Channel cloning by multi-mode phase-sensitive parametric mixer

Lan Liu; Andreas O. J. Wiberg; Bill P-. P. Kuo; Evgeny Myslivets; Nikola Alic; Stojan Radic

doi:10.1364/OE.26.033376

1. Introduction

The ability to clone an arbitrarily modulated channel to multiple spectral copies has both practical and fundamental implications [1]. Its use in optical fiber communication is readily understood in terms of multicasting and broadcasting functions. Specifically, the wavelength division multiplexing (WDM) represents a natural interface for channel cloning since it provides simultaneous transmission of spectrally-distinct, parallel channels over a single fiber waveguide [2]. A channel replicator was recognized early as an essential component in the WDM networks since it can aid both routing and switching within the physical layer for network contention resolution [3]. The importance of channel replication is reinforced with the introduction of streaming multimedia services where a multi-channel replication clones a single source signal to multiple destinations, exploiting the primary topology of WDM networks [4]. Ideally, any channel replication should possess low complexity, instantaneous response and scalability [5], in addition to preserving the input signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) [6].

Past attempts to achieve scalable channel replication have relied on conventional optoelectronic devices [7,8]. However, the conversion between electrical and optical domains is inevitably bandwidth-, and channel-count- restricted. Consequently, considerable research efforts have been made towards achieving all-optical signal replication to overcome this electronic bottleneck and improve the overall efficiency [9]. As an example, semiconductor optical amplifier (SOA) has been identified as a potential candidate [6,10]; however, the physics behind the channel replication through SOA is subject to the carrier density dynamics that limits the conversion bandwidth [11].

In contrast, motivated by the broad conversion bandwidth, the nearly instantaneous response and the full transparency with respect to modulation format, nonlinear processes, including self-phase modulation, cross-phase modulation and four-wave mixing, (FWM) [1,12], have been investigated to be used for channel replication. However, most of these approaches require the channel carriers to be externally seeded [10,13], limiting its ultimate utility.

Recognizing these limitations, self-seeded parametric mixers have been developed for broadband channel replication [3,6,14]. In particular, the advent of dispersion-synthesized parametric mixer [15–17] made the construction of scalable and efficient multi-channel replication achievable for the first time. In particular, parametric mixer-based multi-channel replication contributes substantially to all-optical signal processing, such as photonic-assisted analog-to-digital conversion (ADC) [18] and filter-less microwave channelization [19], in addition to the well-known applications such as broadcasting/multicasting.

The noise performance of the channel replication is of critical importance in all known applications, and particularly so in signal processing architectures. Until recently, the lowest reported noise figure (NF) of a single-channel conversion was 3.7 dB [14], and in the case of multi-channel, dual-pump driven parametric replication [15,16], the theoretical NF limit of 6-dB was recognized [20].

In this paper, we describe the physical architecture capable of near-noiseless replication using a new class of noise-managed parametric mixers operated in multi-mode phase-sensitive (PS) setting. In particular, the new approach of four-mode PS parametric mixer minimizes the excess noise added to the newly replicated channel copies, approaching, for the first time, sub-3-dB NF over 7 signal channels, while sub-6-dB NF over 17 signal channels in the presented experimental demonstration.

The paper is structured as followed. Section II introduces the theory of the dual-pump driven single-mode channel replication and PS multi-mode channel cloning, including the mathematical derivation of non-degenerate and degenerate scenarios. The experiments of the proposed PS four-mode channel cloning scheme are implemented and described in detail in Section III, including the rigorous characterization results of NF and bit-error rate (BER) performance. Section V summarizes this contribution.

2. Operating principle

The PS parametric process, which amplifies the in-phase quadrature but de-amplifies the out-of-phase quadrature component, has been extensively studied in noiseless amplification [21] and phase squeezing [22]. Consequently, to achieve the near-ideal channel cloning, which is the main goal of our investigation, the parametric mixer is operated in a PS multi-mode architecture.

