Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 42 references

All-fiber highly efficient delivery of 2 kW laser over 2.45 km hollow-core fiber

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read An all-fiber hollow-core link delivers 2 kW over 2.45 km at 85.3% efficiency, a nearly 500-fold jump in power-distance product over prior all-fiber systems.

desk verdict A credible experimental milestone—2 kW all-fiber delivery over 2.45 km with record-low 0.175 dB/km loss—but the SRS model used for scalability has a real unexplained inconsistency. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.01852 v1 pith:UQ26FGXS submitted 2025-05-03 physics.optics

Jing Shi , Binyu Rao , Zilun Chen , Zefeng Wang , Guangrong Sun , Zuyin Xu , Zhen Huang , Peng Li
show 11 more authors
Zihan Dong Min Fu Xin Tian Baolai Yang Jian Zhang Zhiyue Zhou Tianyu Li Lei Zhang Biao Shui Chenxin Gao Jinbao Chen
This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.optics
keywords hollow-corefiberanti-resonanthigh-powerlaserdeliveryfusionsplicingstimulatedRamanscattering2kWlowtransmissionlossall-fibersystem
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

An all-fiber line built from a self-fabricated anti-resonant hollow-core fiber carried 2 kW of 1080 nm laser light over 2.45 km with 85.3% transmission efficiency, about 500 times the power–distance product of the previous all-fiber hollow-core delivery system. The fiber achieves a loss of 0.175 dB/km at 1080 nm, the lowest reported in this band, and the whole chain—solid-core launch fiber, fusion splice, hollow-core span, output end cap—is spliced rather than free-space coupled, which is what makes it stable in moving or vibrating environments. The paper also reports the first observation of stimulated Raman scattering amplified inside the silica nested tubes of an anti-resonant fiber; filtering the laser source's Raman noise with a chirped-and-tilted Bragg grating suppresses this effect, letting the system reach 2 kW without silica Raman scattering. If these results hold, multi-kilometer, multi-kilowatt laser delivery becomes practical for factory floors, nuclear decommissioning, and deep drilling.

What carries the argument

The central object is a five-element triple-nested anti-resonant hollow-core fiber: a 28 µm air core surrounded by five capillary elements, each holding three nested silica tubes, with walls 1.3 µm thick, so that 1080 nm light is confined by anti-resonant reflection and overlaps silica only weakly. The argument is carried by that fiber plus two enabling components: an anti-reflection-coated fusion splice between the 20/250 µm solid-core launch fiber and the AR-HCF (splice loss below 0.2 dB, return loss below −28.7 dB), and a chirped-and-tilted Bragg grating after the laser source that removes the seed Raman noise. The load-bearing numbers are the 0.175 dB/km cutback loss at 1080 nm, the measured effective Raman gain coefficient $2.4\,\mathrm{km}^{-1}\mathrm{kW}^{-1}$, and the SRS critical-power relation used to project how far the approach can scale.

What would settle it

Run the 2.45 km delivery at 2400 W with the chirped-and-tilted Bragg grating removed and monitor the output at 1140 nm; the paper's mechanism predicts the Stokes peak returns. Separately, image or tomographically measure the lateral offset at the fusion splice: if it is away from roughly 3 µm, the simulated effective Raman gain of $2.55\,\mathrm{km}^{-1}\mathrm{kW}^{-1}$ can no longer be reconciled with the measured $2.4\,\mathrm{km}^{-1}\mathrm{kW}^{-1}$, and the Fig. 6 projections lose their basis.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper establishes that an all-fiber chain built around a five-element triple-nested anti-resonant hollow-core fiber transmits a 1080 nm laser at 2400 W input over 2.45 km with 2050 W output (85.3% efficiency), and over 1 km with 89.9% efficiency. The authors attribute the result to four ingredients: a fiber loss of 0.175 dB/km at 1080 nm, the lowest reported in the 1 µm band; fusion splices to anti-reflection-coated solid-core fiber with loss below 0.2 dB and return loss below −28.7 dB; suppression of source Raman noise by a chirped-and-tilted Bragg grating so that the silica nested tubes no longer amplify Stokes light; and a protective output end cap. From the observed 2.98 times Raman growth over 200 m, they extract an effective Raman gain of $2.4\,\mathrm{km}^{-1}\mathrm{kW}^{-1}$ for the AR-HCF, match it with simulations at a roughly 3 µm splice offset, and use the SRS critical power to project transmission distances of 2.8 km (25 µm core) and 6.82 km (30 µm core) at 2 kW output, with 10 kW requiring core diameters above 35 µm.

Load-bearing premise

The scalability curves rest on the assumption that the production splice has about a 3 µm lateral offset between the solid-core and hollow-core fibers, an offset inferred by matching theory to a single measured Raman-gain point rather than measured directly.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • After 2.45 km, 2050 W reaches the output with a beam quality factor of 1.29, so kilometer-scale multi-kilowatt delivery preserves beam quality.
  • All-fiber construction removes the free-space coupling optics that drift and heat in industrial settings; the 1 km end-cap system held 2.3% power fluctuation over a 2-hour test.
  • Filtering the source's Raman noise with the chirped-and-tilted Bragg grating is sufficient to avoid silica SRS in AR-HCF; without it, 2400 W produces a Stokes peak near 1140 nm.
  • At 2 kW output, the scaling simulations give roughly 2.8 km for a 25 µm core and 6.82 km for a 30 µm core; reaching 10 kW over 1 km requires core diameters above 35 µm.
  • Because the 1140 nm Stokes light attenuates at 0.557 dB/km while the 1080 nm signal attenuates at 0.175 dB/km, long fibers lose Raman light faster than signal light, an asymmetry favorable to long-distance delivery.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Editorial inference: because the Raman Stokes line is attenuated faster than the signal, the all-fiber design may be most vulnerable to SRS at intermediate lengths rather than at the longest lengths, so splice-offset control and Raman filtering should be optimized jointly with target distance.
  • Editorial inference: the same spliced hollow-core platform should extend to single-frequency delivery limited by stimulated Brillouin scattering, since air-core guidance sharply reduces the acousto-optic overlap that creates Brillouin gain.
  • Editorial inference: directly measuring the fusion-splice offset, rather than inferring it from Raman gain, would turn the Fig. 6 scalability curves into a reliable design tool; offsets below 3 µm would push the predicted maximum distances upward.
  • Editorial inference: replacing the two-mode 20/250 µm solid-core launch fiber with a fiber that excites mainly LP01 would reduce the field overlap with the nested tubes and could raise the power ceiling independently of the grating.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper reports an all-fiber delivery system for a 1080 nm continuous-wave laser through a self-fabricated anti-resonant hollow-core fiber (AR-HCF). The headline results are 2 kW delivered over 2.45 km with 85.3% transmission efficiency, a cut-back loss of 0.175 dB/km at 1080 nm, and fusion splicing of AR-HCF to anti-reflection-coated solid-core fiber with splice loss below 0.2 dB. The authors also report the first observation of stimulated Raman scattering (SRS) amplified within the silica nested tubes of the AR-HCF, attribute this SRS to Raman noise from the laser seed, and show that a chirped and tilted Bragg grating suppresses the Raman component. A scalability model based on an effective Raman gain coefficient is used to predict power-distance limits for larger-core fibers. The central experimental demonstration is internally consistent: cut-back loss, delivered power, and output spectra agree with each other, and the beam quality M² ≈ 1.3 is preserved after both 1 km and 2.45 km.

