Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Nonlinear periodic orbit solutions and their bifurcation structure at the origin of soliton hopping in coupled microresonators

T0 review · 5 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Soliton hopping in dimers originates subcritically from a stable soliton branch, whereas in trimers it originates supercritically from an unstable one, and this determines pump requirements.

desk verdict Solid PDE-level bifurcation study with a novel dimer/trimer distinction; numerically credible but missing the resolution details needed to fully trust the quantitative claims. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.09921 v1 pith:AVJDFRFW submitted 2025-08-13 nlin.PS physics.optics

Savyaraj Deshmukh , Aleksandr Tusnin , Alexey Tikan , Tobias J. Kippenberg , Tobias M. Schneider This is my paper
classification nlin.PSphysics.optics MSC 37G1537L1035Q5578A60
keywords solitonhoppingcoupledmicroresonatorsLugiato-LefeverequationdissipativeKerrsolitonsbifurcationanalysisHopfperiodicorbitsfoliatedsnaking
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

This paper tries to establish where soliton hopping comes from in two- and three-cavity microresonators, in the language of exact invariant solutions of the coupled Lugiato–Lefever equations. It computes stationary soliton equilibria and time-periodic orbit branches, continues them in detuning, and reads their stability off eigenvalue and Floquet spectra. The paper concludes that dimer hopping is born in a subcritical Hopf bifurcation from a stable supermode soliton at $\zeta = 2.767$ and becomes observable only after saddle-node bifurcations, whereas trimer hopping is born in a supercritical Hopf bifurcation from an already-unstable soliton at $\zeta = 5.79$ and is stabilized by a later saddle-node. If correct, this explains why a frequency scan sees a stable soliton before dimer hopping but not before trimer hopping, why trimer hopping needs less pump power, and why hysteresis and path dependence are unavoidable in these systems.

What carries the argument

The central objects are exact invariant solutions of the coupled LLE: equilibrium supermode solitons $\mathrm{SS}^{(N)}$ and periodic orbits $\mathrm{SH}^{(N)}$, continued in the detuning $\zeta$ with stability determined by eigenvalues and Floquet multipliers. The argument is carried by the Hopf bifurcations that create $\mathrm{SH}^{(2)}$ and $\mathrm{SH}^{(3)}$ from the soliton branches, together with the saddle-node bifurcations that stabilize them. The supermode basis is what lets the authors identify the neutral eigenvectors as solitons in unforced supermodes, and the nonlinear dispersion relation (NDR), the peak temporal frequency as a function of spatial mode in the spatiotemporal po

What would settle it

Compute the Floquet multipliers of the periodic-orbit branches at a fixed detuning such as $\zeta = 2.5$ for the dimer and between $\zeta = 5.79$ and the stabilizing saddle-node for the trimer: the paper's claim requires two unstable and two stable coexisting dimer hopping orbits at $\zeta = 2.5$, and requires every trimer hopping orbit below the stabilizing saddle-node to be unstable. A quasi-static dimer detuning sweep slow enough to resolve the breathing instability should fail to reach the stable hopping branch, instead collapsing toward the continuous-wave background; observing sustained

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that the periodic-orbit branches underlying soliton hopping are created by Hopf bifurcations off stationary supermode solitons, but the character of those bifurcations differs between the two geometries. In the dimer, the branch $\mathrm{SH}^{(2)}$ bifurcates subcritically from $\mathrm{SS}^{(2)}$ at $\zeta = 2.767$; the stationary soliton is initially stable and the newborn periodic orbit is unstable, and only after several saddle-node bifurcations do stable hopping orbits appear. In the trimer, $\mathrm{SH}^{(3)}$ bifurcates supercritically from $\mathrm{SS}^{(3)}$ at $\zeta = 5.79$, but the equilibrium branch is already unstable, so the newborn periodic orbit is u

Load-bearing premise

The whole dimer/trimer distinction rests on the coupled Lugiato-Lefever model with identical detuning in all cavities, constant nearest-neighbor coupling, parabolic dispersion, and cubic Kerr nonlinearity faithfully representing physical devices at the specific parameters studied ($d_2 = 0.04$, $J = 10$, $f^2 = 64$).

