pith. sign in

arxiv: 2510.07251 · v3 · submitted 2025-10-08 · ⚛️ physics.optics

Advanced mirror shapes for mode enhancement in plano-concave cavities

William James Hughes , Peter Horak This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-18 08:45 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.optics
keywords plano-concave cavitiesmirror shapingoptical mode enhancementlight-matter couplingFabry-Perot resonatorsquantum emittersnumerical simulationscavity QED
0
0 comments X

The pith

Shaped mirrors let simple plano-concave cavities focus light tightly at a central emitter.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

Plano-concave cavities are easy to align and build but normally cannot concentrate light well at the center where an emitter sits. The paper shows that modest changes to the mirror surfaces overcome this focusing limit. Numerical simulations indicate the coupling to the emitter rises by roughly a factor of ten and can match the strength of harder-to-align concave-concave designs. This keeps the practical advantages of the plano-concave layout while raising interaction strength for applications such as single-photon sources or entangled emitters.

Core claim

Numerical simulations demonstrate that simple mirror shaping increases coupling between a plano-concave cavity and a central emitter by an order of magnitude, rivalling the interaction strength of misalignment-sensitive concave-concave cavities while retaining the alignment tolerance and single-curved-mirror simplicity of the plano-concave geometry. These results establish conditions under which shaped plano-concave cavities can improve both performance and practicality for emitter-cavity systems.

What carries the argument

Numerically optimized mirror surface profiles that reshape the cavity mode to raise intensity at the central emitter location.

If this is right

  • Coupling strength in a plano-concave cavity can reach levels comparable to concave-concave cavities.
  • Alignment tolerances remain high, reducing the need for active stabilization.
  • Only one mirror requires curvature, lowering manufacturing complexity.
  • The approach suits emitters such as trapped ions or Rydberg atoms that must sit away from surfaces.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • These designs could lower the barrier to building quantum networks by simplifying cavity alignment in multi-emitter setups.
  • Testing the shaped mirrors at different wavelengths or with real fabrication tolerances would reveal how broadly the gain applies.
  • The same shaping principle might extend to other open cavity geometries that currently suffer from weak central focusing.

Load-bearing premise

The numerical simulations correctly predict real optical losses, fabrication errors, and emitter placement without experimental checks.

What would settle it

Fabricate a shaped plano-concave mirror pair, measure the actual coupling rate or Purcell enhancement with a central emitter, and compare the result directly to the simulated value.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2510.07251 by Peter Horak, William James Hughes.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Results of retroreflective optimisation for a cavity with the example geometry ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Example mirror profiles and resulting high-performing cavities for the example geometry ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Achievable [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Sensitivity of few-parameter mirrors to errors in their shaping parameters for the example cavity geometry ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Diagram of the clipping loss calculation for a misaligned concave-concave cavity with length [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_5.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Optical cavities are frequently used in quantum technologies to enhance light matter interactions, with applications including single photon generation and entanglement of distant emitters. The Fabry-P\'{e}rot resonator is a popular choice for its high optical access and large emitter-mirror separation. A typical configuration, particularly for emitters that should not be placed close to the mirror surface like trapped ions and Rydberg atoms, features two spherical mirrors placed around a central emitter, but this arrangement can put demanding requirements on the mirror alignment. In contrast, plano-concave cavities are tolerant to mirror misalignment and only require the manufacture of one curved mirror, but have limited ability to focus light in the centre of the cavity. Here we show how mirror shaping can overcome this limitation of plano-concave cavities while preserving the key advantages. We demonstrate through numerical simulations that simple mirror shaping can increase coupling between a plano-concave cavity and a central emitter by an order of magnitude, even rivalling misalignment-sensitive concave-concave counterparts for achievable interaction strength. We use these observations to establish the conditions under which plano-concave cavities with shaped mirrors could improve the performance and practicality of emitter-cavity systems.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper claims that simple shaping of the curved mirror in a plano-concave Fabry-Pérot cavity can increase the coupling strength to a central emitter by an order of magnitude relative to a standard spherical plano-concave design, while retaining misalignment tolerance and rivaling the interaction strength achievable in concave-concave cavities. The demonstration rests entirely on numerical simulations of the cavity modes.