In the previously reported work [14–17], replication was implemented using a PI process. As illustrated in Figs. 1(a) and 1(b), the PS two- and four-mode processes only have one signal (see the purple S₁) at the input of the parametric device, implying that the conversion efficiency (CE) that characterizes the channel replication is not dependent on the phases of the input waves, whereas the SNR is degraded by the noise coupling between the distinct channels. Correspondingly, the input and output SNRs of the multi-channel replication in the PI parametric mixer are defined as

S N R_{i n_P I} = \frac{R^{2} P_{0}^{2}}{4 R^{2} P_{0} \frac{h ν_{i n}}{2}} = \frac{P_{0}}{2 h ν_{i n}}

S N R_{o u t_P I N} = \frac{R^{2} {(G_{P I} P_{0})}^{2}}{4 R^{2} G_{P I} P_{0} (N G_{P I} \frac{h ν_{o u t}}{2})} = \frac{1}{N} \frac{P_{0}}{2 h ν_{o u t}}

where

ν_{i n}

is the frequency of the input signal channel, while

ν_{o u t}

is the frequency of the replicated/cloned signal channel. In the channel replication/cloning,

ν_{i n}

and

ν_{o u t}

can be different frequency values, however, their difference is negligible, denoted as

ν

in the following analysis. Moreover,

h

is the Plank constant,

R

is the responsivity,

P_{0}

is the optical power of the input signal wave,

G_{P I}

is the assumed equalized PI CE of the parametric mixer, and thus, the output power of the replicated channel is expressed as

G_{P I} P_{0}

. Equation (2) clearly manifests that the output SNR of the PI channel replication is degraded by the signal copy number

N

, leading to the NF quantum limit of 3-dB and 6-dB for the PI two- and four-mode parametric processes, respectively. In particular, the theory also applies to the PI dispersion-less parametric mixer for broadband high-order wave mixing, as shown in Fig. 1(c), where S₁, P₁ and P₂ are the input signal and pumps, while all the other waves are the high-order pumps and signals created by the parametric effects. Each wave contributes equally to the noise coupling here, implying that the NF of the PI signal replication in the dispersion-less parametric mixer scales up with copy number

N

[23].

Fig. 1 (a). PI two-mode spectral schematic. S₁ in purple is the input signal, S₂ in grey is the replicated signal channel. (b) PI four-mode spectral configuration. S₁ in purple is the input signal, S₂ to S₄ in grey are the replicated signal channels. (c) PI multi-mode channel replication spectral configuration. S₁ in purple is the input signal, P₁/P₂ are the input pumps, other waves in grey are the replicated high-order pumps/signals. (d) PS four-mode channel replication spectral configuration. S₁ to S₄ in purple are the frequency-locked and phase-correlated input signals. (e) Degenerate PS one-mode parametric amplifier in three-wave model. (f) PS three-mode parametric amplifier in five-wave model. (g) Degenerate PS one-mode channel replication in five-wave model. S₁ in purple is the input signal, P₁/P₂ are the input pumps, S₂/S₃ are the replicated signal channels in five-wave model. (h) Localized noise coupling state for degenerate PS one- and three-mode channel replication with high count copy number (signal channel number>3). All the input and output signals can be considered as two waves sharing the same frequency. Here, we note that the input and output signal waves are assumed equalized.

Download Full Size | PDF

In contrast to the idealized dispersion-less mixer, our past investigations indicate that the normally-dispersive parametric mixer with localized noise coupling leads to a 6-dB SNR degradation for dual-pump driven PI broadband channel replication [20], which is denoted as $4 G_{P I} \frac{h ν}{2}$ in Eq. (3).

S N R_{o u t_P I N_N o r m a l D} = \frac{R^{2} {(G_{P I} P_{0})}^{2}}{4 R^{2} G_{P I} P_{0} (4 G_{P I} \frac{h ν}{2})} = \frac{1}{4} \frac{P_{0}}{2 h ν}

Instead of NF scaling up with copy number $N$ in the dispersion-less mixer, the dispersion-managed parametric mixer driven by two pumps in the PI scenario has a quantum limit NF of 6-dB, calculated by Eqs. (3) and (1). Furthermore, when four frequency-locked and phase-correlated signal waves are present at the input of the normally dispersive mixer, and utilized to seed the PS process, shown as the S₁ to S₄ in Fig. 1(d), the corresponding output SNR of one replica copy is

S N R_{o u t_P S 4_N o r m a l D} = \frac{R^{2} {(16 G_{P I} P_{0})}^{2}}{4 R^{2} 16 G_{P I} P_{0} (4 G_{P I} \frac{h ν}{2})} = 4 \frac{P_{0}}{2 h ν}

The 12-dB CE improvement relative to the PI device ( $16 G_{P I}$ as compared to Eqs. (2) and (3)) originates from the interferometric addition of the four input beams. Conversely, due to the localized noise coupling, the uncorrelated noise associated with the input waves adds incoherently and accumulates to 6 dB ( $4 G_{P I} \frac{h ν}{2}$ ).