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Trimer hopping can be reached at lower pump power than dimer hopping, because its stable periodic orbit forms without requiring a prior stable stationary soliton; this lowers the experimental threshold.
  • Dimer hopping should display hysteresis and multistability: the subcritical Hopf bifurcation plus intervening saddle-nodes make the outcome depend on the path through parameter space, not just on the final parameter values.
  • The hopping frequency is set at the Hopf bifurcation by the imaginary part of the complex eigenvalue pair and remains nearly unchanged along the branch, so the spectral line spacing in experiments can be read as a nonlinear dispersion relation.
  • In supermode-forced configurations both hopping branches bifurcate from foliated-snaking soliton branches of a single LLE, and the Hopf eigenvectors live in unforced supermodes, showing that the instability is emergent from inter-resonator coupling rather than from single-cavity physics.
  • Stable hopping periodic orbits are not directly connected to the Hopf point in either geometry; saddle-node bifurcations intervene, so weakly nonlinear amplitude equations valid near the Hopf point cannot describe fully developed soliton hopping.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same branch logic should extend to longer coupled-resonator chains: whether a stationary soliton is observed before hopping should be set by the stability of the underlying supermode soliton branch at its Hopf point, a prediction one could test by continuing $\mathrm{SS}^{(N)}$ for $N = 4, 5$.
  • The predicted pump-power gap between dimer and trimer invites a direct experimental comparison: measuring the minimum pump power at which hopping appears in a sweep would test the model's parameter assumptions, especially constant coupling and identical detuning.
  • Because the near-Hopf power-spectral features persist along the stabilized branch, the NDR framework could be used in experiments to infer whether a hopping branch is stable or unstable without full state-space access.
  • The supermode-forcing results suggest that soliton hopping is an emergent property of coupling topology rather than of the specific forcing protocol, so analogous bifurcations should appear in other multi-band coupled-cavity arrangements where supermode solitons exist.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

5 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies soliton hopping in coupled Kerr microresonators (photonic dimers and trimers) using a coupled Lugiato-Lefever model. The authors compute stationary soliton equilibria and time-periodic orbit branches with numerical continuation, classify the bifurcations creating the hopping branches, and connect the results to laser-scan simulations, power spectra / nonlinear dispersion relations, and a supermode-forced version that maps onto single-LLE foliated snaking. The central claim is that in a dimer the periodic orbit branch SH(2) emerges subcritically from a stable stationary soliton branch SS(2) at ζ=2.767, while in a trimer SH(3) emerges supercritically from an already unstable SS(3) at ζ=5.79; in both cases the stable hopping state observed in scans is reached only after additional saddle-node bifurcations. The paper concludes that this explains different pump-power thresholds, hysteresis, and path dependence in parameter sweeps.

Significance. If correct, the dimer/trimer distinction is a valuable and nontrivial contribution: it gives a mechanistic explanation for why hopping is easier to access in trimers and why the stationary supermode soliton is observed in dimer scans but not trimer scans. The approach—fully nonlinear invariant solutions, numerical continuation, Floquet analysis, and NDR/PSD diagnostics—is appropriate for the problem, and the analysis is not circular: the hopping frequency is compared with independently computed eigenvalues rather than fitted. The supermode-forced analysis in Sec. V is a nice conceptual bridge to the well-studied snaking structure of the single LLE. However, the quantitative claims rest on numerical continuation data whose resolution, tolerances, and convergence are not reported, and the trimer stability statements are not displayed. These gaps undermine independent verification of the central bifurcation classification.