Significance. If the reported enhancement holds under realistic losses, the approach would combine the practical advantages of plano-concave cavities (single curved surface, alignment tolerance) with strong coupling, which is relevant for trapped-ion or Rydberg-atom cavity QED where emitter-mirror separation must be maintained.

major comments (2)
  1. [Numerical Simulations] Numerical Simulations section: the manuscript provides no information on the loss model, mesh parameters for non-spherical boundaries, or convergence tests for diffraction/scattering at the shaped mirror edges. Because the central claim is an order-of-magnitude net gain in interaction strength while preserving cavity Q, omission of these details leaves open whether the reported enhancement is inflated relative to both the unshaped plano-concave baseline and the concave-concave reference.
  2. [Results] Results on field enhancement (e.g., the ~10× amplitude increase): the post-hoc selection of shaping parameters is not accompanied by a systematic scan or robustness check against small fabrication errors or emitter positioning offsets, which directly affects whether the claimed practicality advantage survives realistic conditions.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract states results are 'demonstrated through numerical simulations' but supplies no quantitative comparison of finesse or Q with and without shaping; adding a table or plot of these metrics would strengthen the preservation-of-Q claim.
  2. [Introduction] Notation for the coupling rate g and Purcell factor should be defined explicitly when first introduced, and the normalization of the electric-field plots should be stated in the figure captions.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for the constructive comments. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript to provide the requested details and additional analyses.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Numerical Simulations] Numerical Simulations section: the manuscript provides no information on the loss model, mesh parameters for non-spherical boundaries, or convergence tests for diffraction/scattering at the shaped mirror edges. Because the central claim is an order-of-magnitude net gain in interaction strength while preserving cavity Q, omission of these details leaves open whether the reported enhancement is inflated relative to both the unshaped plano-concave baseline and the concave-concave reference.

    Authors: We agree that these methodological details are important for substantiating the numerical results. In the revised manuscript we have expanded the Numerical Simulations section to describe the loss model (including mirror absorption, scattering, and diffraction contributions), the finite-element mesh parameters used for the non-spherical boundaries, and the convergence tests performed with respect to mesh density and computational domain size. These additions confirm that the reported order-of-magnitude enhancement in central coupling strength, relative to both the spherical plano-concave baseline and the concave-concave reference, is not inflated by inadequate resolution or incomplete loss accounting. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Results] Results on field enhancement (e.g., the ~10× amplitude increase): the post-hoc selection of shaping parameters is not accompanied by a systematic scan or robustness check against small fabrication errors or emitter positioning offsets, which directly affects whether the claimed practicality advantage survives realistic conditions.

    Authors: The shaping parameters were obtained via an optimization procedure aimed at demonstrating the upper limit of the enhancement possible with simple mirror shaping. To address the concern about robustness, the revised manuscript now includes a systematic scan of the shaping parameters in the vicinity of the reported optimum together with additional simulations that quantify the effect of small fabrication errors (profile deviations of a few percent) and emitter positioning offsets (up to 10 μm). These checks show that the coupling enhancement remains at least a factor of five under the tested perturbations, thereby supporting the claimed practicality advantage for applications that require alignment tolerance. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: enhancement shown via independent numerical simulations

full rationale

The paper demonstrates mirror-shaping benefits for plano-concave cavities exclusively through numerical simulations of optical modes and coupling strengths. No load-bearing step reduces to a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction, a self-referential definition, or a self-citation chain that substitutes for external verification. The central result (order-of-magnitude coupling increase) is obtained from direct computation on shaped mirror profiles rather than by algebraic rearrangement of the input assumptions. This is the most common honest outcome for simulation-driven optics papers that do not invoke uniqueness theorems or ansatzes from the authors' prior work.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the validity of the numerical model for cavity modes and emitter coupling; no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are stated in the abstract, but implicit assumptions include ideal mirror reflectivity and perfect emitter centering.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5724 in / 1087 out tokens · 27514 ms · 2026-05-18T08:45:21.041227+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

