On the resilience of dual-waveguide parametric amplifiers to pump power and phase fluctuations

Shi, M.; Ribeiro, V.; Perego, A. M.

doi:10.1063/5.0136729

Parametric amplifiers based on coupled-core fibers and coupled integrated waveguides are promising devices for delivering broadband and flat gain spectrum with low noise figure in vital technological applications such as optical communications. To address potential practical issues that may arise in the experimental demonstration, in the present work, we derive analytical expressions for the impact of relative input pump phase and power fluctuations between two waveguides on pump waves stability. We, furthermore, evaluate, through numerical simulations, how the pump power oscillations between the two waveguides affect the amplifier spectrum, identifying optimal regimes of operation for coupled-core fibers and also for coupled integrated waveguides. Our findings hint at the resilience of these parametric amplifiers' architectures and at their possible practical implementation in realistic labs and real-world scenarios.

Optical parametric amplifiers relying on four-wave mixing enabled by Kerr nonlinearity^1–3 are a promising technology offering broadband amplifications for optical communications^4–8 and which also find applications for frequency conversion.⁹ Parametric amplifiers have been traditionally demonstrated using silica fibers and also in integrated silicon¹⁰ and silicon nitride waveguides.^11–15 Alternative architectures based on coupled-core fibers and coupled waveguides are possible as well. Parametric amplification in two coupled nonlinear waveguides was originally proposed in seminal contributions a few decades ago.^16–18 The related study of modulation instability has been afterward theoretically addressed by other authors for asymmetric continuous waves solutions,¹⁹ including higher-order effects,²⁰ with gain in one of the waveguides,²¹ including the frequency dependency of the coupling²² (also with polarization effects,²³ higher-order dispersion,^24,25 and saturable nonlinearity²⁶) with asymmetry between the coupled cores,²⁷ and also in fibers with a larger number of coupled cores.^28,29 However, only recently, research attempts to bring coupled-waveguide parametric amplifiers closer to technology have been performed, including theoretical studies^30–33 and preliminary experimental demonstrations.^34,35 The potential benefits of parametric amplifiers based on the two coupled waveguides architecture lie in the flatness of the gain spectrum,³⁰ together with the low noise figure in a phase-sensitive mode.³¹ This geometry provides extra degrees of freedom, which enable compensation of phase-matching degradation due to pump attenuation in lossy integrated waveguides exploiting spatial engineering of the coupling,^32,34 dispersion compensation,³⁶ and parametric amplification with signal and idler separation between different supermodes³⁷ harnessing the frequency dependency of the coupling strength. Several impairments could affect the performance of coupled-waveguide parametric amplifiers pumped with two equally powerful pump waves. These include: relative power and phase differences between the pump waves in the two waveguides, random fluctuations of the zero-dispersion wavelength and their correlation between the two waveguides, and parameters difference among the two waveguides—such as group velocity dispersion and nonlinearity—arising during the fabrication process. In this work, we analytically and numerically study the first one of these potential impairments, namely, the impact of pump power and phase fluctuations between the two coupled waveguides on the amplifier performances for an amplifier operating in the regime where the two waveguides are pumped with equal power. We have derived an analytical formula, which describes the spatial instability—leading to power exchange and oscillations of the continuous waves solutions between the two coupled waveguides during propagation—resulting from the small and unwanted time-independent perturbations caused by the relative differences in input power and phase. We show that the predictions of the analytical formula agree well with numerical solutions of the pump wave propagation along the waveguides. We, furthermore, numerically investigate the impact of the input pump phase and power difference on the amplifier gain for parameters typical of coupled-core silica fibers and also for integrated silicon nitride waveguides, showing that the amplifier is robust against the fluctuation magnitude within the possibility of realistic experimental control. The starting point of our theory consists of two nonlinear Schrödinger equations (NLSEs), which rule the propagation of the electric field amplitudes

A_{1, 2}

along two identical coupled waveguides

(1)

\frac{\partial A_{1}}{\partial z} = i \sum_{n = 0}^{\infty} \frac{β_{n}}{n!} {(i \partial_{t})}^{n} A_{1} + i γ | A_{1} |^{2} A_{1} - \frac{α}{2} A_{1} + i \sum_{n = 0}^{\infty} \frac{C_{n}}{n!} {(i \partial_{t})}^{n} A_{2},

(1a)

\frac{\partial A_{2}}{\partial z} = i \sum_{n = 0}^{\infty} \frac{β_{n}}{n!} {(i \partial_{t})}^{n} A_{2} + i γ | A_{2} |^{2} A_{2} - \frac{α}{2} A_{2} + i \sum_{n = 0}^{\infty} \frac{C_{n}}{n!} {(i \partial_{t})}^{n} A_{1} .

(1b)

Here, β_n and C_n are the nth coefficient of the Taylor expansion of the frequency-dependent propagation constant

β (ω)

and coupling

C (ω)

⁠, respectively, γ and α are the nonlinearity and attenuation coefficients, respectively, t is the temporal coordinate, and z is the spatial evolution coordinate along the longitudinal waveguides dimension. A sketch of a dual-waveguide parametric amplifier is shown in Fig. 1. We consider pumps with amplitudes denoted by

{\bar{u}}_{p 1, p 2}

to be continuous wave (time-independent) solutions of Eqs. . The solutions with the same power

P_{p} / 2

and constant phase difference 0 (symmetric) or π (antisymmetric) read

(2)

{\bar{u}}_{p 1, p 2} = \sqrt{\frac{P_{p}}{2}} e^{- \frac{α}{2} z} e^{i (ϕ_{p} \pm ξ \frac{π}{2})},

(2a)