major comments (5)
  1. [§II A, §III, §IV] No numerical resolution, time-step, Newton tolerance, GMRES tolerance, or convergence checks are reported anywhere in the manuscript. The statements that SH(2) bifurcates at ζ=2.767 and SH(3) at ζ=5.79, and that the branches undergo the described saddle-node sequences, are pure numerical results. With d2=0.04 and J=10 the solitons are strongly localized, so an insufficient Fourier truncation can shift Hopf points and stability intervals. Please report the spatial truncation, temporal step, solver tolerances, and a resolution-convergence test (e.g., doubling N_Fourier) for at least the two Hopf points and the Floquet multipliers on the SH branches.
  2. [§IV, Fig. 6] Fig. 6(a) explicitly states 'Stability features are not shown,' yet the text claims that SH(3) is initially unstable, inherits the instability of SS(3), and is stabilized only after an additional saddle-node bifurcation. This stabilization is a load-bearing part of the trimer narrative and the pump-power conclusion, but no Floquet-multiplier data or stability-colored branch is presented for the trimer. Please show the stability of the SH(3) branch (e.g., Floquet multipliers vs. ζ, or stability markers in the diagram) so the saddle-node stabilization is verifiable.
  3. [§III and §IV, Hopf points] The subcritical/supercritical classification is inferred from the direction of the one-parameter continuation branch. This is not independently verifiable without either the first Lyapunov coefficient/normal-form coefficient at the Hopf points or a two-parameter unfolding showing which side of the bifurcation the periodic orbits exist on and whether they are stable. In particular, a coarse predictor-corrector step can mislead near a steep branch. Please provide the numerical normal-form coefficient or a finely resolved blow-up of the branch direction together with stability of SS and SH on both sides of each Hopf point.
  4. [§II A, Eq. (11)] The manuscript does not specify how the continuous translational symmetry Ψ(ϕ,t)→Ψ(ϕ+ϕ0,t) is fixed during Newton continuation of periodic orbits. Equation (11) introduces the symmetry operator σ, but no phase condition or constraint on ϕ0 is described. Without this, the periodic-orbit continuation, the computed Hopf points, and the Floquet analysis are not fully reproducible. Please state the phase condition used (e.g., integral phase constraint, one-component pinning) and how the neutral translational mode is handled in the Newton and Arnoldi solvers.
  5. [Abstract, §VI] The abstract and conclusions state that for both dimers and trimers the soliton hopping frequency observed in simulations is well captured by the imaginary part of the Hopf eigenvalues. The dimer evidence is provided via PSD comparisons in Figs. 3(c) and 4, but no corresponding PSD or frequency comparison is shown for the trimer. Please add the trimer PSD/NDR data or qualify the claim to the dimer case supported by the presented results.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Eq. (1)] The notation 'iJ Ψ' is ambiguous: J is a matrix, so the coupling term should be written as iJΨ or i(JΨ) to make clear that J acts on the vector Ψ.
  2. [Eq. (6)] δ(μ) is a Kronecker delta in the discrete Fourier mode index, not a Dirac delta; the notation should be changed to δ_{μ,0} for clarity.
  3. [Section title and text] Typos: 'LUGIA TO-LEFEVER' in the Section II heading, 'specturm' (p. 5), 'periodc' (Fig. 4 caption), 'F oiliated' (Fig. 7 caption), and 'obit' (Fig. 4 caption) should be corrected.
  4. [§V] The supermode-forced analysis switches parameters from J=10, f²=64 (Secs. III–IV) to J=7, f²=16 (Sec. V). The text notes this is 'experimentally easier,' but the comparison between the two forcing protocols should explicitly remind the reader that the quantitative bifurcation values (ζ̃=10.05, 6.46) are obtained for different J and f² and are not directly comparable to the dimer/trimer results of Secs. III–IV.
  5. [§III, Fig. 3(c)] The caption should state which field is shown in the PSD (the pumped resonator field, as in the text) and clarify that the frequency axis ω is normalized by the photon lifetime.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the bifurcation statements are direct numerical results from the stated coupled LLEs; self-citations are contextual, not load-bearing.

full rationale

The central claims are obtained by numerically solving the coupled Lugiato-Lefever equations with fixed parameters (d2=0.04, J=10, f^2=64), computing exact invariant solutions via Newton's method and Channelflow/Dedalus continuation, and determining stability from eigenvalues and Floquet multipliers. No parameter is fitted to a target dynamical output, and the observed laser-scan states are used only as initial guesses for Newton solvers, not to tune the bifurcation analysis. The reported subcritical/supercritical Hopf bifurcations and subsequent saddle-node stabilizations are direct continuation results, not consequences of prior definitions or fitted quantities. The comparison of the hopping frequency with the imaginary part of the Hopf eigenvalues is a consistency check between an independently computed linear spectrum and transient dynamics near the equilibrium; it does not reduce to the eigenvalue by construction because the nonlinear branch is followed and its stability is computed separately. Self-citations to prior work on photonic dimers provide the model and experimental context, but the bifurcation structure of SH(2) and SH(3) is not imported from those references; the mapping to single-LLE snaking is an exact algebraic reduction for supermode forcing, supported by external literature. Missing convergence or resolution details would be a reproducibility concern, not evidence of circularity. No step in the derivation chain exhibits a definitional equivalence, a fitted input renamed as a prediction, or a load-bearing self-citation chain.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central result is a numerical bifurcation analysis of a parameterized PDE model. All reported quantities depend on the chosen inputs (d2, J, f, scan rate), but these are set from experimental relevance, not fitted to the target result. No new physical entities are introduced; supermode solitons and Hopf bifurcations are standard objects. The main burden is model fidelity and numerical convergence, not circular fitting.

free parameters (4)
  • d2 (normalized group velocity dispersion) = 0.04
    Set in Sec. III 'to maintain consistency with microresonator fabrication parameters'; not fitted to target result.
  • J (coupling strength) = 10 (also 7 in Sec. V)
    Chosen in Sec. III as 'sufficient to observe soliton hopping' in both dimer and trimer; the central claim is computed for these values.
  • f (pump amplitude, f^2 = pump power) = 8 (f^2=64; also f^2=16 in Sec. V)
    Fixed for main scans in Sec. III and IV; the trimer lower-power claim relies on the parameter scans shown in Fig. 1(c).
  • Laser scan rate (dζ/dt) = 0.1 per unit time
    Chosen for simulated laser scans in Sec. III and IV; the paper explicitly discusses that slower rates change the observed regime, so this parameter affects the phenomenology.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Coupled LLE (Eq. 1) adequately models the physical coupled microresonators, with identical detuning, constant coupling, and cubic Kerr nonlinearity.
    Invoked in Sec. II as the governing model; if the model misses physics (higher-order dispersion, thermal drift, detuning mismatch), the bifurcation structure may not transfer to experiments.
  • domain assumption Finite-dimensional Fourier truncation and the numerical integration schemes (RK4 + implicit-explicit in Dedalus, Channelflow Newton-GMRES) converge to exact invariant solutions of the PDE.
    All invariant solutions and bifurcation points are computed numerically; no convergence study or resolution check is reported.
  • domain assumption The PSD-based Nonlinear Dispersion Relation (Eq. 10) correctly represents the renormalized dispersion of transient dynamics.
    The NDR interpretation in Sec. III relies on this concept from Refs. [55-57] and is used to connect eigenvector structures to spatiotemporal spectra.
  • domain assumption Laser scans at rate 0.1 per unit time are quasi-static enough to reveal the stable branches predicted by the bifurcation diagrams.
    The paper's explanation of hysteresis and rate dependence (Sec. VI) depends on finite scan rates jumping over unstable windows; the chosen rate is not derived from first principles.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Nonlinear periodic orbit solutions and their bifurcation structure at the origin of soliton hopping in coupled microresonators." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/AVJDFRFW

@misc{pith2026250809921,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Nonlinear periodic orbit solutions and their bifurcation structure at the origin of soliton hopping in coupled microresonators},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/AVJDFRFW}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.09921}
}
read the original abstract

Microresonator frequency combs, essential for future integrated optical systems, rely on dissipative Kerr solitons generated in a single microresonator to achieve coherent frequency comb generation. Recent advances in the nanofabrication of low-loss integrated nonlinear microresonators have paved the way for the exploration of coupled-resonator systems. These systems provide significant technological advantages, including higher conversion efficiency and the generation of dual dispersive waves. Beyond their practical benefits, coupled-resonator systems also reveal novel emergent nonlinear phenomena, such as soliton hopping, a dynamic process in which solitons periodically transfer between coupled resonators. In this study, we employ a dynamical system approach and the corresponding well-established numerical techniques, extensively developed within the context of hydrodynamics and transitional turbulence, to investigate the bifurcation structure of periodic orbit solutions of the coupled Lugiato-Lefever equations that underlie soliton hopping in photonic dimers and trimers. Our main finding uncovers a fundamental difference in the origin of the hopping process in dimers and trimers. We demonstrate that in dimers, hopping emerges from a branch of stable soliton solutions, whereas in trimers, it originates from an unstable branch. This distinction leads to a significant difference in pump power requirements. We relate the bifurcation structure of the periodic orbits including their stability to the observed dynamics in simulated laser scans mimicking typical experimental investigations. Subcritical Hopf bifurcations of unstable equilibrium branches specifically explain observed hysteresis, the coexistence of multiple attractors at the same parameter values, and the importance of choosing a specific path in parameter space to reliably achieve a desired dynamical regime.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Periodic orbits underlying spatiotemporal chaos in the Lugiato-Lefever model

    nlin.PS 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Oscillating Turing roll periodic orbits are identified in the Lugiato-Lefever model, and chaotic cavity dynamics are shown to intermittently shadow these exact solutions.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

68 extracted references · 64 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Knobloch, Spatial localization in dissipative systems, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics 6, 325 (2015)

    E. Knobloch, Spatial localization in dissipative systems, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics 6, 325 (2015)

    work page 2015

  2. [2]

    El Koussaifi, A

    R. El Koussaifi, A. Tikan, A. Toffoli, S. Randoux, P. Suret, and M. Onorato, Spontaneous emergence of rogue waves in partially coherent waves: A quantitative 16 experimental comparison between hydrodynamics and optics, Phys. Rev. E 97, 012208 (2018)

    work page 2018

  3. [3]

    L. A. Lugiato and R. Lefever, Spatial Dissipative Struc- tures in Passive Optical Systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 58, 2209 (1987)

    work page 1987

  4. [4]

    Y. K. Chembo and N. Yu, Modal expansion approach to optical-frequency-comb generation with monolithic whispering-gallery-mode resonators, Physical Review A - Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics 82, 1 (2010)

    work page 2010

  5. [5]

    Y. K. Chembo and C. R. Menyuk, Spatiotemporal Lugiato-Lefever formalism for Kerr-comb generation in whispering-gallery-mode resonators, Physical Review A - Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics 87, 1 (2013)

    work page 2013

  6. [6]

    Godey, I

    C. Godey, I. V. Balakireva, A. Coillet, and Y. K. Chembo, Stability analysis of the spatiotemporal Lugiato-Lefever model for Kerr optical frequency combs in the anomalous and normal dispersion regimes, Physi- cal Review A 89, 063814 (2014)

    work page 2014

  7. [7]

    L. A. Lugiato, F. Prati, M. L. Gorodetsky, and T. J. Kippenberg, From the lugiato–Lefever equation to microresonator-based soliton kerr frequency combs, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A 376, 10.1098/rsta.2018.0113 (2018)

    work page arXiv 2018

  8. [8]

    T. J. Kippenberg, A. L. Gaeta, M. Lipson, and M. L. Gorodetsky, Dissipative Kerr solitons in optical microres- onators, Science 361, eaan8083 (2018)

    work page 2018

Show all 68 references
  1. [9]

    Pasquazi, M

    A. Pasquazi, M. Peccianti, L. Razzari, D. J. Moss, S. Coen, M. Erkintalo, Y. K. Chembo, T. Hansson, S. Wabnitz, P. Del’Haye, X. Xue, A. M. Weiner, and R. Morandotti, Micro-combs: A novel generation of op- tical sources, Physics Reports 729, 1 (2018)

    2018

  2. [10]

    T. Herr, V. Brasch, J. D. Jost, C. Y. Wang, N. M. Kon- dratiev, M. L. Gorodetsky, and T. J. Kippenberg, Tempo- ral solitons in optical microresonators, Nature Photonics 8, 145 (2014)

    2014

  3. [11]

    Y. Sun, J. Wu, M. Tan, X. Xu, Y. Li, R. Morandotti, A. Mitchell, and D. J. Moss, Applications of optical mi- crocombs, Adv. Opt. Photon. 15, 86 (2023)

    2023

  4. [12]

    Feldmann, N

    J. Feldmann, N. Youngblood, M. Karpov, H. Gehring, X. Li, M. Stappers, M. Le Gallo, X. Fu, A. Lukashchuk, A. S. Raja, J. Liu, C. D. Wright, A. Sebastian, T. J. Kippenberg, W. H. Pernice, and H. Bhaskaran, Paral- lel convolutional processing using an integrated photonic tensor ...

    2021

  5. [13]

    Riemensberger, A

    J. Riemensberger, A. Lukashchuk, M. Karpov, W. Weng, E. Lucas, J. Liu, and T. J. Kippenberg, Massively parallel coherent laser ranging using a soliton microcomb, Nature 581, 164 (2020)

    2020

  6. [14]

    Lukashchuk, J

    A. Lukashchuk, J. Riemensberger, A. Tusnin, J. Liu, and T. Kippenberg, Chaotic micro-comb based parallel rang- ing, arXiv preprint arXiv:2112.10241 (2021)

    2021 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Marin-Palomo, J

    P. Marin-Palomo, J. N. Kemal, M. Karpov, A. Kordts, J. Pfeifle, M. H. Pfeiffer, P. Trocha, S. Wolf, V. Brasch, M. H. Anderson, R. Rosenberger, K. Vijayan, W. Freude, T. J. Kippenberg, and C. Koos, Microresonator-based solitons for massively parallel coherent optical communi- c...

    2017

  8. [16]

    J. Liu, G. Huang, R. N. Wang, J. He, A. S. Raja, T. Liu, N. J. Engelsen, and T. J. Kippenberg, High-yield, wafer- scale fabrication of ultralow-loss, dispersion-engineered silicon nitride photonic circuits, Nature communications 12, 1 (2021)

    2021

  9. [17]

    Tikan, J

    A. Tikan, J. Riemensberger, K. Komagata, S. H¨ onl, M. Churaev, C. Skehan, H. Guo, R. N. Wang, J. Liu, P. Seidler, and T. J. Kippenberg, Emergent nonlinear phenomena in a driven dissipative photonic dimer, Na- ture Physics 17, 604 (2021)

    2021

  10. [18]

    Tikan, A

    A. Tikan, A. Tusnin, J. Riemensberger, M. Churaev, X. Ji, K. Komagata, R. N. Wang, J. Liu, and T. J. Kip- penberg, Protected generation of dissipative Kerr soli- tons in supermodes of coupled optical microresonators, Science Advances 8, eabm6982 (2022)

    2022

  11. [19]

    ´O. B. Helgason, F. R. Arteaga-Sierra, Z. Ye, K. Twayana, P. A. Andrekson, M. Karlsson, J. Schr¨ oder, and V. Torres-Company, Dissipative solitons in photonic molecules, Nature Photonics 15, 305 (2021)

    2021

  12. [20]

    Q.-X. Ji, W. Jin, L. Wu, Y. Yu, Z. Yuan, W. Zhang, M. Gao, B. Li, H. Wang, C. Xiang, J. Guo, A. Feshali, M. Paniccia, V. S. Ilchenko, A. B. Matsko, J. E. Bowers, and K. J. Vahala, Engineered zero-dispersion microcombs using CMOS-ready photonics, Optica 10, 279 (2023)

    2023

  13. [21]

    Z. Yuan, M. Gao, Y. Yu, H. Wang, W. Jin, Q.-X. Ji, A. Feshali, M. Paniccia, J. Bowers, and K. Vahala, Soli- ton pulse pairs at multiple colours in normal dispersion microresonators, Nat. Photon. , 1 (2023)

    2023

  14. [22]

    ´O. B. Helgason, M. Girardi, Z. Ye, F. Lei, J. Schr¨ oder, and V. Torres-Company, Surpassing the nonlinear con- version efficiency of soliton microcombs, Nat. Photon. , 1 (2023)

    2023

  15. [23]

    X. Xue, Y. Xuan, P.-H. Wang, Y. Liu, D. E. Leaird, M. Qi, and A. M. Weiner, Normal-dispersion microcombs enabled by controllable mode interactions, Laser & Pho- tonics Reviews 9, L23 (2015)

    2015

  16. [24]

    ´O. B. Helgason, F. R. Arteaga-Sierra, Z. Ye, K. Twayana, P. A. Andrekson, M. Karlsson, J. Schr¨ oder, and Vic- tor Torres-Company, Dissipative solitons in photonic molecules, Nat. Photonics 15, 305 (2021)

    2021

  17. [25]

    Pidgayko, A

    D. Pidgayko, A. Tusnin, J. Riemensberger, A. Stroganov, A. Tikan, and T. J. Kippenberg, Voltage-tunable opo with an alternating dispersion dimer integrated on chip, arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.01951 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Ghosh, A

    A. Ghosh, A. Pal, L. Hill, G. Campbell, T. Bi, Y. Zhang, A. Alabbadi, S. Zhang, and P. Del Haye, Controlled light distribution with coupled microresonator chains via Kerr symmetry breaking, Photonics Research 12, 2376 (2024), arXiv:2402.10673

    2024 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Morichetti, C

    F. Morichetti, C. Ferrari, A. Canciamilla, and A. Melloni, The first decade of coupled resonator optical waveguides: Bringing slow light to applications, Laser and Photonics Reviews 6, 74 (2012)

    2012

  20. [28]

    Hopf, A mathematical example displaying features of turbulence, Communications on Pure and Applied Math- ematics 1, 303 (1948)

    E. Hopf, A mathematical example displaying features of turbulence, Communications on Pure and Applied Math- ematics 1, 303 (1948)

    1948

  21. [29]

    Nagata, Three-dimensional finite-amplitude solutions in plane Couette flow: bifurcation from infinity, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 217, 519 (1990)

    M. Nagata, Three-dimensional finite-amplitude solutions in plane Couette flow: bifurcation from infinity, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 217, 519 (1990)

    1990

  22. [30]

    R. R. Kerswell, Recent progress in understanding the transition to turbulence in a pipe, Nonlinearity 18, R17 (2005)

    2005

  23. [31]

    J. F. Gibson, J. Halcrow, and P. Cvitanovi´ c, Visualizing the geometry of state space in plane couette flow, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 611, 107 (2008)

    2008

  24. [32]

    Kawahara, M

    G. Kawahara, M. Uhlmann, and L. Van Veen, The significance of simple invariant solutions in turbulent flows, Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics 44, 203 (2011), arXiv:1108.0975

    2011 arXiv

  25. [33]

    B. Suri, J. Tithof, R. O. Grigoriev, and M. F. Schatz, 17 Forecasting fluid flows using the geometry of turbulence, Physical Review Letters 118, 114501 (2017)

    2017

  26. [34]