58 extracted references · 58 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    C. K. Law and H. J. K. and, Deterministic generation of a bit-stream of single-photon pulses, J. Mod. Optic.44, 2067 (1997)

    work page 2067

  2. [2]

    Keller, B

    M. Keller, B. Lange, K. Hayasaka, W. Lange, and H. Walther, Continuous generation of single photons with controlled waveform in an ion-trap cavity system, Nature431, 1075 (2004)

    work page 2004

  3. [3]

    Bochmann, M

    J. Bochmann, M. M¨ ucke, C. Guhl, S. Ritter, G. Rempe, and D. L. Moehring, Lossless state detection of single neutral atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett.104, 203601 (2010)

    work page 2010

  4. [4]

    Grinkemeyer, E

    B. Grinkemeyer, E. Guardado-Sanchez, I. Dimitrova, D. Shchepanovich, G. E. Mandopoulou, J. Borregaard, V. Vuleti´ c, and M. D. Lukin, Error-detected quantum operations with neutral atoms mediated by an optical cavity, Science387, 1301 (2025)

    work page 2025

  5. [5]

    Wang, D.-Y

    J. Wang, D.-Y. Huang, X.-L. Zhou, Z.-M. Shen, S.-J. He, Q.-Y. Huang, Y.-J. Liu, C.-F. Li, and G.-C. Guo, Ultrafast high-fidelity state readout of single neutral atom, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 240802 (2025)

    work page 2025

  6. [6]

    Reiserer and G

    A. Reiserer and G. Rempe, Cavity-based quantum networks with single atoms and optical photons, Rev. Mod. Phys.87, 1379 (2015)

    work page 2015

  7. [7]

    Ritter, C

    S. Ritter, C. N¨ olleke, C. Hahn, A. Reiserer, A. Neuzner, M. Uphoff, M. M¨ ucke, E. Figueroa, J. Bochmann, and G. Rempe, An elementary quantum network of single atoms in optical cavities, Nature484, 195 (2012)

    work page 2012

  8. [8]

    Krutyanskiy, M

    V. Krutyanskiy, M. Canteri, M. Meraner, J. Bate, V. Krcmarsky, J. Schupp, N. Sangouard, and B. P. Lanyon, Telecom- wavelength quantum repeater node based on a trapped-ion processor, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 213601 (2023)

    work page 2023

  9. [9]

    Monroe, R

    C. Monroe, R. Raussendorf, A. Ruthven, K. R. Brown, P. Maunz, L.-M. Duan, and J. Kim, Large-scale modular quantum- computer architecture with atomic memory and photonic interconnects, Phys. Rev. A89, 022317 (2014)

    work page 2014

  10. [10]

    Li and J

    Y. Li and J. D. Thompson, High-rate and high-fidelity modular interconnects between neutral atom quantum processors, PRX Quantum5, 020363 (2024)

    work page 2024

  11. [11]

    Sinclair, J

    J. Sinclair, J. Ramette, B. Grinkemeyer, D. Bluvstein, M. D. Lukin, and V. Vuleti´ c, Fault-tolerant optical interconnects for neutral-atom arrays, Phys. Rev. Res.7, 013313 (2025)

    work page 2025

  12. [12]

    Rempe, R

    G. Rempe, R. J. Thompson, H. J. Kimble, and R. Lalezari, Measurement of ultralow losses in an optical interferometer, Opt. Lett.17, 363 (1992)

    work page 1992

  13. [13]

    Shadmany, A

    D. Shadmany, A. Kumar, A. Soper, L. Palm, C. Yin, H. Ando, B. Li, L. Taneja, M. Jaffe, S. David, and J. Simon, Cavity qed in a high na resonator, Sci. Adv.11, eads8171 (2025)

    work page 2025

  14. [14]

    Maier, S

    P. Maier, S. Rupp, N. Lettner, J. H. Denschlag, and A. Kubanek, Fabrication of customized low-loss optical resonators by combination of fib-milling and co2 laser smoothing, Opt. Express33, 19205 (2025)

    work page 2025

  15. [15]

    Teller, D

    M. Teller, D. A. Fioretto, P. C. Holz, P. Schindler, V. Messerer, K. Sch¨ uppert, Y. Zou, R. Blatt, J. Chiaverini, J. Sage, and T. E. Northup, Heating of a trapped ion induced by dielectric materials, Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 230505 (2021)

    work page 2021

  16. [16]

    Davtyan, S

    D. Davtyan, S. Machluf, M. L. Soudijn, J. B. Naber, N. J. van Druten, H. B. van Linden van den Heuvell, and R. J. C. Spreeuw, Controlling stray electric fields on an atom chip for experiments on rydberg atoms, Phys. Rev. A97, 023418 (2018)

    work page 2018

  17. [17]

    Y.-T. Chen, M. Szurek, B. Hu, J. de Hond, B. Braverman, and V. Vuletic, High finesse bow-tie cavity for strong atom- photon coupling in rydberg arrays, Opt. Express30, 37426 (2022)

    work page 2022

  18. [18]

    F. R. Ong, K. Sch¨ uppert, P. Jobez, M. Teller, B. Ames, D. A. Fioretto, K. Friebe, M. Lee, Y. Colombe, R. Blatt, and T. E. Northup, Probing surface charge densities on optical fibers with a trapped ion, New J. Phys.22, 063018 (2020)

    work page 2020

  19. [19]

    Podoliak, H

    N. Podoliak, H. Takahashi, M. Keller, and P. Horak, Comparative numerical studies of ion traps with integrated optical cavities, Phys. Rev. Appl.6, 044008 (2016)

    work page 2016

  20. [20]

    Kassa, S

    E. Kassa, S. Gao, S. Teh, D. van Dinter, and H. Takahashi, How to integrate a miniature optical cavity in a linear ion trap: Shielding dielectrics and trap symmetry, Phys. Rev. Appl.23, 024038 (2025)

    work page 2025

  21. [21]

    C. H. Nguyen, A. N. Utama, N. Lewty, and C. Kurtsiefer, Operating a near-concentric cavity at the last stable resonance, Phys. Rev. A98, 063833 (2018)

    work page 2018

  22. [22]

    K. C. Cox, D. H. Meyer, N. A. Schine, F. K. Fatemi, and P. D. Kunz, Increased atom-cavity coupling and stability using a parabolic ring cavity, J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys.51, 195002 (2018)

    work page 2018

  23. [23]

    D. Wang, H. Kelkar, D. Martin-Cano, T. Utikal, S. G¨ otzinger, and V. Sandoghdar, Coherent coupling of a single molecule to a scanning fabry-perot microcavity, Phys. Rev. X7, 021014 (2017)

    work page 2017

  24. [24]

    Malmir, W

    K. Malmir, W. Okell, A. A. P. Trichet, and J. M. Smith, Characterization of nanoparticle size distributions using a microfluidic device with integrated optical microcavities, Lab Chip22, 3499 (2022). 9

    work page 2022

  25. [25]

    Farrow, A

    T. Farrow, A. R. Dhawan, A. R. Marshall, A. Ghorbal, W. Son, H. J. Snaith, J. M. Smith, and R. A. Taylor, Ultranarrow Line Width Room-Temperature Single-Photon Source from Perovskite Quantum Dot Embedded in Optical Microcavity, Nano Lett.23, 10667 (2023)

    work page 2023

  26. [26]

    P. R. Dolan, G. M. Hughes, F. Grazioso, B. R. Patton, and J. M. Smith, Femtoliter tunable optical cavity arrays, Opt. Lett.35, 3556 (2010)

    work page 2010

  27. [27]

    Hunger, T

    D. Hunger, T. Steinmetz, Y. Colombe, C. Deutsch, T. W. H¨ ansch, and J. Reichel, A fiber fabry–perot cavity with high finesse, New J. Phys.12, 065038 (2010)

    work page 2010

  28. [28]

    A. A. P. Trichet, P. R. Dolan, D. M. Coles, G. M. Hughes, and J. M. Smith, Topographic control of open-access microcavities at the nanometer scale, Opt. Express23, 17205 (2015)

    work page 2015

  29. [29]

    B. T. Walker, B. J. Ash, A. A. P. Trichet, J. M. Smith, and R. A. Nyman, Bespoke mirror fabrication for quantum simulation with light in open-access microcavities, Opt. Express29, 10800 (2021)

    work page 2021

  30. [30]

    K. Ott, S. Garcia, R. Kohlhaas, K. Sch¨ uppert, P. Rosenbusch, R. Long, and J. Reichel, Millimeter-long fiber fabry-perot cavities, Opt. Express24, 9839 (2016)

    work page 2016

  31. [31]

    S. Gao, V. Kavungal, S. Oya, D. Okuno, E. Kassa, W. J. Hughes, P. Horak, and H. Takahashi, Profile control of fiber-based micro-mirrors using adaptive laser shooting with in situ imaging, Opt. Express33, 39009 (2025)

    work page 2025

  32. [32]

    Ferdous, A

    F. Ferdous, A. A. Demchenko, S. P. Vyatchanin, A. B. Matsko, and L. Maleki, Microcavity morphology optimization, Phys. Rev. A90, 033826 (2014)

    work page 2014

  33. [33]

    Podoliak, H

    N. Podoliak, H. Takahashi, M. Keller, and P. Horak, Harnessing the mode mixing in optical fiber-tip cavities, J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys.50, 085503 (2017)

    work page 2017

  34. [34]

    D. V. Karpov and P. Horak, Cavities with nonspherical mirrors for enhanced interaction between a quantum emitter and cavity photons, Phys. Rev. A105, 023515 (2022)

    work page 2022

  35. [35]

    Karpov and P

    D. Karpov and P. Horak, Evolutionary algorithm to design high-cooperativity optical cavities, New J. Phys.24, 073028 (2022)

    work page 2022

  36. [36]

    D. V. Karpov, S. Kurdiumov, and P. Horak, Convolutional neural networks for mode on-demand high finesse optical resonator design, Sci. Rep.13, 15567 (2023)

    work page 2023

  37. [37]

    H. Goto, S. Mizukami, Y. Tokunaga, and T. Aoki, Figure of merit for single-photon generation based on cavity quantum electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. A99, 053843 (2019)

    work page 2019

  38. [38]

    Utsugi, A

    T. Utsugi, A. Goban, Y. Tokunaga, H. Goto, and T. Aoki, Gaussian-wave-packet model for single-photon generation based on cavity quantum electrodynamics under adiabatic and nonadiabatic conditions, Phys. Rev. A106, 023712 (2022)

    work page 2022

  39. [39]

    W. J. Hughes, J. F. Goodwin, and P. Horak, Optimizing finite-time photon extraction from emitter-cavity systems, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B41, C168 (2024)

    work page 2024

  40. [40]

    Goto and K

    H. Goto and K. Ichimura, Condition for fault-tolerant quantum computation with a cavity-qed scheme, Phys. Rev. A82, 032311 (2010)

    work page 2010

  41. [41]

    Kikura, H

    S. Kikura, H. Goto, and T. Aoki, Engineering propagating cat states with driven four-level systems inside a cavity, Phys. Rev. Appl.24, 024001 (2025)

    work page 2025

  42. [42]

    W. J. Hughes and P. Horak, Retroreflective surface optimisation for optical cavities with custom mirror profiles, arXiv e-prints , arXiv:2508.14712 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  43. [43]

    Kogelnik and T

    H. Kogelnik and T. Li, Laser beams and resonators, Appl. Opt.5, 1550 (1966)

    work page 1966

  44. [44]

    J. M. Bennett, Recent developments in surface roughness characterization, Meas. Sci. Technol.3, 1119 (1992)

    work page 1992

  45. [45]

