Abstract
In practice, noise is present in all measurements, and FROG measurements are no exception. As a result, it’s important to ask several questions with regard to FROG [1]: How well does the FROG-retrieval algorithm retrieve the pulse in the presence of such noise? Does it always converge? If so, then what errors can be expected in the retrieved pulse intensity and phase versus time for a given noise level in the experimental FROG trace? What additional numerical techniques can be incorporated to improve the retrieval? Finally, can one calculate error bars on the retrieved intensity and phase for a noisy experimental FROG trace? If so, how?
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
D. N. Fittinghoff, K. W. DeLong, R. Trebino, and C. L. Ladera, “Noise sensitivity in frequency-resolved optical-gating measurements of ultrashort pulses,” Journal of the Optical Society of America B 12, 1955–67 (1995).
K. W. DeLong, D. N. Fittinghoff, R. Trebino, B. Kohler, and K. Wilson, “Pulse retrieval in frequency-resolved optical gating based on the method of generalized projections.,” Optics Letters 19, 2152–4 (1994).
R. Trebino and D. J. Kane, “Using Phase Retrieval to Measure the Intensity and Phase of Ultrashort Pulses: Frequency-Resolved Optical Gating,” J. Opt. Soc. Amer. A 10, 1101–11 (1993).
K. W. DeLong and R. Trebino, “Improved Ultrashort-Pulse Retrieval Algorithm for Frequency-Resolved Optical Gating,” Journal of the Optical Society of America A 11, 2429–37 (1994).
H. Stark, “Image Recovery: Theory and Application,” (Academic Press, Orlando, 1987).
Jae S. Lim, Two-dimensional signal and image processing (Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliff, New Jersey, 1990).
R. R. Coifman and D. L. Donoho, “Translation-Invariant De-Noising” in Wavelets and Statistics,” edited by Anestis Antoniadis (Springer-Verlag Lecture Notes, 1995).
David L. Donoho, “Wavelet Shrinkage and W.V.D-A Ten-Minute Tour,” Stanford University Tech. Rep. 416 (Stanford University, Stanford, California, January 1993).
M. A. Krumbugel, K. W DeLong, D. N. Fittinghoff, J. N. Sweetser, and R. Trebino, “Wavelet noise reduction for frequency-resolved-optical-gating measurements of ultrashort laser pulses,” presented at the Wavelet Applications III, Orlando, FL, USA, 1996.
B. Efron and Tibshirani, Science 253, 390 (1991).
William H. Press, Saul A. Teukolsky, William T. Vetterling, and Brian P. Flannery, Numerical Recipes in C (University Press, Cambridge, 1992).
D. J. Kane, “Real-time measurement of ultrashort laser pulses using principal component generalized projections,” IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Quantum Electronics 4, 278-84 (1998).
D. J. Kane, “Recent progress toward real-time measurement of ultrashort laser pulses,” IEEE Journal of Quantum Electronics 35, 421–31 (1999).
D. J. Kane, private communication.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2000 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Fittinghoff, D.N., Munroe, M. (2000). Noise: Its Effects and Suppression. In: Frequency-Resolved Optical Gating: The Measurement of Ultrashort Laser Pulses. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-1181-6_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-1181-6_9
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4613-5432-1
Online ISBN: 978-1-4615-1181-6
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive