Expand this Topic clickable element to expand a topic
Skip to content
Optica Publishing Group

Comment on: Novel method for ultrashort laser pulse-width measurement based on the self-diffraction effect

Open Access Open Access

Abstract

A new technique for the measurement of the pulse-width of ultrashort optical pulses has been recently proposed[1]. I argue in this comment that such a technique is unable to get any temporal information on an ultrashort pulse, based on the absence of a time-non-stationary element in the proposed setup.

©2003 Optical Society of America

The characterization of short optical pulses has been a field of intense research and innovation closely following any new development in the generation of these pulses. A general framework describing some minimal requirements that must be fulfilled in order to measure the electric field of an isolated ultrashort optical pulse has been published [2,3]. It was shown that a time-non-stationary filter, i.e. an element with a response time of the order of the duration of the pulse under test, must be present. Such an element is in practice implemented using a fast detector, a fast modulator or a nonlinear interaction with one or several optical pulses (that can include the pulse under test itself). In the latter case, the non-stationarity (and not the nonlinearity) is the key element. More generally, a time-non-stationary filter is required to get any kind of temporal information on a short optical pulse. The inability of a setup constructed from time-stationary elements and time-integrating detectors to get any information on the spectral phase of an optical pulse can be demonstrated easily. Let’s call Ẽ(ω) the electric field of the pulse under test and R̃(ω) the transfer function of a time-stationary setup (i.e. a setup built only with time-stationary elements), which can be a function of several parameters (for example, a delay, a frequency or a spatial variable), in which case the experimental trace is the quantity measured by the integrating detector as a function of these parameters. Such dependence is removed for clarity. The output electric field is:

E˜OUTPUT(ω)=E˜INPUT(ω)R˜(ω)

When the output pulse is incident on a time-integrating detector, the measured signal is:

S=+EOUTPUT(t)2dt

Using the Parseval theorem, the signal can be expressed as:

S=+E˜OUTPUT(ω)22π=+E˜INPUT(ω)2R˜(ω)22π

Therefore, the measured signals only depend on the spectral density of the source. They would be identical for a short optical pulse, independently of its spectral phase, and for an incoherent white light with the same spectral density. Such a setup is thus unable of getting any temporal information. Typical examples are a monochromator (in which case the transfer function is a narrow pass-band function), or a Fourier-transform spectrometer (in which case the transfer function is the sum of two exponentials) [4].

The method proposed in [1] is based on a grating followed by an integrating detector (note that such a setup strongly resembles a grating-spectrometer). It does not contain any time-non-stationary element. It can be concluded that such a technique is only sensitive to the spectral density of the light under test. Equations 6, 7 and 8 of reference [1] are exactly of the same functional form as equation 3 of this comment.

The specific flaw in the derivation presented in [1] lies in the description of the pulse under test as a gaussian function of time without a phase. For such a pulse, it is obvious that the measurement of the spectrum allows the determination of the only parameter present in the model, which is the width of that gaussian function. However, propagating such a pulse in a material with second order dispersion would give the same experimental trace (since the spectrum is not modified), but would be represented with a gaussian temporal intensity and a quadratic temporal phase, a function that is not taken into account by the proposed derivation. Errors of this kind can be avoided by using a full, assumption-free, description of the pulse under test using the analytic signal as a function of time or frequency.

Temporal information on a short optical pulse can be obtained with a linear setup, either using a fast detector or a more elaborate device including a time-non-stationary element [5, 6, 7, 8, 9]. Note that if a known reference pulse is available, the pulse under test can be characterized completely with a linear technique without any time-non-stationary elements provided that the spectral support of the reference pulse encompasses the spectral support of the pulse under test [4]. These interferometric approaches are either spectral interferometry [10,11] or Fourier-transform dispersive spectrometry [12].

In conclusion, I have argued that the setup presented in [1] would be unable to gather any kind of temporal information on the light source under test because of the absence of a time-non-stationary filter. The proposed setup was shown to be only sensitive to the spectral density of the source under test.

References and links

1. P. Xi, C. Zhou, E. Dai, and L. Liu, “Novel method for ultrashort laser pulse-width measurement based on the self-diffraction effect,” Opt. Express 10, 1099 (2002), http://www.opticsexpress.org/abstract.cfm?URI=OPEX-10-20-1099 [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

2. V. Wong and I.A. Walmsley, “Linear Filter Analysis of Methods for Ultrashort Pulse Shape Measurements,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 12, 1491 (1995). [CrossRef]  

3. I.A. Walmsley and V. Wong, “Characterization of the electric field of ultrashort optical pulses,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 13, 2453–2463 (1996). [CrossRef]  

4. C. Dorrer and M. Joffre, “Characterization of the spectral phase of ultrashort optical pulses,” C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris2 Série IV, 1415–1426 (2001).

5. M.T. Kaufman, W.C. Banyai, A.A Godil, and D.M. Bloom, “Time-to-frequency converter for measuring picosecond optical pulses,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 64, 270–272 (1994). [CrossRef]  

6. S. Prein, S. Diddams, and J.C. Diels, “Complete characterization of femtosecond pulses using an all-electronic detector” Opt. Commun. 123, 567–573 (1996). [CrossRef]  

7. J. Debeau, B. Kowalski, and R. Boittin, “Simple method for the complete characterization of an optical pulse,” Opt. Lett. 23, 1784–1786 (1998). [CrossRef]  

8. C. Dorrer and I. Kang, “Simultaneous characterization of telecommunication optical pulses and modulators,” Opt. Lett. 27, 1315 (2002). [CrossRef]  

9. C. Dorrer and I. Kang, “Highly sensitive direct femtosecond pulse measurements using electro-optic spectral shearing interferometry,” Postdeadline paper PDA 7, Conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics 2002 (2002).

10. L. Lepetit, G. Chériaux, and M. Joffre, “Linear techniques of phase measurement by femtosecond spectral interferometry for applications in spectroscopy,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 12, 2467 (1995). [CrossRef]  

11. D.N. Fittinghoff, J.L. Bowie, J.N. Sweetser, R.T. Jennings, M.A. Krumbugel, K.W. DeLong, R. Trebino, and I.A. Walmsley, “Measurement of the intensity and phase of ultraweak, ultrashort laser pulses,” Opt. Lett. 21, 884–1996). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

12. P.R. Griffith and J.A. Haseth, “Fourier-transform infrared spectrometry,” Chemical Analysis Vol. 83, Wiley Interscience, New-York (1986).

Cited By

Optica participates in Crossref's Cited-By Linking service. Citing articles from Optica Publishing Group journals and other participating publishers are listed here.

Alert me when this article is cited.


Equations (3)

Equations on this page are rendered with MathJax. Learn more.

E ˜ OUTPUT ( ω ) = E ˜ INPUT ( ω ) R ˜ ( ω )
S = + E OUTPUT ( t ) 2 dt
S = + E ˜ OUTPUT ( ω ) 2 2 π = + E ˜ INPUT ( ω ) 2 R ˜ ( ω ) 2 2 π
Select as filters


Select Topics Cancel
© Copyright 2024 | Optica Publishing Group. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies.