse trains,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 24, 1441–1450 (2007). [CrossRef]

6.

B. Davis, “Measurable coherence theory for statistically periodic fields,” Phys. Rev. A 76, 043843 (2007). [CrossRef]

7.

P. Vahimaa and J. Turunen, “Independent-elementary-pulse representation for non-stationary fields,” Opt. Express 14, 5007–5012 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

8.

A. T. Friberg, H. Lajunen, and V. Torres-Company, “Spectral elementary-coherence-function representation for partially coherent light pulses,” Opt. Express 15, 5160–5165 (2007). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

9.

J. Ojeda-Castaneda, J. Lancis, C. M. Gomez-Sarabia, V. Torres-Company, and P. Andrés, “Ambuguity function analysis of pulse train propagation: applications to temporal Lau filtering,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 242268–2273 (2007). [CrossRef]

10.

M. A. Alonso, “Wigner functions in optics: describing beams as ray bundles and pulses as particle ensembles,” Adv. Opt. Photon. 3, 272–365 (2011). [CrossRef]

11.

S. A. Ponomarenko, “Complex Gaussian representation of statistical pulses,” Opt. Express 19, 17086–17091 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

12.

G. P. Agrawal, Fiber-Optic Communication Systems, 3rd ed., (Wiley, New York, NY2002). [CrossRef]

13.

Q. Lin, L. Wang, and S. Zhu, “Partially coherent light pulse and its propagation,” Opt. Commun. 219, 65–70 (2003). [CrossRef]

14.

M. Brunel and S. Coëtlemec, “Fractional-order Fourier formulation of the propagation of partially coherent light pulses,” Opt. Commun. 230, 1–5 (2004). [CrossRef]

15.

H. Lajunen, V. Torres-Company, J. Lancis, E. Silvestre, and P. Andrés, “Pulse-by-pulse method to characterize partially coherent pulse propagation in instanteneous nonlonear media,” Opt. Express 18, 14979–14991 (2011). [CrossRef]

16.

B. H. Kolner and M. Nazarathy, “Temporal imaging with a time lens,” Opt. Lett. 14, 630–632 (1989). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

17.

Although the slowly-varying envelope approximation breaks down for few-cycle long femtosecond pulses, the decomposition into the envelope and carrier wave makes sense even in this case, see Ref. [21] for details.

18.

G. P. Agrawal, Nonlinear Fiber Optics, 4th ed. (Academic Press, Amsterdam, 2007).

19.

M. J. Bastiaans, “The Wigner distribution function applied to optical signals and systems,” Opt. Commun. 25, 26–30, (1978). [CrossRef]

20.

M. J. Bastiaans, “The Wigner function and its application to first-order optics,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. 69, 1710–1716 (1979). [CrossRef]

21.

J. C. Diels and W. Rudolph, Ultrashort Laser Pulse Phenomena, 2nd ed. (Academic Press, Amsterdam2006).

22.

J. Lancis, V. Torres-Company, E. Silvestre, and P. Andrés, “Space-time analogy for partially coherent plane-wave-type pulses,” Opt. Lett. 30, 2973–2975 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

23.

V. Torres-Company, J. Lancis, and P. Andrés, “Space-time analogies in optics,” Prog. Opt. 56, 1–80 (2011), ed. E. Wolf. [CrossRef]

24.

M. G. Raymer, M. Beck, and D. F. McAlister, “Complex wave-field reconstruction using phase-space tomography,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 72, 1137–1140 (1994). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

25.

P. M. Morse and H. Feshbach, Methods of Theoretical Physics (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1953), Part I.

26.

L. Mandel and E. Wolf, Optical Coherence and Quantum Optics (Cambridge University Press, 1995).

27.

M. Abramowitz and I. A. Stegan, Handbook of Mathematical Functions (Dover, New York, 1972).

28.

F. Gori, “Collett-Wolf sources and multimode lasers,” Opt. Commun. 34, 301–305 (1980). [CrossRef]

29.

A. Starikov and E. Wolf, “Coherent-mode representation of Gaussian Schell-model sources and their radiation fields,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. 72, 923–928 (1982). [CrossRef]

OCIS Codes
(030.0030) Coherence and statistical optics : Coherence and statistical optics
(320.0320) Ultrafast optics : Ultrafast optics
(320.5550) Ultrafast optics : Pulses

ToC Category:
Coherence and Statistical Optics

History
Original Manuscript: December 13, 2011
Revised Manuscript: January 9, 2012
Manuscript Accepted: January 10, 2012
Published: January 19, 2012

Citation
Sergey A. Ponomarenko, "Degree of phase-space separability of statistical pulses," Opt. Express 20, 2548-2555 (2012)
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/oe/abstract.cfm?URI=oe-20-3-2548