    Takahashi, E

    H. Takahashi, E. Kassa, C. Christoforou, and M. Keller, Strong coupling of a single ion to an optical cavity, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 013602 (2020)

    work page 2020

  46. [46]

    Krutyanskiy, M

    V. Krutyanskiy, M. Galli, V. Krcmarsky, S. Baier, D. A. Fioretto, Y. Pu, A. Mazloom, P. Sekatski, M. Canteri, M. Teller, J. Schupp, J. Bate, M. Meraner, N. Sangouard, B. P. Lanyon, and T. E. Northup, Entanglement of trapped-ion qubits separated by 230 meters, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 050803 (2023)

    work page 2023

  47. [47]

    S. Gao, J. A. Blackmore, W. J. Hughes, T. H. Doherty, and J. F. Goodwin, Optimization of scalable ion-cavity interfaces for quantum photonic networks, Phys. Rev. Appl.19, 014033 (2023)

    work page 2023

  48. [48]

    A. E. Siegman,Lasers(University Science Books, 1986)

    work page 1986

  49. [49]

    W. J. Hughes, T. H. Doherty, J. A. Blackmore, P. Horak, and J. F. Goodwin, Mode mixing and losses in misaligned microcavities, Opt. Express31, 32619 (2023)

    work page 2023

  50. [50]

    Kleckner, W

    D. Kleckner, W. T. M. Irvine, S. S. R. Oemrawsingh, and D. Bouwmeester, Diffraction-limited high-finesse optical cavities, Phys. Rev. A81, 043814 (2010)

    work page 2010

  51. [51]

    Benedikter, T

    J. Benedikter, T. H¨ ummer, M. Mader, B. Schlederer, J. Reichel, T. W. H¨ ansch, and D. Hunger, Transverse-mode coupling and diffraction loss in tunable fabry–p´ erot microcavities, New J. Phys.17, 053051 (2015)

    work page 2015

  52. [52]

    Muller, E

    A. Muller, E. B. Flagg, J. R. Lawall, and G. S. Solomon, Ultrahigh-finesse, low-mode-volume fabry-perot microcavity, Opt. Lett.35, 2293 (2010)

    work page 2010

  53. [53]

    Storn and K

    R. Storn and K. Price, Differential evolution–a simple and efficient heuristic for global optimization over continuous spaces, Journal of global optimization11, 341 (1997)

    work page 1997

  54. [54]

    Nogueira, Bayesian Optimization: Open source constrained global optimization tool for Python (2014–)

    F. Nogueira, Bayesian Optimization: Open source constrained global optimization tool for Python (2014–)

    work page 2014

  55. [55]

    J. L. Blows and G. Forbes, Mode characteristics of twisted resonators composed of two cylindrical mirrors., Opt. Express 2, 184 (1998). 10 Appendix A: Internal cooperativity limit in concave-concave cavities As explained in the main text (Sec. III), to maximiseC int, we should choosew 0 < wconf 0 , and decreasew 0 until the waist on the mirror causes the ...

    work page 1998

  56. [56]

    Retroreflective optimisation The retroreflective optimisation optimisesC 0 int in a basis containing radially symmetric (m= 0) Laguerre-Gauss modes with radial indexlbetween zero andl=l max. The optimisation varies coefficients of the mode vector that represent amplitudes of the basis mode, but the number of variable coefficients does not have to match th...

    work page

  57. [57]

    Designed surface optimisation The main text calculates the modes of cavities with three specific surface types: Gaussian, dual curvature, and a three-point spline (see Sec. IV). Each mode mixing calculation involved basis states froml= 0 tol=l max, with integrals conducted numerically overN s linearly-spaced radial samples. The parameters used are summari...

    work page

  58. [58]

    Spherical surface optimisation The data in Fig. 3 of the main text presents the optimumC 0 int available for cavities with spherical non-planar mirrors in the plano-concave and transversely aligned concave-concave cases as a function of the mirror diameter. We optimise a single parameter controlling the radius of the non-planar mirror (discussed later). B...

    work page