    M. D. Graham and D. Floryan, Exact Coherent States and the Nonlinear Dynamics of Wall-Bounded Turbulent Flows, Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics53, 227 (2021)

    2021

  27. [35]

    Reetz, T

    F. Reetz, T. Kreilos, and T. M. Schneider, Exact invari- ant solution reveals the origin of self-organized oblique turbulent-laminar stripes, Nature Communications 10, 2277 (2019)

    2019

  28. [36]

    C. J. Crowley, J. L. Pughe-Sanford, W. Toler, M. C. Krygier, R. O. Grigoriev, and M. F. Schatz, Turbulence tracks recurrent solutions, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 119, 1 (2022)

    2022

  29. [37]

    Bodenschatz, W

    E. Bodenschatz, W. Pesch, and G. Ahlers, Recent devel- opments in rayleigh-b´ enard convection, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 32, 709 (2000)

    2000

  30. [38]

    Lappa, Thermal convection: patterns, evolution and stability (John Wiley & Sons, 2009)

    M. Lappa, Thermal convection: patterns, evolution and stability (John Wiley & Sons, 2009)

    2009

  31. [39]

    F. H. Busse, Non-linear properties of thermal convection, Reports on Progress in Physics 41, 1929 (1978)

    1929

  32. [40]

    F. H. Busse and R. M. Clever, Instabilities of convection rolls in a fluid of moderate prandtl number, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 91, 319–335 (1979)

    1979

  33. [41]

    Subramanian, O

    P. Subramanian, O. Brausch, K. E. Daniels, E. Boden- schatz, T. M. Schneider, and W. Pesch, Spatio-temporal patterns in inclined layer convection, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 794, 719 (2016)

    2016

  34. [42]

    Reetz and T

    F. Reetz and T. M. Schneider, Invariant states in inclined layer convection. part 1. temporal transitions along dy- namical connections between invariant states, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 898, 10.1017/jfm.2020.317 (2020)

    2020 doi

  35. [43]

    Reetz, P

    F. Reetz, P. Subramanian, and T. M. Schneider, Invariant states in inclined layer convection. part

  36. [44]

    bifurcations and connections between branches of invariant states, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 898, 10.1017/jfm.2020.318 (2020)

    2020 doi

  37. [45]

    Zheng, L

    Z. Zheng, L. S. Tuckerman, and T. M. Schneider, Natu- ral convection in a vertical channel. part 1. wavenumber interaction and eckhaus instability in a narrow domain, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 1000, A28 (2024)

    2024

  38. [46]

    Zheng, L

    Z. Zheng, L. S. Tuckerman, and T. M. Schneider, Natural convection in a vertical channel. part 2. oblique solutions and global bifurcations in a spanwise-extended domain, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 1000, A29 (2024)

    2024

  39. [47]

    Z. Qi, S. Wang, J. Jaramillo-Villegas, M. Qi, A. M. Weiner, G. D’Aguanno, T. F. Carruthers, and C. R. Menyuk, Dissipative cnoidal waves (Turing rolls) and the soliton limit in microring resonators, Optica 6, 1220 (2019), arXiv:1905.07086

    2019 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Parra-Rivas, D

    P. Parra-Rivas, D. Gomila, L. Gelens, and E. Knobloch, Bifurcation structure of periodic patterns in the lugiato- lefever equation with anomalous dispersion, Physical Re- view E 98, 042212 (2018)

    2018

  41. [49]

    Parra-Rivas, D

    P. Parra-Rivas, D. Gomila, L. Gelens, and E. Knobloch, Bifurcation structure of localized states in the Lugiato- Lefever equation with anomalous dispersion, Phys. Rev. E 97, 042204 (2018)

    2018

  42. [50]

    I. V. Barashenkov, Y. S. Smirnov, and N. V. Alexeeva, Bifurcation to multisoliton complexes in the ac-driven, damped nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation, Physical Review E - Statistical Physics, Plasmas, Fluids, and Related In- terdisciplinary Topics 57, 2350 (1998)

    1998

  43. [51]

    Godey, A bifurcation analysis for the Lugiato-Lefever equation, The European Physical Journal D 71, 131 (2017)

    C. Godey, A bifurcation analysis for the Lugiato-Lefever equation, The European Physical Journal D 71, 131 (2017)

    2017

  44. [52]

    I. V. Barashenkov and Y. S. Smirnov, Existence and stability chart for the ac-driven, damped nonlinear Schr¨ odinger solitons, Physical Review E54, 5707 (1996)

    1996

  45. [53]