In contrast to the aforementioned PI input SNR definition, which is based on a single input signal wave (as expressed in Eq. (1)), it is our preference to use a more rigorous NF definition relying on the combined power of the four input signals

S N R_{i n_P S 4} = \frac{R^{2} {(16 P_{0})}^{2}}{4 R^{2} \cdot 16 P_{0} \cdot 4 \frac{h ν}{2}} = 4 \frac{P_{0}}{2 h ν}

Compared to the PI one-mode scheme in normally-dispersive parametric mixer (where NF quantum limit is 6 dB, defined by Eqs. (1) and (3)), the PS four-mode architecture (where NF is calculated with Eqs. (4) and (5)) leads to the 0-dB NF for multi-channel replication, justifying the original notion of noiseless channel cloning.

We can generalize the conclusion to even higher-order PS multi-mode (>4) operations. For example, regarding the PS architecture with input N pumps and 2N signals, the input and output SNRs are derived as

S N R_{i n_P S N} = \frac{R^{2} {(2 N)}^{4} P_{0}^{2}}{4 R^{2} \cdot {(2 N)}^{2} P_{0} \cdot 2 N \frac{h ν}{2}} = 2 N \frac{P_{0}}{2 h ν}

S N R_{o u t_P S N_N o r m a l D} = \frac{R^{2} {(2 N)}^{4} {(G_{P I} P_{0})}^{2}}{4 R^{2} {(2 N)}^{2} G_{P I} P_{0} (2 N G_{P I} \frac{h ν}{2})} = 2 N \frac{P_{0}}{2 h ν}

where the PS interferometric beam combination leads to a

{(2 N)}^{2}

gain improvement, whereas the uncorrelated noise only accumulates to a fold of

2 N

in the normally-dispersive parametric mixer with localized noise coupling, even though the replicated channel number should be much larger than

2 N

. The 0-dB NF defined by Eqs. (6) and (7) leads to the noiseless channel cloning with high count copy throughput.

Here, we note that the above conclusion only applies to the non-degenerate PI one-mode and PS multi-mode configurations. Correspondingly, in the non-degenerate PI one-mode scenario with multiple pumps, the input signal wave is offset from the middle of the two pumps (as shown in Figs. 1(b) and 1(c)). While our recent investigation on the degenerate PS one- and three-mode architectures indicates a different theory for the final localized noise coupling state [24].

Figures 1(e) and 1(f) shows the schematic of degenerate PS one- and three-mode processes. When the nonlinear interactions are constrained in the input waves for amplification (e.g. no high-order pumps and signals), the NF is theoretically 0-dB, since all the internal modes are occupied by the input signals, and no excess noise is induced by the nonlinear process.

Take the five-wave model as an example (as shown in Fig. 1(f)), the PS three-mode amplifier (with two pumps and three signals at the input of the parametric device) has 0-dB NF. On the other hand, when the parametric device has only one signal and two pumps at the input (see Fig. 1(g), S₁ and P₁/P₂) in the five-wave model, two more sideband signals are generated (see Fig. 1(g) S₂ and S₃). Hence, each input signal contributes evenly to the noise coupling, leading to a three-fold noise coupling, calculated as

S N R_{i n_P S 1} = \frac{R^{2} P_{0}^{2}}{4 R^{2} \cdot P_{0} \cdot \frac{h ν}{2}} = \frac{P_{0}}{2 h ν}

S N R_{o u t_P S 1_N o r m a l D_5 w a v e} = \frac{R^{2} {(G_{P S} P_{0})}^{2}}{4 R^{2} G_{P S} P_{0} (3 G_{P S} \frac{h ν}{2})} = \frac{1}{3} \frac{P_{0}}{2 h ν}

where,

G_{P S}

is the equalized PS one-mode parametric gain, while

3 G_{P S} \frac{h ν}{2}

implies the individual signal’s equal contribution to the final noise coupling state in the five-wave model. Consequently, in the five-wave model (where only two pumps and three signals are present at the output of the mixer device), the degenerate PS one-mode channel replication has a theoretical quantum limit NF of 4.77-dB, and two replicated signal channels.

In contrast, when the PS one-mode architecture is employed in the multi-channel replication (output pumps and signal channels >5), the theory needs to be re-derived. Reference [24] has demonstrated corresponding numerical simulation and experimental results, supporting the hypothesis that the degenerate PS one-mode architecture for multi-channel replication with high-count copy number (>5) has a quantum limit of 3-dB, instead of the 4.77-dB NF in the five-wave model. Here, we will provide the thorough analytical derivation.

The theoretical final state of localized noise coupling for the degenerate PS channel replication/cloning is shown in Fig. 1(h), where the degenerate signal wave in the middle of the two pumps can be considered as two waves sharing the same frequency. In the central noise coupling, the signal S₁ contributes a field of $E$ and noise power of $N_{0}$ (where $N_{0} = h ν / 2$ ). Whereas the sideband signal S₂ or S₃ interacts with the sideband noise coupling, in addition to contributing a field of $E / \sqrt{2}$ and noise power of $N_{0} / 2$ to the central noise coupling. Therefore, the output SNR of the degenerate PS one-mode multi-channel replication can be deduced as

S N R_{o u t_P S 1_N o r m a l D} = \frac{R^{2} {(G_{P S} P_{0})}^{2}}{4 R^{2} G_{P S} P_{0} (2 G_{P S} \frac{h ν}{2})} = \frac{1}{2} \frac{P_{0}}{2 h ν}

We note that, the noise term of $2 G_{P S} h ν / 2$ is induced by the doubled excess noise from S₂ and S₃, and correspondingly, the degenerate PS one-mode channel replication has a quantum limit NF of 3-dB, defined by the Eqs. (8) and (10). While regarding the degenerate PS three-mode channel replication, we can obtain

S N R_{i n_P S 3} = \frac{R^{2} {(9 P_{0})}^{2}}{4 R^{2} \cdot 9 P_{0} \cdot 3 \frac{h ν}{2}} = 3 \frac{P_{0}}{2 h ν}

S N R_{o u t_P S 3_N o r m a l D} = \frac{R^{2} {({(1 + \sqrt{2})}^{2} G_{P S} P_{0})}^{2}}{4 R^{2} {(1 + \sqrt{2})}^{2} G_{P S} P_{0} (2 G_{P S} \frac{h ν}{2})} = \frac{{(1 + \sqrt{2})}^{2}}{2} \frac{P_{0}}{2 h ν}

Note that, the PS three-mode architecture has a ${(1 + \sqrt{2})}^{2}$ gain improvement compared to the degenerate PS one-mode scenario, corresponding to ~7.66 dB multi-mode interferometric addition induced gain. Relying on Eqs. (11) and (12), we can obtain the theoretical NF quantum limit for the degenerate PS three-mode channel cloning is 0.126 dB, which is also close to the noiseless performance, further corroborating the superiority of the PS multi-mode architecture for the channel cloning with high count copy number.

The PS three- and four-mode channel cloning have been theoretically investigated using the numerical simulations in [24,25], and the corresponding results support that the noiseless channel cloning can be implemented by the dispersion-synthesized noise-managed parametric mixer in the PS multi-mode architecture. In addition to the theoretical investigation, we experimentally implemented the PS three-mode channel cloning with sub-3-dB NF over 5 signal copies. The PS four-mode architecture has been experimentally exploited in the PS amplifier [26,27]. However, the noiseless performance has not been straightly validated, and most of the past demonstrations focused on the signal amplification with no extra replicated signal channels. Here, we extended the experimental investigation into the PS four-mode channel cloning for ultra-low noise performance and high count channel number. Next, we proceed to the experimental implementation and results.

3. Experimental configuration

The experimental architecture shown in Fig. 2 consists of four essential partitions: the reference comb, the pump recovery, the parametric mixer and the phase-locked loop (PLL).

Fig. 2 Experimental setup configuration, including reference comb, pump recovery, parametric mixer and DPLL. LD: laser diode, MZM: Mach-Zehnder modulator, PM: phase modulator, PS: phase shifter, OP: optical processor, SL: slave laser, PZT: Piezoelectric transducer, HNLF: highly nonlinear fiber, SMF: single mode fiber, ADC: analog-to-digital converter, DAC: digital-to-analog converter, MICP: microprocessor, DPLL: digital phase-locked loop.

Download Full Size | PDF

In the first module, to create an optical frequency reference comb for channel replication, a narrow-linewidth (< 5-kHz) external-cavity-laser at 1549.3-nm was utilized as a master laser, injecting continuous wave (CW) output into a tandem of a Mach-Zehnder modulator (MZM) and two phase modulators (PMs). A 25-GHz harmonic tone from a radio-frequency (RF) oscillator was amplified and then employed to drive the modulators, defining the reference comb with 25-GHz frequency grid. The monitored equalized spectrum of the reference comb is shown in Fig. 3(a), obtained by tuning the MZM bias and aligning the phase delays of the RF signals into the corresponding PMs. Subsequently, the reference comb was amplified by an Erbium-doped fiber amplifier (EDFA) to 21 dBm, and then launched into a four-port programmable optical processor (OP). Two comb lines with 400-GHz spacing (1547.7 and 1550.9 nm) were selected by the OP as pump seeds with correlated phase characteristics, while four tones at 1546.9, 1548.5, 1550.1 and 1551.7 nm were derived as the signal carriers for the PS four-mode scheme. Additionally, the OP power-balanced and phase-manipulated the four signals, and then de-multiplexed the input six waves into three fiber branches.

Fig. 3 (a) Monitored experimental spectrum of the reference comb. (b) Experimental spectral comparison of PI one-mode and PS four-mode channel replication. (c) Expanded spectrum of central 20 copies.

Download Full Size | PDF

In the upper and lower fiber branch of the pump recovery module in Fig. 2, filtered pump seeds were employed to injection-lock two distributed-feedback (DFB) slave lasers, in order to endow the pump waves with inherent narrow linewidth of the master laser and high output power of the slave laser. Next, the power of the two pumps were further boosted by high power EDFAs to 33 dBm, narrowly filtered in respective branches and subsequently combined with the input four signals by wavelength division multiplexers (WDMers). Here, we note that the path length difference of the fiber in the three branches was engineered to be less than 1 cm, allowing the pumps and signals to interact with maximum coherence.

Next, the six waves (two pumps and four signals) were launched into a three-stage dispersion-engineered parametric mixer. The first fiber section, a 105-m long highly nonlinear fiber (HNLF, i.e. HNLF1), characterized by a zero dispersion wavelength of 1597 nm, a nonlinear coefficient of 22 km⁻¹W⁻¹, and a dispersion slope of 0.018 ps/nm²/km, induces positive chirp to the dual-pump defined sinusoid wave and creates multiple frequency tones. In addition, HNLF1 was longitudinal strained in sections with different tension force to elevate the Brillouin threshold [28]. Subsequently, a 6-m single-mode fiber (SMF) was used to compensate for the nonlinear chirp induced in the HNLF1 and compresses the corresponding pulses in time domain to enhance the peak power intensity, and to effectively increase the nonlinear figure of merit (defined as the product of nonlinear coefficient, optical peak power and interaction length) of the final mixer section. The efficient broadband mixing was accomplished in a 230-m dispersion flattened HNLF (HNLF2), characterized by a peak dispersion of −0.2 ps/nm/km, and dispersion fluctuation less than 1-ps/nm/km over 100-nm.

The parametric mixer has previously been validated as an efficient platform for broadband multi-channel replication in the PI regime [15–17]. However, in the PS four-mode scheme, the device inherently behaves as an interferometer, and therefore, a digital PLL (DPLL) was developed to track and compensate for the ambient-induced phase and power fluctuations. The principle of the DPLL was theoretically and experimentally demonstrated in [29]. As shown in Fig. 2, a small fraction of the power at the mixer output was utilized by DPLL, to track and compensate for the phase fluctuations. The remaining part of the output power was launched into a tunable optical filter to extract a specific channel copy for subsequent NF and BER measurements. In contrast to the PS operation, only the 1550.1-nm signal carrier was extracted by the OP for the PI channel replication. Note that in the PI operation, the DPLL was not utilized.