Significance. If the results hold, this is a substantial advance in high-power laser delivery: a factor of roughly 500 improvement in power-distance product over prior all-fiber AR-HCF demonstrations, a record low loss at 1 μm, and a practical all-fiber architecture with a protected output end cap. The paper's strengths include the cut-back loss measurement over an 8.65 km length, the directly measured power-delivery values, a two-hour stability test, and the systematic use of a CTFBG to separate source-generated Raman noise from intrinsic fiber nonlinearity. These are concrete, checkable experimental results. The main weakness is the modeling of the effective Raman gain coefficient: the extraction uses a single measurement point and is inconsistent with the other two measurements at nearby powers. This modeling underpins the Fig. 6 scalability projections and the quantitative 'no SRS' margin, so those parts need substantial revision. The core delivery demonstration, however, is not dependent on the Raman model.

major comments (4)
  1. [§4, Methods 3a, Fig. 4b, Eqs. (4)–(7)] The effective Raman gain coefficient γ_R^HCF ≈ 2.4 km⁻¹·kW⁻¹ is derived from a single measured amplification ratio G = 2.98 at 2259 W, but the same experiment gives G = 1.33 at 2315 W and G = 1.28 at 2400 W. Under the constant-γ exponential model used, the ratio R(200 m/2 m) = exp[γ_R P (L_eff(200 m) − L_eff(2 m)) − α_R(198 m)] is predicted to increase modestly with P (from ≈2.6 at 2259 W to ≈2.8 at 2400 W for γ_R = 2.4 km⁻¹·kW⁻¹), not to drop by more than half. The paper attributes the reversal to differential attenuation (α_R = 0.557 dB/km vs α_S = 0.175 dB/km), but over 198 m this contributes only a factor exp(−0.110) ≈ 0.90, far too small to reverse the trend. The measured γ_R is therefore not a constant, and the model used to infer the 3 μm offset and to construct Fig. 6 is not validated at the upper end of the power range. Please provide a self-consistent extraction with error bars, or explicitly discuss saturation, pump-depletion, or detector nonlinearity effects. Without this, the no-SRS margin and the quantitative scalability claims are unsupported.
  2. [§4, Fig. 4c, Discussion] The 3 μm fusion offset is obtained by matching the simulated effective Raman coefficient (2.55 km⁻¹·kW⁻¹) to the measured value (2.4 km⁻¹·kW⁻¹) at a single power. This is effectively a one-parameter calibration with no stated uncertainty, and the same fitted model is then used to generate the power-distance curves in Fig. 6. The sensitivity of the predicted limits (2.8 km for a 25 μm core and 6.82 km for a 30 μm core at 2 kW) to the assumed offset should be quantified, for example by showing curves for offsets of 2, 3, and 4 μm. If possible, the offset should also be verified independently from microscope images of the splice or from mode-field measurements, rather than inferred solely from the Raman gain fit.
  3. [§5, Fig. 5a] The text states that the 1 km (2160 W) and 2.45 km (2050 W) power-delivery results imply a fiber transmission loss of 0.172 dB/km. However, assuming identical input coupling loss in the two builds, the ratio gives 10·log10(2160/2050)/1.45 ≈ 0.157 dB/km, not 0.172 dB/km. Please reconcile this discrepancy or state explicitly which additional loss terms (for example, different splice losses in the two systems) are included in the 0.172 dB/km value. The cut-back value of 0.175 dB/km is the primary loss claim, but the text's use of the power-delivery data to derive loss and coupling loss should be internally consistent.
  4. [§5 and Methods 3a] Key quantitative claims are reported without measurement uncertainty or repeated-measurement information: the 0.175 dB/km cut-back loss, the 85.3% transmission efficiency, the Raman amplification ratios (2.98, 1.33, 1.28), and the derived γ_R = 2.4 km⁻¹·kW⁻¹. The factor-of-two variation in the Raman ratios at 2315 and 2400 W relative to 2259 W may be partly a measurement artifact, but without error bars this cannot be assessed. Please provide estimates of measurement precision for these central numbers, either from repeated measurements or from instrument specifications.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§4, Fig. 4b] The phrase 'Raman amplification of 200 m AR-HCF relative to 2 m AR-HCF' should be defined explicitly as the ratio of integrated Raman spectral intensity, since Fig. 4b shows normalized spectra; this will help readers connect the measurement to Eq. (4).
  2. [§5, Fig. 5b] The 'minor spectral redshift' attributed to the Raman response of atmospheric air within the core is implausible as stated: the vibrational Raman shifts of N₂ (~2331 cm⁻¹) and O₂ (~1556 cm⁻¹) would produce discrete Stokes lines well separated from 1080 nm, not a small continuous redshift. Please clarify what is meant or find another explanation.
  3. [Methods 3a, Eqs. (4)–(7)] Eq. (7) appears to duplicate Eq. (4) with an explicit attenuation term, but it is unclear whether the α in Eq. (7) is α_S or α_R and how L_eff is used. Please state the conventions explicitly and check the units consistently.
  4. [Data Availability] The data availability statement says the data are not publicly available. Given that the central quantitative claims are a record loss and a record power-distance product, depositing the raw cut-back, power-delivery, and spectral data in a public repository would greatly strengthen the paper's verifiability.
  5. [Throughout] Minor presentation issues: 'the practical maps' should be 'photographs'; in Methods 3b, 'According to the analysis.' is an incomplete sentence; and References 15 and 32 are the same paper and should be unified.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

Fig. 6 scalability curves are anchored by a single-point SRS fit; the main 2 kW/2.45 km delivery result is direct and non-circular.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Results §4, Methods §3a/§3b, Discussion/Fig. 6]
    "Experimental results demonstrate a total Raman gain 𝐺HCF ≈ 2.98 at a signal power (𝑃S) of 2259 W. ... we derive an effective Raman gain coefficient 𝛾R^HCF ≈ 2.4 km−1⋅kW−1. ... At a fiber offset of around 3 μm, the effective Raman coefficient increases sharply to 2.55 km-1⋅kW-1, which is close to experimental results. This indicates a deviation of approximately 3 μm between the SCF and the AR-HCF at the fusion point. ... According to the simulation calculation of 𝛾R, the maximum transmission power and length can be calculated, as shown in Fig. 6."

    The 3 μm fusion offset is not independently measured; it is inferred by choosing the simulated γ_R that reproduces the experimentally fitted value (2.4–2.55 km⁻¹·kW⁻¹). The same calibrated γ_R then enters Eq. (9), P_cr = 16/(γ_R L_eff), to generate the Fig. 6 power-distance limits. Thus Fig. 6 is a re-expression of the single measured G ≈ 2.98 point through the calibrated model, not a parameter-free prediction. The central experimental achievements (2 kW over 2.45 km, 0.175 dB/km loss, spectra without SRS) do not rely on this calibration and remain direct measurements.

full rationale

The core experimental claims are self-contained: cutback loss (0.175 dB/km), fusion splicing loss (<0.2 dB, return loss <−28.7 dB), delivered power (2 kW / 85.3% over 2.45 km), and the measured output spectra with no observable SRS are direct measurements and do not depend on any fitted parameter. The circular element is confined to the scalability projection: γ_R is extracted from one SRS amplification ratio via Eq. (4), the simulated offset is then selected to match that γ_R, and Fig. 6 uses Eq. (9) with that same γ_R. Hence the projected power-distance curves are calibrated rather than independently predictive. The observed drop in measured Raman amplification (2.98 → 1.33/1.28) is a consistency/correctness concern about the constant-γ model, not a circularity step per se. No load-bearing self-citation chain was found; the Agrawal critical-power formula is a standard external reference.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central experimental demonstration is grounded in direct measurements. The main fitted quantities are the effective Raman gain coefficient and the inferred 3 μm fusion offset, which feed the scalability projections. No new physical entities are introduced; the fiber structure is a design variant. Standard nonlinear optics and electromagnetic simulation tools are the principal background assumptions.