Sort:  Author  |  Year  |  Journal  |  Reset  

References

  1. T. Brabec and F. Krausz, “Intense few-cycle laser fields: Frontiers of nonlinear optics,” Rev. Mod. Phys.72, 545–591 (2000). [CrossRef]
  2. P. Pääkkönen, J. Turunen, P. Vahimaa, A. T. Friberg, and F. Wyrowski, “Partially coherent Gaussian pulses,” Opt. Commun.204, 53–58 (2002). [CrossRef]
  3. H. Lajunen, J. Tervo, J. Turunen, P. Vahimaa, and F. Wyrowski, “Spectral coherence properties of temporarily modulated stationary light sources,” Opt. Express11, 1894–1899 (2003). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. S. A. Ponomarenko, G. P. Agrawal, and E. Wolf, “Energy spectrum of a nonstationary ensemble of pulses,” Opt. Lett.29, 394–396 (2004). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. V. Torres-Company, H. Lajunen, and A. T. Friberg, “Cohrence theory of noise in ultrashort pulse trains,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. B24, 1441–1450 (2007). [CrossRef]
  6. B. Davis, “Measurable coherence theory for statistically periodic fields,” Phys. Rev. A76, 043843 (2007). [CrossRef]
  7. P. Vahimaa and J. Turunen, “Independent-elementary-pulse representation for non-stationary fields,” Opt. Express14, 5007–5012 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. A. T. Friberg, H. Lajunen, and V. Torres-Company, “Spectral elementary-coherence-function representation for partially coherent light pulses,” Opt. Express15, 5160–5165 (2007). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. J. Ojeda-Castaneda, J. Lancis, C. M. Gomez-Sarabia, V. Torres-Company, and P. Andrés, “Ambuguity function analysis of pulse train propagation: applications to temporal Lau filtering,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A242268–2273 (2007). [CrossRef]
  10. M. A. Alonso, “Wigner functions in optics: describing beams as ray bundles and pulses as particle ensembles,” Adv. Opt. Photon.3, 272–365 (2011). [CrossRef]
  11. S. A. Ponomarenko, “Complex Gaussian representation of statistical pulses,” Opt. Express19, 17086–17091 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. G. P. Agrawal, Fiber-Optic Communication Systems, 3rd ed., (Wiley, New York, NY2002). [CrossRef]
  13. Q. Lin, L. Wang, and S. Zhu, “Partially coherent light pulse and its propagation,” Opt. Commun.219, 65–70 (2003). [CrossRef]
  14. M. Brunel and S. Coëtlemec, “Fractional-order Fourier formulation of the propagation of partially coherent light pulses,” Opt. Commun.230, 1–5 (2004). [CrossRef]
  15. H. Lajunen, V. Torres-Company, J. Lancis, E. Silvestre, and P. Andrés, “Pulse-by-pulse method to characterize partially coherent pulse propagation in instanteneous nonlonear media,” Opt. Express18, 14979–14991 (2011). [CrossRef]
  16. B. H. Kolner and M. Nazarathy, “Temporal imaging with a time lens,” Opt. Lett.14, 630–632 (1989). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Although the slowly-varying envelope approximation breaks down for few-cycle long femtosecond pulses, the decomposition into the envelope and carrier wave makes sense even in this case, see Ref. [21] for details.
  18. G. P. Agrawal, Nonlinear Fiber Optics, 4th ed. (Academic Press, Amsterdam, 2007).
  19. M. J. Bastiaans, “The Wigner distribution function applied to optical signals and systems,” Opt. Commun.25, 26–30, (1978). [CrossRef]
  20. M. J. Bastiaans, “The Wigner function and its application to first-order optics,” J. Opt. Soc. Am.69, 1710–1716 (1979). [CrossRef]
  21. J. C. Diels and W. Rudolph, Ultrashort Laser Pulse Phenomena, 2nd ed. (Academic Press, Amsterdam2006).
  22. J. Lancis, V. Torres-Company, E. Silvestre, and P. Andrés, “Space-time analogy for partially coherent plane-wave-type pulses,” Opt. Lett.30, 2973–2975 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. V. Torres-Company, J. Lancis, and P. Andrés, “Space-time analogies in optics,” Prog. Opt.56, 1–80 (2011), ed. E. Wolf. [CrossRef]
  24. M. G. Raymer, M. Beck, and D. F. McAlister, “Complex wave-field reconstruction using phase-space tomography,” Phys. Rev. Lett.72, 1137–1140 (1994). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. P. M. Morse and H. Feshbach, Methods of Theoretical Physics (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1953), Part I.
  26. L. Mandel and E. Wolf, Optical Coherence and Quantum Optics (Cambridge University Press, 1995).
  27. M. Abramowitz and I. A. Stegan, Handbook of Mathematical Functions (Dover, New York, 1972).
  28. F. Gori, “Collett-Wolf sources and multimode lasers,” Opt. Commun.34, 301–305 (1980). [CrossRef]
  29. A. Starikov and E. Wolf, “Coherent-mode representation of Gaussian Schell-model sources and their radiation fields,” J. Opt. Soc. Am.72, 923–928 (1982). [CrossRef]

Cited By

Alert me when this paper is cited

OSA is able to provide readers links to articles that cite this paper by participating in CrossRef's Cited-By Linking service. CrossRef includes content from more than 3000 publishers and societies. In addition to listing OSA journal articles that cite this paper, citing articles from other participating publishers will also be listed.

Figures

Fig. 1 Fig. 2 Fig. 3
 

« Previous Article  |  Next Article »

OSA is a member of CrossRef.

CrossCheck Deposited