The feasibility of the DPLL-stabilized channel cloning has been indicated by the time-transient power evolution of three monitored channels in [29]. Figure 3(b) shows the output spectrum of the channel replication/cloning under the PI and DPLL-stabilized PS operations, both obtained at individual input signal power of −18 dBm. We note that the PS channel cloning exhibits 3-dB spectral flatness over 20 replicated channels (as shown in Fig. 3(c), i.e. the expanded spectrum plot of the central 20 copies), with the maximum channel output power of 1 dBm. Moreover, Fig. 3(b) validates that the PS cloning possesses a 12-dB CE improvement compared to the PI counterpart.

To further corroborate the advantage of the PS multi-mode channel cloning, the NFs of the central 17 channels under the PI and PS operations were calibrated with the RIN subtraction method [30,31], and are shown as blue and red curves, respectively, in Fig. 4(a). In case of the PI channel replication, the lowest NF over 17 replicas was 8.15 dB. We attribute the discrepancy between the measured PI NF from the quantum limit of 6-dB to the Brillouin-scattering limited mixer length, responsible for the inadequate localization of noise coupling. In sharp contrast, the four-mode PS channel replication offers a 6-dB NF benefit, as clearly demonstrated in the red curve of Fig. 4(a).

Fig. 4 (a) Monitored experimental spectrum of reference comb. (b) Experimental spectral comparison of PI one-mode and PS four-mode wavelength multicasting.

Download Full Size | PDF

We note that the lowest NF of 2-dB corresponds to the signal wave at 1548.5 nm; whereas regarding the newly generated replicas, the lowest NF is 2.85 dB at 1553.3 nm. Most importantly, there are 7 copies having NFs lower than 3 dB, and additionally, all the 17 replicas possess lower than 6-dB NFs. To the best of our knowledge, these results correspond to the highest copy number with sub-3-dB NF for channel replication.

To further highlight the advantages of the PS four-mode parametric mixer, replicated channels were characterized by the BER measurements [32], where the evaluation was implemented with a 10-Gbit/s NRZ OOK data sequence. As specifically shown in Fig. 2, two pumps are regenerated by the injection locking in the upper and lower fiber branches of the pump recovery block, while the OOK data modulation is implemented in the middle fiber branch, where amplitude modulator is inserted for the BER validation. Figure 4(b) compares the BER curves of eight replicated channels under the PI one-mode and PS four-mode scenarios, illustrating the PS operation has a 1.9-dB receiver sensitivity improvement compared to the single channel (at 1550.1 nm) amplification by an EDFA, possessing a NF of 4.1 dB. Here, the total power of the input optical signal(s) into the parametric mixer (or EDFA for single channel amplification) was maintained at −34 dBm, implying that the power of each input signal for PS operation is −40 dBm. Most importantly, we note that multiple channels were successfully replicated with significantly improved BER receiver sensitivities compared to the single channel amplification, as demonstrated in Fig. 4(b).

4. Conclusion

In this paper we have theoretically and experimentally reported a near-noiseless channel cloning based on a PS multi-mode architecture using a parametric mixer. The experimental results presented in this paper support the original hypothesis that the parametric mixer can replicate multiple channels over a wide bandwidth, while simultaneously maintaining a low noise level. In addition, the DPLL stabilized operation has provided the first practical, environment-invariant PS four-mode operation, as manifested by the record-low NFs and significant BER improvements over the PI equivalent. Even though substantial work remains with respect to engineering an optimized, wide-band PS four-mode mixer, the measured results presented here indicate that near-noiseless channel replication can indeed be achieved. The realization of such practical channel cloning modules is expected to qualitatively change wide-ranging applications in signal processing, channel distribution and remote sensing.