ϕ_{p} = ϕ_{0} + [β_{0} + {(- 1)}^{ξ} C_{0}] z + \frac{γ}{2} P_{p} z_{eff},

(2b)

where ξ is 0 or 1 for symmetric or antisymmetric solution, respectively,

ϕ_{0} \pm ξ π / 2

are the initial phases of the two pump waves, and

z_{eff} = \int_{0}^{z} e^{- α z^{'}} d z'

(in the absence of losses

z_{eff} \to z

⁠). To study the stability of the pump waves shown in Eqs. , we add small perturbations

η_{1, 2}

(⁠

| η_{1, 2} |^{2} ≪ P_{p}

⁠) at the pump frequency to the solutions

{\bar{u}}_{p 1, p 2}

⁠, which leads to the following ansatz:

u_{p 1, p 2} (z) = {\bar{u}}_{p 1, p 2} + η_{1, 2} (z) e^{- \frac{α}{2} z} e^{i (ϕ_{p} \pm ξ \frac{π}{2})} .

(3)

FIG. 1.

View large Download slide

Sketch of a dual-waveguide parametric amplifier. A_s is the input signal wave, and $A_{p 1, p 2}$ are the pump waves in the two waveguides. The components denoted by “50/50” are 50/50% couplers. Blue rectangles with a diagonal arrow describe phase shifters, and one can input even or odd supermodes by switching the phase shifter located before the coupled waveguides between $\pm \frac{π}{2}$ ⁠. The second phase shifter and the coupler located after the coupled waveguides enable separation of the amplified supermodes at the output.

By redefining P_p as the total power and selecting a proper

ϕ_{0}

⁠, the initial amplitudes in two waveguides can always be written as

u_{p 1, p 2} (0) = \sqrt{\frac{P_{p}}{2} \pm \frac{P_{d}}{2}} e^{i (ϕ_{0} \pm i \frac{ϕ_{d}}{2} \pm ξ \frac{π}{2})},

(4)

where P_d and

ϕ_{d}

are the initial power difference and phase difference, respectively. Considering

P_{d} ≪ P_{p}

and

ϕ_{d} ≪ 1

⁠, the amplitudes can be rewritten as

\begin{matrix} u_{p 1, p 2} (0) \approx (\sqrt{\frac{P_{p}}{2}} \pm \frac{P_{d}}{2 \sqrt{2 P_{p}}}) (1 \pm \frac{ϕ_{d}}{2}) e^{i (ϕ_{0} \pm ξ \frac{π}{2})} \\ \approx (\sqrt{\frac{P_{p}}{2}} \pm \frac{P_{d}}{2 \sqrt{2 P_{p}}} \pm i \frac{1}{2} \sqrt{\frac{P_{p}}{2}} ϕ_{d}) e^{i (ϕ_{0} \pm ξ \frac{π}{2})}, \end{matrix}

(5)

which implies

η_{1} (0) = - η_{2} (0) = \frac{P_{d}}{2 \sqrt{2 P_{p}}} + i \frac{1}{2} \sqrt{\frac{P_{p}}{2}} ϕ_{d}

⁠. By substituting Eq. into the coupled NLSEs, Eqs. , and explicitly writing

η_{\pm} = a_{\pm} + i b_{\pm}

⁠, where

η_{\pm} = η_{1} \pm η_{2}

⁠, we obtain the equations governing the propagation of the perturbations real and imaginary parts as follows:

\begin{matrix} \partial_{z} (\begin{matrix} a_{\pm} \\ b_{\pm} \end{matrix}) = M_{\pm} (\begin{matrix} a_{\pm} \\ b_{\pm} \end{matrix}) \\ = (\begin{matrix} 0 & γ \frac{P_{p}}{2} e^{- α z} - K_{\pm} \\ γ \frac{P_{p}}{2} e^{- α z} + K_{\pm} & 0 \end{matrix}) (\begin{matrix} a_{\pm} \\ b_{\pm} \end{matrix}), \end{matrix}

(6)

where

K_{\pm} = γ \frac{P_{p}}{2} e^{- α z} + {(- 1)}^{ξ} (\pm C_{0} - C_{0})

⁠. As

η_{+} (0) \approx 0

and

η_{-} (0) \approx \frac{P_{d}}{\sqrt{2 P_{p}}} + i \sqrt{\frac{P_{p}}{2}} ϕ_{d}

⁠, only the evolution of

η_{-}

needs to be calculated whereas

η_{+}

remains vanishing. An approximate solution to Eq. is

{(a_{-}, b_{-})}^{T} = e^{\int_{0}^{z} M_{-} (z^{'}) d z^{'}} {(a_{-} (0), b_{-} (0))}^{T}

⁠, where the exponential expression reads

N = e^{\int_{0}^{z} M_{-} (z^{'}) d z^{'}} = (\begin{matrix} cosh ρ & θ sinh ρ \\ θ^{- 1} sinh ρ & cosh ρ \end{matrix}),

(7)

with

ρ = \sqrt{- 2 C_{0} z [2 C_{0} z - {(- 1)}^{ξ} γ P_{p} z_{eff}]} and θ = {(- 1)}^{ξ} 2 C_{0} z / ρ

⁠. We finally obtain

\begin{matrix} η_{-} (z) = (cosh ρ + i θ^{- 1} sinh ρ) \frac{P_{d}}{\sqrt{2 P_{p}}} + (θ sinh ρ + i cosh ρ) \sqrt{\frac{P_{p}}{2}} ϕ_{d} . \end{matrix}

(8)

To have direct insight into the instability of the symmetric pump power solution, we study the power difference between two waveguides

P_{-} (z) = | u_{p 1} |^{2} - | u_{p 2} |^{2}

⁠, which can be evaluated as a function of

η_{-}

approximately by

\begin{matrix} P_{-} (z) = e^{- α z} ({| \sqrt{\frac{P_{p}}{2}} + \frac{η_{-}}{2} |}^{2} - {| \sqrt{\frac{P_{p}}{2}} - \frac{η_{-}}{2} |}^{2}) \\ = e^{- α z} (P_{d} cosh ρ + P_{p} ϕ_{d} θ sinh ρ), \end{matrix}

(9)

where

η_{1} = - η_{2} = η_{-} / 2

is considered. We first focus on the symmetric pump power solution (ξ = 0). As the signature flat broadband gain of coupled-waveguide amplifiers is obtained with symmetric pump input when the attenuation is negligible for

γ P_{p} = 4 C_{0}

⁠, we will use this relation across the whole paper and as a result

θ \approx 1

⁠. In realistic symmetrically pumped parametric amplifiers,

cosh ρ

is close to

sinh ρ

as the amplifier length L is larger than the nonlinear length L_NL:

L > L_{N L} = \frac{1}{γ P_{p} / 2}

⁠. (We consider in this work

L_{N L} \approx 33

m for dual-core fibers and

L_{N L} \approx 28

cm for integrated waveguides.) Thus, the two expressions enclosed by parentheses in Eq. are approximately equal. As typically the pump power is larger than 1 W, power fluctuations of the order of 1 mW and phase fluctuations of the order of 1 mRad will lead to a similar dynamics of the power imbalance

P_{-}

⁠. Experimentally, it is, in general, more challenging—but still feasible—to control phase differences up to the mRad level rather than it is to control power fluctuations or imbalances up to the mW level, as we will comment more in detail later; hence, we can generally assume that

\sqrt{\frac{P_{p}}{2}} ϕ_{d} > \frac{P_{d}}{\sqrt{2 P_{p}}}

⁠, and initial phase differences in two waveguides are usually the dominant effect that can induce substantial pump power imbalance upon propagation. In typical optical parametric amplifiers experimental setups, the noise of the pump laser can result in power fluctuations with an optical signal-to-noise ratio (OSNR) between 50 and 70 dB, which for a pump with 1 W average power will put the power or variance of the noise in the sub-μW to μW regime. An additional source of power fluctuations is the 3-dB coupler that follows the pump laser (typically composed of a low-power laser source followed by an erbium-doped fiber amplifier). However, as the two optical waves used to pump dual-waveguide parametric amplifiers are, in general, obtained by splitting a powerful wave by means of a 50/50% optical coupler, the main cause of the relative power difference between two pump waves is due to coupler imperfections. The ratio tolerance is within ±5% in a 100 nm bandwidth for most standard 50/50% couplers, increasing almost monotonically with wavelength shift from their center wavelength. (The ratio tolerance will be in practice much smaller in case the pump is located at the center of the coupler transmission bandwidth.) For a reference value of the pump power on the order of 1 W, this leads to a maximum of ±50 mW power imbalance between the pumps, meaning a 100 mW net difference. Note that the physical power difference between the pumps corresponds to P_d in our notation [see the definition given in Eq. ]. Sources of the relative phase difference between the two input pump waves are instead connected to differences in their optical paths—after being split at the 50/50% coupler—which can be due to alignment issues of the fiber components in the setup or to fabrication precision issues in the case of integrated waveguides; for instance, an optical path difference of 1 nm corresponds to approximately 6 mRad phase difference at 1550 nm in silica. Methods available to substantially reduce the relative input pump power imbalance and to precisely controlling phase differences will be discussed later in the text.

Examples of the pump power difference evolution without losses (using parameters typical of coupled-core fibers) and with losses (using parameters typical of silicon nitride waveguides) are shown in Fig. 2. To study the worst-case scenario, where pump and phase fluctuations contribute to a maximum power difference between the two waveguides, the signs of P_d and $ϕ_{d}$ are kept the same in the following analysis. For each case, we considered the impact of various initial pump power differences— $P_{d} = 0.4, 4, and 40 mW$ ⁠, the impact of different initial phase differences— $ϕ_{d} = 0.6, 6, and 60 mRad$ (corresponding to an optical path difference of $\sim 0.1, 1$ ⁠, and 10 nm at wavelength λ = 1550 nm in silica), and the combined impact of both initial power and phase differences. For the lossless case [Figs. 2(a)–2(c)], the analytical theory is in excellent agreement with numerical simulation results of the coupled NLSEs up to when most of the power is contained in a single waveguide (⁠ $P_{-} \approx P_{p}$ ⁠). The larger the input perturbations, the earlier (along the propagation) $P_{-}$ becomes substantial. It is worth mentioning that the simulation results show the power exchange between the two waveguides upon propagation: the power in one waveguide flows into the other one and then goes back at the critical point $P_{-} = P_{p}$ ⁠, where all the power is contained in a single waveguide. As the stability analysis is based on the small perturbations assumption, this phenomenon is not captured by the analytical calculations. In the lossy case [Figs. 2(d)–2(f)], we observe that $P_{-}$ performs damped oscillations, and agreement between simulations and theory seems quite robust for the parameters considered.

FIG. 2.

View large Download slide

Evolution of pump power difference for the symmetric case. $P_{-}$ evolution without losses calculated analytically (solid) and in numerical simulations (dots) for different values of P_d and $ϕ_{d}$ shown in the legends, where (x, y) represents P_d = x mW and $ϕ_{d} = y$ mRad. (a)–(c) describe coupled-core fibers and parameters used are $γ = 10 W^{- 1} {km}^{- 1}, P_{p} = 6 W, C_{0} = 15 {km}^{- 1}$ ⁠, and α = 0. (d)–(f) Lossy integrated waveguides and parameters used are $γ = 1.2 W^{- 1} m^{- 1}, P_{p} = 6 W, C_{0} = 1.8 m^{- 1}$ ⁠, and $α = 0.69 m^{- 1}$ corresponding to $3 dB m^{- 1}$ ⁠.