    Yelo-Sarri´ on, P

    J. Yelo-Sarri´ on, P. Parra-Rivas, N. Englebert, C. M. Arab ´ ı, F. Leo, and S.-P. Gorza, Self-pulsing in driven- dissipative photonic Bose-Hubbard dimers, Physical Re- view Research 3, L042031 (2021), arXiv:2104.00649

    2021 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Yelo-Sarri´ on, F

    J. Yelo-Sarri´ on, F. Leo, S.-P. Gorza, and P. Parra-Rivas, Self-pulsing and chaos in the asymmetrically driven dis- sipative photonic Bose–Hubbard dimer: A bifurcation analysis, Chaos: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlin- ear Science 32, 1 (2022), arXiv:2202.04066

    2022 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Tusnin, A

    A. Tusnin, A. Tikan, K. Komagata, and T. J. Kippen- berg, Nonlinear dynamics and Kerr frequency comb for- mation in lattices of coupled microresonators, Communi- cations Physics 6, 10.1038/s42005-023-01438-z (2023)

    2023 doi

  48. [56]

    Tikan, F

    A. Tikan, F. Bonnefoy, G. Ducrozet, G. Prabhudesai, G. Michel, A. Cazaubiel, ´E. Falcon, F. Copie, S. Ran- doux, and P. Suret, Nonlinear dispersion relation in in- tegrable turbulence, Sci Rep 12, 10386 (2022)

    2022

  49. [57]

    K. P. Leisman, D. Zhou, J. W. Banks, G. Kovaˇ ciˇ c, and D. Cai, Effective dispersion in the focusing nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation, Phys. Rev. E100, 022215 (2019)

    2019

  50. [58]

    W. Lee, G. Kovaˇ ciˇ c, and D. Cai, Renormalized Reso- nance Quartets in Dispersive Wave Turbulence, Physical Review Letters 103, 2 (2009)

    2009

  51. [59]

    Komagata, A

    K. Komagata, A. Tikan, A. Tusnin, J. Riemensberger, M. Churaev, H. Guo, and T. J. Kippenberg, Dissipative kerr solitons in a photonic dimer on both sides of excep- tional point, Communications Physics 10.1038/s42005- 021-00661-w (2021)

    2021 doi

  52. [60]

    W. Lee, G. Kovaˇ ciˇ c, and D. Cai, Renormalized resonance quartets in dispersive wave turbulence, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 024502 (2009)

    2009

  53. [61]

    M. H. Anderson, A. Tikan, A. Tusnin, J. Riemensberger, A. Davydova, R. N. Wang, and T. J. Kippenberg, Dis- sipative Solitons and Switching Waves in Dispersion- Modulated Kerr Cavities, Physical Review X 13, 11040 (2023), arXiv:2205.09957

    2023 arXiv

  54. [62]

    K. J. Burns, G. M. Vasil, J. S. Oishi, D. Lecoanet, and B. P. Brown, Dedalus: A flexible framework for numer- ical simulations with spectral methods, Physical Review Research 2, 023068 (2020)

    2020

  55. [63]

    J. F. Gibson, Channelflow: A spectral navier-stokes sim- ulator in c++ (2012)

    2012

  56. [64]

    Saad and M

    Y. Saad and M. H. Schultz, GMRES: A Generalized Min- imal Residual Algorithm for Solving Nonsymmetric Lin- ear Systems, SIAM Journal on Scientific and Statistical Computing 7, 856 (1986)

    1986

  57. [65]

    Viswanath, Recurrent motions within plane couette turbulence, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 580, 339 (2007)

    D. Viswanath, Recurrent motions within plane couette turbulence, Journal of Fluid Mechanics 580, 339 (2007)

    2007

  58. [66]

    Parra-Rivas, E

    P. Parra-Rivas, E. Knobloch, D. Gomila, and L. Ge- lens, Dark solitons in the Lugiato-Lefever equation with normal dispersion, Physical Review A 93, 1 (2016), arXiv:1603.03985

    2016 arXiv

  59. [67]

    Burke and E

    J. Burke and E. Knobloch, Localized states in the gen- eralized Swift-Hohenberg equation, Physical Review E - Statistical, Nonlinear, and Soft Matter Physics 73, 10.1103/PhysRevE.73.056211 (2006)

    2006 doi

  60. [68]

    Parra-Rivas, D

    P. Parra-Rivas, D. Gomila, M. A. Mat ´ ıas, S. Coen, and L. Gelens, Dynamics of localized and patterned struc- 18 tures in the Lugiato-Lefever equation determine the sta- bility and shape of optical frequency combs, Physical Re- view A - Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics ...

    2014 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.