free parameters (2)
  • effective Raman gain coefficient gamma_R^HCF = 2.4 km^-1 kW^-1
    Determined from Eq. (4) using measured G_HCF=2.98 at P_S=2259 W over 0.2 km. Used to infer fusion offset and to produce scalability predictions in Fig. 6.
  • fusion offset at splice = ≈3 μm
    Inferred by matching simulated gamma_R (2.55 km^-1 kW^-1) to the experimental value (2.4 km^-1 kW^-1) in Fig. 4c; this offset is then assumed in the SRS-limited scaling simulations (Fig. 6).
assumptions (5)
  • standard math Maxwell's equations and finite element analysis accurately model mode loss and Raman gain overlap.
    Used throughout for fiber design (Fig. 1b-e) and for Raman gain simulations (Fig. 4c).
  • domain assumption Silica Raman gain coefficient g_R = 1e-13 km/kW for the solid-core fiber (ref 36, Agrawal).
    Used as reference in Eq. (8) to compute the AR-HCF Raman gain coefficient from the simulated field overlap eta.
  • standard math The SRS critical power criterion P_cr = 16 A_eff/(g_R L_eff) from ref. 36 applies to the hollow-core fiber.
    Used to generate the scalability curves in Fig. 6.
  • domain assumption The Raman noise seed originates from the laser source, not from the delivery SCF or spontaneous processes in the AR-HCF.
    Supported by the CTFBG suppression experiment (Fig. 4a), where inserting the grating eliminated the 1140 nm peak.
  • domain assumption Anti-reflection coating on the SCF end face survives fusion splicing and high-power operation.
    The coating integrity is checked indirectly via back-reflected power during splicing, but no post-test coating characterization is provided.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of All-fiber highly efficient delivery of 2 kW laser over 2.45 km hollow-core fiber." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/UQ26FGXS

@misc{pith2026250501852,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: All-fiber highly efficient delivery of 2 kW laser over 2.45 km hollow-core fiber},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/UQ26FGXS}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.01852}
}
read the original abstract

Anti-resonant hollow-core fibers (AR-HCFs) have emerged as an important medium for high-power laser delivery due to their low optical nonlinearity and high damage threshold. However, current delivery systems of high-power laser based on AR-HCFs mainly rely on free-space optical components, which limits long-term stability in dynamic environments. Here, we report an all-fiber delivery of 2 kW laser with 85.3% transmission efficiency over 2.45 km, using a self-fabricated AR-HCF with a record low transmission loss of 0.175 dB/km at 1080 nm. This represents a nearly 500-fold improvement in the power-distance product compared to reported all-fiber AR-HCF-based laser transmission systems, achieving a record transmission distance for high-power laser delivery. Notably, we observed the phenomenon of stimulated Raman scattering amplified within the silica nested tubes in AR-HCF for the first time. By effectively suppressing the Raman noise from the laser source, we achieve an all-fiber laser delivery without stimulated Raman scattering of silica glass. This work marks a significant breakthrough in multi-kilometer and multi-kilowatt power delivery that is potentially useful for industrial manufacturing, nuclear decommissioning, laser drilling of oil, particle acceleration and so on.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references · 41 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    & Tünnermann, A

    Jauregui, C., Limpert, J. & Tünnermann, A. High-power fibre lasers. Nature Photon. 7, 861–867 (2013)

    work page 2013

  2. [2]

    & Payne, D

    Nilsson, J. & Payne, D. N. High-power fiber lasers. Science 332, 921–922 (2011)

    work page 2011

  3. [3]

    Zervas, M. N. & Codemard, C. A. High Power Fiber Lasers: A Review. IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quantum Electron. 20, 219–241 (2014)

    work page 2014

  4. [4]

    Yang, B. L. et al. Monolithic fiber laser oscillator with record high power. Laser Phys. Lett. 15, 75106 (2018)

    work page 2018

  5. [5]

    Shima, K. et al. 5-kW single stage all-fiber Yb-doped single-mode fiber laser for materials processing. In Proc. SPIE 10512, Fiber Lasers XV: Technology and Systems 105120C (SPIE, 2018)

    work page 2018

  6. [6]

    Wang, Y. et al. 8-kW single-stage all-fiber Yb-doped fiber laser with a BPP of 0.50 mm-mrad. In Proc. SPIE 11260, Fiber Lasers XVII: Technology and Systems 1126022 (SPIE, 2020)

    work page 2020

  7. [7]