To see how the amplifier gain spectrum is affected by the relative input pump phase and power fluctuations, we performed numerical simulations of Eqs. (1) for parameters corresponding to coupled-core fibers and integrated lossy coupled-waveguide amplifiers, considering terms up to the second order in the waveguide and coupling dispersion. We have simulated amplifiers with characteristics analogous to those used for the perturbation analysis presented in Fig. 2, resulting in the key quantity determining the amplifier gain, namely, the nonlinear phase shift accumulated per waveguide $γ P_{p} L / 2$ ⁠, to be up to 4.5 for dual-core fibers and up to 5.4 for integrated waveguides. These values can be considered realistic for parametric amplifiers used in optical communications, where the accumulated nonlinear phase shift ranges approximately between 3 and 5.^6,8,13

We calculated the phase-insensitive (PI) gain spectrum of supermodes $A_{\pm} = (A_{1} \pm A_{2}) / \sqrt{2}$ choosing as the initial condition the signals—with frequency larger than the pump (⁠ $Δ ω > 0$ ⁠)—to be fully located in the supermode $A_{-}$ as $u_{s 1} (0) = - u_{s 2} (0) = 10^{- 4} \sqrt{W}$ ⁠, and considering idlers—with frequency smaller than the pump (⁠ $Δ ω < 0$ ⁠)—to be vanishing, $u_{i 1} (0) = u_{i 2} (0) = 0$ ⁠. Here, $u_{s 1, s 2, i 1, i 2}$ are the sideband waves (subscripts s, i and 1, 2 denote signal and idler and waveguides 1 and 2, respectively). The gain spectrum of the supermodes $A_{\pm}$ is, hence, defined as $G_{\pm} (z) = | u_{s 1} (z) \pm u_{s 2} (z) |^{2} / | u_{s 1} (z) - u_{s 2} (0) |^{2}$ and $G_{\pm} (z) = | u_{i 1} (z) \pm u_{i 2} (z) |^{2} / | u_{s 1} (0) - u_{s 2} (0) |^{2}$ for positively and negatively detuned angular frequency $Δ ω$ from the pump, respectively. We first studied how the relative pump power or phase difference alone can impact the amplifier gain spectrum in a similar way: we compared the parametric gain spectrum obtained with (P_d = 600 mW, $ϕ_{d} = 0$ ⁠) and (P_d = 0, $ϕ_{d} = 100$ mRad). From Eq. (8), we know that $η_{-}$ would be almost equal in both cases for the chosen value of the total pump power P_p = 6 W. The results are summarized in Fig. 3 for coupled-core fibers and also for coupled integrated lossy waveguide parameters.

FIG. 3.

View large Download slide

PI gain for $A_{-}$ ⁠: equivalence of amplitude and phase fluctuation effects. Map of parametric gain from numerical simulations vs z and frequency. Amplification in lossless coupled-core fibers: (a) (⁠ $P_{d} = 600 mW, ϕ_{d} = 0$ ⁠); (b) (P_d = 0, $ϕ_{d} = 100 mRad$ ⁠). Amplification in lossy coupled waveguides: (c) (⁠ $P_{d} = 600 mW, ϕ_{d} = 0$ ⁠); (d) (P_d = 0, $ϕ_{d} = 100 mRad$ ⁠). Evolution of $P_{-}$ calculated analytically (solid) and numerically (dots) are shown as a reference. Other parameters used in (a) and (b) are: $β_{2} = - 0.5 {ps}^{2} {km}^{- 1}, γ = 10 W^{- 1} {km}^{- 1}, P_{p} = 6 W, α = 0 {km}^{- 1}, C_{0} = 15 {km}^{- 1}, C_{1} = - 3 ps {km}^{- 1}$ ⁠, and $C_{2} = 1 {ps}^{2} {km}^{- 1}$ ⁠; parameters used in (c) and (d) are: $β_{2} = - 0.05 {ps}^{2} m^{- 1}, γ = 1.2 W^{- 1} m^{- 1}, P_{p} = 6 W, C_{0} = 1.8 m^{- 1}, C_{1} = - 0.3 ps m^{- 1}, C_{2} = 0.1 {ps}^{2} m^{- 1}$ ⁠, and $α = 0.69 m^{- 1}$ corresponding to $3 dB m^{- 1}$ ⁠.

We have then explored the impact on the parametric gain of different magnitudes of pump power and pump phase fluctuations and compared different parametric gain profiles obtained with the unperturbed scenario. The sidebands' gain for the lossless dual-core fiber amplifier is shown in Fig. 4 for supermode $A_{-}$ and in Fig. 5 for supermode $A_{+}$ ⁠. For the lossy integrated waveguide amplifier, the gain is shown in Fig. 6 for supermode $A_{-}$ and in Fig. 7 for supermode $A_{+}$ ⁠. Up to P_d = 40 mW and $ϕ_{d} = 40$ mRad, we observe that for propagation distance $z ≲$ 100 m and $z ≲$ 1 m, for coupled-core fibers and integrated waveguides, respectively, the main impact of amplitude and phase perturbations is to slightly reduce the maximum gain without substantially affecting the ideal amplifier performance. However, for larger propagation distances and/or for larger values of input power and phase differences (here, we have considered P_d = 200 mW and $ϕ_{d} = 200$ mRad to illustrate a more extreme case), substantial modifications of the gain spectrum and coupling of energy from the input supermode $A_{-}$ to supermode $A_{+}$ occur. This results, as well, in a frequency asymmetric gain spectrum for different supermodes due to the interplay between power asymmetry in the two waveguides and C₁, the first-order term of the coupling Taylor expansion around the pump frequency. It can be indeed shown that the combination of coupling dispersion and asymmetric pump power among the two waveguides can lead to intermodal four-wave mixing, resulting in coupling between different supermodes and also frequency asymmetric parametric gain spectrum of individual supermodes.³⁷ We note that significant changes in the gain spectrum start to occur when most of the pump power is contained in a single waveguide (⁠ $P_{-} \approx P_{p}$ ⁠) as shown by the evolution of $P_{-}$ plotted in each case considered.

FIG. 4.

View large Download slide

Symmetrically pumped lossless PI gain for $A_{-}$ ⁠. Maps of parametric gain from numerical simulations vs z and frequency. (a) No fluctuations (P_d = 0, $ϕ_{d} = 0$ ⁠); (b) $P_{d} = 4 mW$ and $ϕ_{d} = 4 mRad$ ⁠; (c) $P_{d} = 40 mW$ and $ϕ_{d} = 40 mRad$ ⁠; and (d) $P_{d} = 200 mW$ and $ϕ_{d} = 200 mRad$ ⁠. Evolution of $P_{-}$ calculated analytically (solid) and numerically (dots) are shown as a reference. Remaining parameters used are the same as in Figs. 3(a) and 3(b).

FIG. 5.

View large Download slide

Symmetrically pumped lossless PI gain for $A_{+}$ ⁠. Map of parametric gain from numerical simulations vs z and frequency. (a) No fluctuations (P_d = 0, $ϕ_{d} = 0$ ⁠); (b) $P_{d} = 4 mW$ and $ϕ_{d} = 4 mRad$ ⁠; (c) $P_{d} = 40 mW$ and $ϕ_{d} = 40 mRad$ ⁠; and (d) $P_{d} = 200 mW$ and $ϕ_{d} = 200 mRad$ ⁠. Evolution of $P_{-}$ calculated analytically (solid) and numerically (dots) are shown as a reference. Remaining parameters used are the same as in Figs. 3(a) and 3(b).

FIG. 6.

View large Download slide

Symmetrically pumped lossy PI gain for $A_{-}$ ⁠. Maps of parametric gain calculated numerically vs z and frequency. (a) No fluctuations (P_d = 0, $ϕ_{d} = 0$ ⁠); (b) $P_{d} = 4 mW$ and $ϕ_{d} = 4 mRad$ ⁠; (c) $P_{d} = 40 mW$ and $ϕ_{d} = 40 mRad$ ⁠; and (d) $P_{d} = 200 mW$ and $ϕ_{d} = 200 mRad$ ⁠. Evolution of $P_{-}$ calculated analytically (solid) and numerically (dots) are shown as a reference. Remaining parameters used are the same as in Figs. 3(c) and 3(d).

FIG. 7.

View large Download slide

Symmetrically pumped lossy PI gain for $A_{+}$ ⁠. Map of parametric gain with numerical simulation vs z and frequency. (a) No fluctuations (P_d = 0, $ϕ_{d} = 0$ ⁠); (b) $P_{d} = 4 mW$ and $ϕ_{d} = 4 mRad$ ⁠; (c) $P_{d} = 40 mW$ and $ϕ_{d} = 40 mRad$ ⁠; and (d) $P_{d} = 200 mW$ and $ϕ_{d} = 200 mRad$ ⁠. Evolution of $P_{-}$ calculated analytically (solid) and numerically (dots) are shown as a reference. Remaining parameters used are the same as in Figs. 3(c) and 3(d).

In the antisymmetrically pumped (ξ = 1) parametric amplifier, the evolution of the pump power difference is still given in Eq. (9), but ρ keeps imaginary for any distance, so that the pump power difference $P_{-}$ oscillates around zero. This is illustrated in Fig. 8. In the antisymmetric scenario, the same initial conditions for signals and idlers as in the symmetric case have been considered, and a more stable parametric amplification is achieved—without the flat gain profile though—as depicted in Figs. 9 and 10, where we can appreciate that spectral gain degradation occurs for much larger values of the perturbations compared to the symmetric case. Analogously to the symmetric case, substantial changes in the gain spectrum for mode $A_{-}$ correspond to energy transfer to mode $A_{+}$ (not shown here). We have presented the impact of the input pump phase and power fluctuations in the PI operational regime. It is worth mentioning that in the phase-sensitive scenario (where idler waves are present at the input too), we find results that are analogous, and we do not report here for the sake of brevity. A similar scenario occurs as well for a PI amplifier where the input signals are located in supermode $A_{+}$ instead that in $A_{-}$ ⁠.

FIG. 8.

View large Download slide

Evolution of pump power difference for the antisymmetric case. (a)–(c) Evolution of $P_{-}$ without losses calculated analytically (solid) and in numerical simulations (dots) for different values of P_d and $ϕ_{d}$ shown in the legends, where (x, y) represents P_d = x mW and $ϕ_{d} = y$ mRad. Parameters used are like Fig. 2(a). (d)–(f) Evolution of $P_{-}$ with losses calculated analytically (solid) and in numerical simulations (dots). Parameters used are like Fig. 2(d).

FIG. 9.

View large Download slide

Antisymmetrically pumped lossless PI gain for $A_{-}$ ⁠. Maps of parametric gain from numerical simulations vs z and frequency. (a) No fluctuations (P_d = 0, $ϕ_{d} = 0$ ⁠); (b) $P_{d} = 40 mW$ and $ϕ_{d} = 40 mRad$ ⁠; (c) $P_{d} = 400 mW$ and $ϕ_{d} = 400 mRad$ ⁠; and (d) $P_{d} = 800 mW$ and $ϕ_{d} = 800 mRad$ ⁠. Evolution of $P_{-}$ calculated analytically (solid) and numerically (dots) are shown as a reference. Remaining parameters used are the same as in Figs. 3(a) and 3(b).

