2002
DOI: 10.1007/s00340-002-0900-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Simultaneous automatic calibration and direction-of-time removal in frequency-resolved optical gating

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
21
0

Year Published

2005
2005
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
1
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
21
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Yellampalle et al also reminded us of an SHG FROG trivial ambiguity, described earlier by Taylor and co-workers [3,4] and also by us [5,6]: pulses well separated in time ( Fig. 1 in [1]).…”
mentioning
confidence: 81%
“…Yellampalle et al also reminded us of an SHG FROG trivial ambiguity, described earlier by Taylor and co-workers [3,4] and also by us [5,6]: pulses well separated in time ( Fig. 1 in [1]).…”
mentioning
confidence: 81%
“…This ambiguity can be resolved by an additional measurement of the test pulse after adding known dispersion (e.g., passing through a glass slide before the device) or adding a dispersive element in one arm of the interferometer to break the symmetry (note that simply attenuating one beam is not sufficient) [56]. Alternatively one can use the third-order polarizability of optical materials to provide five alternative geometries: polarization gating (PG), self-diffraction (SD), transient grating (TG) in two geometries [57] and third harmonic generation (THG) [58]; the gate functions are given in Eqs.…”
Section: Frequency-resolved Optical Gatingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Time-reversal making a second trace, which is consistent with only one of the directions of time. Also, a few ambiguities exist for well-separated pulses in time and modes in frequency (such pulses are better measured using a properly designed XFROG, which does not have these ambiguities, but if one insists on using FROG, use of an etalon as the beam-splitter removes them and also the direction-of-time ambiguity if present [2,15]). In any case, for all other pulses, FROG works extremely well.…”
Section: Functionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As is often the case with new ideas, there are many misconceptions about FROG in the literature. For example, the simple trick of using an etalon as the beam-splitter in a FROG to remove the well-separated-pulse ambiguities [2,15] is not well known, and, as a result, very complex methods have been introduced to remove these ambiguities. Unfortunately, complex methods are as likely to introduce a distortion as to measure it, and so such methods should only be used with extreme care.…”
Section: Functionmentioning
confidence: 99%