References

1. S. Radic, “Parametric signal processing,” IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quantum Electron. 18(2), 670–680 (2012). [CrossRef]

2. C. A. Brackett, “Dense wavelength division multiplexing networks: principle and applications,” IEEE J. Sel. Areas Comm. 8(6), 948–964 (1990). [CrossRef]

3. J. M. H. Elmirghani and H. T. Mouftah, “All-optical wavelength conversion: technologies and applications in DWDM networks,” IEEE Commun. Mag. 38(3), 86–92 (2000). [CrossRef]

4. R. Malli, X. Zhang, and C. Qiao, “Benefits of multicasting in all-optical networks,” Proc. SPIE 3531, 209–220 (1998). [CrossRef]

5. B. Ramamurthy and B. Mukherjee, “Wavelength conversion in WDM networking,” IEEE J. Sel. Areas Comm. 16(7), 1061–1073 (1998). [CrossRef]

6. T. Durhuus, B. Mikkelsen, C. Joergensen, S. L. Danielsen, and K. E. Stubkjaer, “All-optical wavelength conversion by semiconductor optical amplifiers,” J. Lightwave Technol. 14(6), 942–954 (1996). [CrossRef]

7. M. Fujiwara, N. Shimosaka, M. Nishio, S. Suzuki, S. Yamazaki, S. Murata, and K. Kaede, “A coherent photonic wavelength-division switching system for broadband networks,” in Proc. ECOC1988 (1988), 139–142.

8. L. H. Sahasrabuddhe and B. Mukherjee, “Light-trees: optical multicasting for improved performance in wavelength-routed networks,” IEEE Commun. Mag. 37(2), 67–73 (1999). [CrossRef]

9. G. Contestabile, M. Presi, and E. Ciaramella, “Multiple wavelength conversion for WDM multicasting by FWM in an SOA,” IEEE Photonics Technol. Lett. 16(7), 1775–1777 (2004). [CrossRef]

10. H. S. Chung, R. Inohara, K. Nishimura, and M. Usami, “All-optical multi-wavelength conversion of 10 Gbit/s NRZ/RZ signals based on SOA-MZI for WDM multicasting,” Electron. Lett. 41(7), 432–433 (2005). [CrossRef]

11. F. Girardin, G. Guekos, and A. Houbavlis, “Gain recovery of bulk semiconductor optical amplifiers,” IEEE Photonics Technol. Lett. 10(6), 784–786 (1998). [CrossRef]

12. J. Hansryd, P. A. Andrekson, M. Westlund, J. Li, and P. O. Hedekvist, “Fiber-based optical parametric amplifiers and their applications,” IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quantum Electron. 8(3), 506–520 (2002). [CrossRef]

13. C. S. Bres, N. Alic, E. Myslivets, and S. Radic, “Scalable multicasting in one-pump parametric amplifier,” J. Lightwave Technol. 27(3), 356–363 (2009). [CrossRef]

14. R. Tang, P. L. Voss, J. Lasri, P. Devgan, and P. Kumar, “Noise-figure limit of fiber-optical parametric amplifiers and wavelength converters: experimental investigation,” Opt. Lett. 29(20), 2372–2374 (2004). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

15. B. P. P. Kuo, E. Myslivets, N. Alic, and S. Radic, “Wavelength multicasting via frequency comb generation in a bandwidth-enhanced fiber optical parametric xixer,” J. Lightwave Technol. 29(23), 3515–3522 (2011). [CrossRef]

16. E. Myslivets, B. P. P. Kuo, N. Alic, and S. Radic, “Generation of wideband frequency combs by continuous-wave seeding of multistage mixers with synthesized dispersion,” Opt. Express 20(3), 3331–3344 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

17. Z. Tong, A. O. Wiberg, E. Myslivets, B. P. P. Kuo, N. Alic, and S. Radic, “Broadband parametric multicasting via four-mode phase-sensitive interaction,” Opt. Express 20(17), 19363–19373 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

18. A. O. J. Wiberg, Z. Tong, L. Liu, J. L. Ponsetto, V. Ataie, E. Myslivets, N. Alic, and S. Radic, “Demonstration of 40 GHz analog-to-digital conversion using copy-and-sample-all parametric processing,” in Proc. OFC/NFOEC 2012, paper OW3C.2 (2012).

19. A. O. J. Wiberg, D. J. Esman, L. Liu, J. R. Adleman, S. Zlatanovic, V. Ataie, E. Myslivets, B. P.-P. Kuo, N. Alic, E. W. Jacobs, and S. Radic, “Coherent filterless wideband microwave/millimeter-wave channelizer based on Broadband Parametric Mixers,” J. Lightwave Technol. 32(20), 3609–3617 (2014). [CrossRef]

20. Z. Tong, A. O. J. Wiberg, E. Myslivets, C. K. Huynh, B. P. P. Kuo, N. Alic, and S. Radic, “Noise performance of phase-insensitive frequency multicasting in parametric mixer with finite dispersion,” Opt. Express 21(15), 17659–17669 (2013). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

21. Z. Tong, C. Lundstrom, P. A. Andrekson, C. J. McKinstrie, M. Karlsson, D. J. Blessing, E. Tipsuwannakul, B. J. Puttnam, H. Toda, and L. Gruner-Nielsen, “Towards ultrasensitive optical links enabled by low-noise phase-sensitive amplifiers,” Nat. Photonics 5(7), 430–436 (2011). [CrossRef]

22. R. Slavik, F. Parmigiani, J. Kakande, C. Lundstrom, M. Sjodin, P. A. Andrekson, R. Weerasuriya, S. Sygletos, A. D. Ellis, L. Gruner-Nielsen, D. Jakobsen, S. Herstrom, R. Phelan, J. O’Gorman, A. Bogris, D. Syvridis, S. Dasgupta, P. Petropoulos, and D. J. Richardson, “All-optical phase and amplitude regenerator for next-generation telecommunications systems,” Nat. Photonics 4(10), 690–695 (2010). [CrossRef]

23. C. McKinstrie, S. Radic, and M. Raymer, “Quantum noise properties of parametric amplifiers driven by two pump waves,” Opt. Express 12(21), 5037–5066 (2004). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

24. L. Liu, A. O. J. Wiberg, B. P.-P. Kuo, E. Myslivets, N. Alic, and S. Radic, “Comparison of PS one- and three-mode wavelength multicasting,” J. Lightwave Technol. 34(10), 2491–2499 (2016). [CrossRef]

25. Z. Tong and S. Radic, “Low-noise optical amplification and signal processing in parametric devices,” Adv. Opt. Photonics 5(3), 318–384 (2013). [CrossRef]

26. T. Richter, B. Corcoran, S. L. Olsson, C. Lundstrom, M. Karlsson, C. Schubert, and P. Andrekson, “Experimental characterization of a phase-sensitive four-mode fiber-optic parametric amplifier,” in ECOC (2012), paper Th.1.F.1.

27. A. A. C. Albuquerque, B. J. Puttnam, J. M. D. Mendinueta, M. V. Drummond, S. Shinada, R. N. Nogueira, and N. Wada, “Experimental investigation of phase-sensitive amplification of data signals in a four-mode fiber-based PSA,” Opt. Lett. 40(2), 288–291 (2015). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

28. E. Myslivets, C. Lundstrom, J. M. Aparicio, S. Moro, A. O. J. Wiberg, C. S. Bres, N. Alic, P. A. Andrekson, and S. Radic, “Spatial equalization of zero-dispersion wavelength profiles in nonlinear fibers,” IEEE Photonics Technol. Lett. 21(24), 1807–1809 (2009). [CrossRef]

29. L. Liu, Z. Tong, A. O. J. Wiberg, B. P. P. Kuo, E. Myslivets, N. Alic, and S. Radic, “Digital multi-channel stabilization of four-mode phase-sensitive parametric multicasting,” Opt. Express 22(15), 18379–18388 (2014). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

30. G. Obarski, “Precise calibration for optical amplifier noise figure measurement using the RIN subtraction method,” in Proc. OFC2003, 601–603 (2003).

31. M. Movassaghi, M. K. Jackson, V. M. Smith, and W. J. Hallam, “Noise figure of erbium-doped fiber amplifiers in saturated operation,” J. Lightwave Technol. 16(5), 812–817 (1998). [CrossRef]

32. Z. Tong, L. Liu, A. O. J. Wiberg, V. Ataie, E. Myslivets, B. Kuo, N. Alic, and S. Radic, “First demonstration of four-mode phase-sensitive multicasting of optical channel,” in CLEO 2013 (2013), paper CTh5D.6.

Channel cloning by multi-mode phase-sensitive parametric mixer

Abstract

1. Introduction

2. Operating principle

3. Experimental configuration

4. Conclusion

References

Cited By

Figures (4)

Equations (12)

Optics Express