FIG. 10.

View large Download slide

Antisymmetrically pumped lossy PI gain for $A_{-}$ ⁠. Maps of parametric gain from numerical simulations vs z and frequency. (a) No fluctuations (P_d = 0, $ϕ_{d} = 0$ ⁠); (b) $P_{d} = 40 mW$ and $ϕ_{d} = 40 mRad$ ⁠; (c) $P_{d} = 400 mW$ and $ϕ_{d} = 400 mRad$ ⁠; and (d) $P_{d} = 800 mW$ and $ϕ_{d} = 800 mRad$ ⁠. Evolution of $P_{-}$ calculated analytically (solid) and numerically (dots) are shown as a reference. Remaining parameters used are the same as in Figs. 3(c) and 3(d).

Achieving two almost identical optical paths for the waves injected into the coupled-nonlinear-waveguide amplifier may result in alignment issues that require special equipment for precise compensation. However, existing commercial phase-meters³⁸ enable phase control up to the order of 6 μrad. This makes our parameters choice, regarding the gain spectrum degradation caused by large relative phase difference illustrated in the previous figures, a very pessimistic scenario. A very pessimistic scenario has been indeed considered for the cases of gain degradation caused by large values of input power differences too. An analysis based on current 50/50% couplers commercially available,³⁹ which have a coupling ratio tolerance of ±5%, would predict relative differences of the order of ±50 mW for a 1 W pump in the worst-case scenario. However, it is very important to stress that since the resolution of typical power meters is of the order of sub μW, it is possible to correct this imbalance, as it is not a fundamental one, without sophisticated technology, for instance, by using variable optical attenuators in each output port of the 50/50% couplers. Hence, it is likely feasible to achieve the performance of Figs. 4, 6(a), and 6(b) with minimum engineering effort and a negligible impact on the noise figure.

In conclusion, we have provided the analytical theory of pump waves stability for an equally pumped dual-waveguide parametric amplifier under the influence of relative input power and phase fluctuations. Our analytical theory predicts the evolution of pump power difference along the waveguides, and it is in good agreement with numerical simulations for realistic parameters. We have, furthermore, shown numerically how pump waves instability caused by power and phase fluctuations translates into amplifier gain spectrum changes, which occur for the magnitude of the input perturbations much larger than what can be realistically controlled in experiments. The results presented in this work hint at the resilience of equally pumped coupled dual-waveguide parametric amplifiers against pump fluctuations and can help the design of photonic technologies relying on this amplification scheme.

A.M.P. acknowledges support from the Royal Academy of Engineering through the Research Fellowship Scheme.

AUTHOR DECLARATIONS

Conflict of Interest

The authors have no conflicts to disclose.

Author Contributions

Minji Shi: Conceptualization (equal); Formal analysis (equal); Investigation (equal); Writing – original draft (equal). Vitor Ribeiro: Conceptualization (equal); Methodology (equal); Writing – original draft (equal). Auro M. Perego: Conceptualization (equal); Formal analysis (equal); Investigation (equal); Methodology (equal); Supervision (equal); Writing – original draft (equal); Writing – review & editing (equal).

DATA AVAILABILITY

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

REFERENCES

1.

R.

Stolen

and

J.

Bjorkholm

, “

Parametric amplification and frequency conversion in optical fibers

,”

IEEE J. Quantum Electron.

18

,

1062

–

1072

(

1982

).

https://doi.org/10.1109/JQE.1982.1071660

Google Scholar

Crossref

2.

M. E.

Mahric

,

Fiber Optical Parametric Amplifiers, Oscillators and Related Devices: Theory, Applications, and Related Devices

(

Cambridge University Press

,

2007

).

Google Scholar

3.

M. E.

Marhic

,

N.

Kagi

,

T.-K.

Chiang

, and

L. G.

Kazovsky

, “

Broadband fiber optical parametric amplifiers

,”

Opt. Lett.

21

,

573

–

575

(

1996

).

https://doi.org/10.1364/OL.21.000573

Google Scholar

Crossref

PubMed

4.

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

,

506

–

520

(

2002

).

https://doi.org/10.1109/JSTQE.2002.1016354

Google Scholar

Crossref

5.

P. A.

Andrekson

and

M.

Karlsson

, “

Fiber-based phase-sensitive optical amplifiers and their applications

,”

Adv. Opt. Photonics

12

,

367

–

428

(

2020

).

https://doi.org/10.1364/AOP.382548

Google Scholar

Crossref

6.

S.

Olsson

,

H.

Eliasson

,

E.

Astra

,

M.

Karlsson

, and

P. A.

Andrekson

, “

Long-haul optical transmission link using low-noise phase-sensitive amplifiers

,”

Nat. Commun.

9

,

2513

(

2018

).

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-04956-5

Google Scholar

Crossref

PubMed

7.

M. F. C.

Stephens

,

V.

Gordienko

, and

N. J.

Doran

, “

20 dB net-gain polarization-insensitive fiber optical parametric amplifier with >2 THz bandwidth

,”

Opt. Express

25

,

10597

–

10609

(

2017

).

https://doi.org/10.1364/OE.25.010597

Google Scholar

Crossref

PubMed

8.

V.

Gordienko

,

M. F. C.

Stephens

,

A. E.

El-Taher

, and

N. J.

Doran

, “

Ultra-flat wideband single-pump Raman-enhanced parametric amplification

,”

Opt. Express

25

,

4810

–

4818

(

2017

).

https://doi.org/10.1364/OE.25.004810

Google Scholar

Crossref

PubMed

9.

M.

Islam

and

O.

Boyraz

, “

Fiber parametric amplifiers for wavelength band conversion

,”

IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quantum Electron.

8

,

527

–

537

(

2002

).

https://doi.org/10.1109/JSTQE.2002.1016356

Google Scholar

Crossref

10.

X.

Liu

,

R.

Osgood

,

Y.

Vlasov

, and

W.

Green

, “

Mid-infrared optical parametric amplifier using silicon nanophotonic waveguides

,”

Nat. Photonics

4

,

557

–

560

(

2010

).

https://doi.org/10.1038/nphoton.2010.119

Google Scholar

Crossref

11.

P.

Zhao

,

Z.

Ye

,

K.

Vijayan

,

C.

Naveau

,

J.

Schröder

,

M.

Karlsson

, and

P. A.

Andrekson

, “

Waveguide tapering for improved parametric amplification in integrated nonlinear Si₃N₄ waveguides

,”

Opt. Express

28

,

23467

–

23477

(

2020

).

https://doi.org/10.1364/OE.389159

Google Scholar

Crossref

PubMed

12.

Z.

Ye

,

P.

Zhao

,

K.

Twayana

,

M.

Karlsson

,

P. A.

Andrekson

, and

V.

Torres-Company

, “

Ultralow-loss meter-long dispersion-engineered silicon nitride waveguides

,” in

Conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics

(

Optical Society of America

,

2021

).

Google Scholar

Crossref

13.

Z.

Ye

,

P.

Zhao

,

K.

Twayana

,

M.

Karlsson

,

V.

Torres-Company

, and

P. A.

Andrekson

, “

Overcoming the quantum limit of optical amplification in monolithic waveguides

,”

Sci. Adv.

7

,

eabi8150

(

2021

).

https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abi8150

Google Scholar

Crossref

PubMed

14.

P.

Zhao

,

M.

Karlsson

, and

P. A.

Andrekson

, “

Low-noise integrated phase-sensitive waveguide parametric amplifiers

,”

J. Lightwave Technol.

40

,

128

–

135

(

2022

).

https://doi.org/10.1109/JLT.2021.3119423

Google Scholar

Crossref

15.

P.

Zhao

,

Z.

Ye

,

M.

Karlsson

,

V.

Torres-Company

, and

P. A.

Andrekson

, “

Low-noise phase-sensitive parametric amplifiers based on integrated silicon-nitride-waveguides for optical signal processing

,”

J. Lightwave Technol.

40

,

1847

–

1854

(

2022

).

https://doi.org/10.1109/JLT.2021.3119425

Google Scholar

Crossref

16.

A.

Mecozzi

, “

Parametric amplification and squeezed-light generation in a nonlinear directional coupler

,”

Opt. Lett.

13

,

925

–

927

(

1988

).

https://doi.org/10.1364/OL.13.000925

Google Scholar

Crossref

PubMed

17.

S.

Trillo

,

S.

Wabnitz

,

G. I.

Stegeman

, and

E. M.

Wright

, “

Parametric amplification and modulational instabilities in dispersive nonlinear directional couplers with relaxing nonlinearity

,”

J. Opt. Soc. Am. B

6

,

889

–

900

(

1989

).

https://doi.org/10.1364/JOSAB.6.000889

Google Scholar

Crossref

18.

J.

Janszky

,

C.

Sibilia

,

M.

Bertolotti

,

P.

Adam

, and

A.

Petak

, “

Properties of a directional coupler with parametric amplification

,”

Quantum Semiclassical Opt.

7

,

509

–

516

(

1995

).

https://doi.org/10.1088/1355-5111/7/4/008

Google Scholar

Crossref

19.

R. S.

Tasgal

and

B. A.

Malomed

, “

Modulational instabilities in the dual-core nonlinear optical fiber

,”

Phys. Scr.

60

,

418

–

422

(

1999

).

https://doi.org/10.1238/Physica.Regular.060a00418

Google Scholar

Crossref

20.

A. A.

Nair

,

K.

Porsezian

, and

M.

Jayaraju

, “

Impact of higher order dispersion and nonlinearities on modulational instability in a dual-core optical fiber

,”

Eur. Phys. J. D

72

,

6

(

2018

).

https://doi.org/10.1140/epjd/e2017-80437-6

Google Scholar

Crossref

21.

R.

Ganapathy

,

B. A.

Malomed

, and

K.

Porsezian

, “

Modulational instability and generation of pulse trains in asymmetric dual-core nonlinear optical fibers

,”

Phys. Lett. A

354

,

366

–

372

(

2006

).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physleta.2006.02.002

Google Scholar

Crossref

22.

J. H.

Li

,

K. S.

Chiang

, and

K. W.

Chow

, “

Modulation instabilities in two-core optical fibers

,”

J. Opt. Soc. Am. B

28

,

1693

–

1701

(

2011

).

https://doi.org/10.1364/JOSAB.28.001693

Google Scholar

Crossref

23.

J. H.

Li

,

K. S.

Chiang

,

B. A.

Malomed

, and

K. W.

Chow

, “

Modulation instabilities in birefringent two-core optical fibres

,”

J. Phys. B

45

,

165404

(

2012

).

https://doi.org/10.1088/0953-4075/45/16/165404

Google Scholar

Crossref

24.

J. H.

Li

,

T. T.

Sun

,

Y. Q.

Ma

,

Y.

Chen

,

Z. L.

Cao

,

F. L.

Xian

,

D. Z.

Wang

, and

W.