    S., Ki-Hee, S., Seong, Y

    Jae, S. S., Ki-Hee, S., Seong, Y. O. & Seung-Kyu, P. Laser cutting studies on 10–60 mm thick stainless steels with a short focus head for nuclear decommissioning. Opt. Laser Technol. 169: 110121 (2024)

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    Zhang, S. Z. et al. Characterizing the laser drilling process of oil shale using laser-induced voltage. Opt. Laser Technol. 131, 106478 (2023)

    work page 2023

Show all 42 references
  1. [9]

    Wei, C., Joseph Weiblen, R., Menyuk, C. R. & Hu, J. Negative curvature fibers. Adv. Opt. Photon. 9, 504 (2017)

    2017

  2. [10]

    Zhou, Z. et al. Towards high-power mid-IR light source tunable from 3.8 to 4.5 µm by HBr-filled hollow-core silica fibres. Light Sci. Appl. 11, 15 (2022)

    2022

  3. [11]

    Sakr, H. et al. Hollow core optical fibres with comparable attenuation to silica fibres between 600 and 1100 nm. Nat. Commun. 11, 6030 (2020)

    2020

  4. [12]

    Gao, S. et al. Fourfold truncated double-nested antiresonant hollow-core fiber with ultralow loss and ultrahigh mode purity. Optica 12, 56-61 (2025)

    2025

  5. [13]

    Invited commentary: hollow core glass fibre-the perfect pipe for light

    Russell, P. Invited commentary: hollow core glass fibre-the perfect pipe for light. eLight 5, 1-5 (2025)

    2025

  6. [14]

    Kolyadin, A. N. et al. negative curvature hollow-core fibers: Dispersion properties and femtosecond pulse delivery. Phys. Procedia 73, 59–66 (2015)

    2015

  7. [15]

    Nested antiresonant nodeless hollow core fiber

    Poletti, F. Nested antiresonant nodeless hollow core fiber. Opt. Express 22, 23807-23828 (2014)

    2014

  8. [16]

    Yu, F. et al. Attenuation limit of silica-based hollow-core fiber at mid-IR wavelengths. APL Photonics 4, 080803 (2019)

    2019

  9. [17]

    T., Richardson, D

    Numkam Fokoua, E., Abokhamis Mousavi, S., Jasion, G. T., Richardson, D. J. & Poletti, F. Loss in hollow-core optical fibers: mechanisms, scaling rules, and limits. Adv. Opt. Photon. 15, 1-84 (2023)

    2023

  10. [18]

    & Knight, J

    Belardi, W. & Knight, J. C. Hollow antiresonant fibers with low bending loss. Opt. Express 22, 10091-10096 (2014)

    2014

  11. [19]

    Debord, B. et al. Ultralow transmission loss in inhibited-coupling guiding hollow fibers. Optica 4, 209-217 (2017)

    2017

  12. [20]

    Gu, S. et al. Single-ring hollow-core anti-resonant fiber with a record low loss (4.3 dB/km) for high-power laser delivery at 1 µm. Opt. Lett. 47, 5925-5928 (2022)

    2022

  13. [21]

    Jasion, G. T. et al. 0.174 dB/km Hollow Core Double Nested Antiresonant Nodeless Fiber (DNANF). In Optical Fiber Communication Conference 2022 paper Th4C.7 (Optical Society of America, 2022)

    2022

  14. [22]

    Chen, Y. et al. Hollow Core DNANF Optical Fiber with <0.11 dB/km Loss. In Optical Fiber Communication Conference 2024 paper Th4A.8 (Optical Society of America, 2024)

    2024

  15. [23]

    First broadband optical fibre with an attenuation lower than 0.1 decibel per kilometre

    Petrovich, M. First broadband optical fibre with an attenuation lower than 0.1 decibel per kilometre. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.21467 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Sakr, H. et al. Hollow core NANFs with five nested tubes and record low loss at 850, 1060, 1300 and 1625nm. In Optical Fiber Communication Conference 2021 paper F3A.4 (Optical Society of America, 2021)

    2021

  17. [25]

    Mulvad, H. C. H. et al. Kilowatt-average-power single-mode laser light transmission over kilometre-scale hollow-core fibre. Nat. Photon. 16, 448–453 (2022)

    2022

  18. [26]

    Cooper, M. A. et al. 2.2 kW single-mode narrow-linewidth laser delivery through a hollow-core fiber. Optica 10, 1253-1259 (2023)

    2023

  19. [27]

    Yao, J. et al. High-Efficiency Distortion-Free Delivery of 3 kW Continuous-Wave Laser Using Low-Loss Multi-Mode Nested Hollow-Core Anti-Resonant Fiber. J. Lightwave Technol. 42, 5710–5716 (2024)

    2024

  20. [28]

    Lekosiotis, A. et al. On-target delivery of intense ultrafast laser pulses through hollow-core anti-resonant fibers. Opt. Express 31, 30227-30238 (2023)

    2023

  21. [29]

    Michieletto, M. et al. High-power picosecond pulse delivery through hollow core photonic band gap fibers. In Workshop on Specialty Optical Fibers and Their Applications 2015 paper WF2A.4 (Optica Publishing Group, 2015)

    2015

  22. [30]

    C., Bennett, C

    Jones, D. C., Bennett, C. R. M., Smith, A. & Scott, A.M. High-power beam transport through a hollow-core photonic bandgap fiber. Opt. Lett. 39, 3122-3125 (2014)

    2014

  23. [31]

    Gao, S. et al. All-fiber delivery of 100 W single-frequency laser through 100 m anti-resonant hollow-core fiber without stimulated Brillouin scattering. High Power Laser Sci. Eng. 12, e99 (2024)

    2024

  24. [32]

    Nested antiresonant nodeless hollow core fiber

    Poletti, F. Nested antiresonant nodeless hollow core fiber. Opt. Express 22, 23807-23828(2014)

    2014

  25. [33]

    Shi, B. et al. Splicing Hollow-Core Fiber with Standard Glass-Core Fiber with Ultralow Back-Reflection and Low Coupling Loss. ACS Photonics 11, 3288- 3295 (2024)

    2024

  26. [34]

    Zuba, V. et al. Limits of Coupling Efficiency into Hollow-Core Antiresonant Fibres. J. Lightwave Technol. 41, 6374-6382 (2023)

    2023

  27. [35]

    Y., Yu, R

    Wang, C. Y., Yu, R. W., Xiong, C., Zhu, J. & Xiao, L. M. Ultralow-loss fusion splicing between antiresonant hollow-core fibers and antireflection-coated single- mode fibers with low return loss. Opt. Lett. 48, 1120-1123 (2023)

    2023

  28. [36]

    Agrawal, G. P. Nonlinear Fiber Optics 3rd edn (Academic, 2001)

    2001

  29. [37]

    & Chowdhury, D

    Kobyakov, A., Sauer, M. & Chowdhury, D. Stimulated Brillouin scattering in optical fibers. Adv. Opt. Photon. 2, 1-59 (2010)

    2010

  30. [38]

    Benabid, F., Knight, J. C. & Russell, P. S. J. Particle levitation and guidance in hollow-core photonic crystal fiber. Opt. Express 10, 1195–1203 (2002)

    2002

  31. [39]

    Liu, D. et al. Highly Sensitive Twist Sensor Based on Partially Silver Coated Hollow Core Fiber Structure. J. Lightwave Technol. 36, 3672-3677 (2018)

    2018

  32. [40]

    Miele, E. et al. Hollow-core optical fibre sensors for operando Raman spectroscopy investigation of Li-ion battery liquid electrolytes. Nat. Commun. 13, 1651 (2022)

    2022

  33. [41]

    Zhang, X. et al. Low-loss microwave photonics links using hollow core fibres. Light Sci. Appl. 11, 213 (2022)

    2022

  34. [42]

    Wang, R. et al. Optical trapping of mesoscale particles and atoms in hollow-core optical fibers: principle and applications. Light Sci. Appl. 14, 146 (2025)

    2025

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.