Wang

, “

Modulation instabilities in nonlinear two-core optical fibers with fourth order dispersion

,”

Optik

208

,

164134

(

2020

).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijleo.2019.164134

Google Scholar

Crossref

25.

J. H.

Li

,

T. T.

Sun

,

Y. Q.

Ma

,

Y. Y.

Chen

,

Z. L.

Cao

, and

F. L.

Xian

, “

The effects of fourth-order dispersion on modulation instabilities in two-core optical fibers with asymmetric CW state

,”

Phys. Scr.

95

,

115502

(

2020

).

https://doi.org/10.1088/1402-4896/abba4c

Google Scholar

Crossref

26.

K.

Nithyanandan

,

R. V. J.

Raja

, and

K.

Porsezian

, “

Modulational instability in a twin-core fiber with the effect of saturable nonlinear response and coupling coefficient dispersion

,”

Phys. Rev. A

87

,

043805

(

2013

).

https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.87.043805

Google Scholar

Crossref

27.

A.

Govindarajan

,

B. A.

Malomed

,

A.

Mahalingam

, and

A.

Uthayakumar

, “

Modulational instability in linearly coupled asymmetric dual-core fibers

,”

Appl. Sci.

7

,

645

(

2017

).

https://doi.org/10.3390/app7070645

Google Scholar

Crossref

28.

A. M.

Rubenchik

,

E. V.

Tkachenko

,

M. P.

Fedoruk

, and

S. K.

Turitsyn

, “

Power-controlled phase-matching and instability of CW propagation in multicore optical fibers with a central core

,”

Opt. Lett.

38

,

4232

–

4235

(

2013

).

https://doi.org/10.1364/OL.38.004232

Google Scholar

Crossref

PubMed

29.

J. H.

Li

,

K. S.

Chiang

, and

C. R.

Li

, “

Modulation instability in collinear three-core optical fibers

,”

J. Opt. Soc. Am. B

34

,

2467

–

2477

(

2017

).

https://doi.org/10.1364/JOSAB.34.002467

Google Scholar

Crossref

30.

V.

Ribeiro

,

M.

Karlsson

, and

P.

Andrekson

, “

Parametric amplification with a dual-core fiber

,”

Opt. Express

25

,

6234

–

6243

(

2017

).

https://doi.org/10.1364/OE.25.006234

Google Scholar

Crossref

PubMed

31.

V.

Ribeiro

,

A.

Lorences-Riesgo

,

P.

Andrekson

, and

M.

Karlsson

, “

Noise in phase-(in)sensitive dual-core fiber parametric amplification

,”

Opt. Express

26

,

4050

–

4059

(

2018

).

https://doi.org/10.1364/OE.26.004050

Google Scholar

Crossref

PubMed

32.

V.

Ribeiro

and

A. M.

Perego

, “

Parametric amplification in lossy nonlinear waveguides with spatially dependent coupling

,”

Opt. Express

30

,

17614

–

17624

(

2022

).

https://doi.org/10.1364/OE.457583

Google Scholar

Crossref

PubMed

33.

V.

Ribeiro

and

A. M.

Perego

, “

Theory of parametric amplification in coupled lossy waveguides

,” in

Conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics

(

Optical Society of America

,

2022

).

Google Scholar

Crossref

34.

A. D.

Szabó

,

V.

Ribeiro

,

C. B.

Gaur

,

A. A. I.

Ali

,

A.

Mussot

,

Y.

Quiquempois

,

G.

Bouwmans

, and

N. J.

Doran

, “

Dual-polarization C+L-band wavelength conversion in a twin-core highly nonlinear fibre

,” in

OFC Virtual Conference

,

2021

.

Google Scholar

Crossref

35.

V.

Ribeiro

,

A. D.

Szabó

,

A. M.

Rocha

,

C. B.

Gaur

,

A. A. I.

Ali

,

Y.

Quiquempois

,

A.

Mussot

,

G.

Bouwmans

, and

N.

Doran

, “

Parametric amplification and wavelength conversion in dual-core highly nonlinear fibers

,”

J. Lightwave Technol.

40

,

6013

(

2022

).

https://doi.org/10.1109/JLT.2022.3186809

Google Scholar

Crossref

36.

M.

Shi

,

V.

Ribeiro

, and

A. M.

Perego

, “

Parametric amplification in coupled nonlinear waveguides: the role of coupling dispersion

,” Front. Photonics (submitted) (

2023

).

Google Scholar

37.

M.

Shi

,

V.

Ribeiro

, and

A. M.

Perego

, “

Parametric amplification based on intermodal four-wave mixing between different supermodes in coupled core fibers

,”

Opt. Express

31

,

9760

–

9768

(

2023

).

https://doi.org/10.1364/OE.480480

Google Scholar

Crossref

PubMed

38.

Liquid Instruments

, see https://www.liquidinstruments.com for “

Moku:Pro's phasemeter

;” accessed 26 November 2022.

39.

Thorlabs

, see https://www.thorlabs.com/newgrouppage9.cfm?objectgroup_id=9567 for “

1550 nm 1x2 single mode fused fiber optic couplers taps

;” accessed 26 November

2022

.

Published open access through an agreement with Aston University

On the resilience of dual-waveguide parametric amplifiers to pump power and phase fluctuations

AUTHOR DECLARATIONS

Conflict of Interest

Author Contributions

DATA AVAILABILITY

REFERENCES

Citing articles via

Resources

Explore

pubs.aip.org

Connect with AIP Publishing

On the resilience of dual-waveguide parametric amplifiers to pump power and phase fluctuations

AUTHOR DECLARATIONS

Conflict of Interest

Author Contributions

DATA AVAILABILITY

REFERENCES

Citing articles via

Related Content

Resources

Explore

pubs.aip.org

Connect with AIP Publishing

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only