Solitons in optical couplers: introduction and perspectives

Boris A. Malomed

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 66 references

Solitons in optical couplers: introduction and perspectives

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper reports that the asymmetric solitons in a symmetric nonlinear optical coupler, predicted in 1989, were first observed experimentally in 2020, closing a gap of more than two decades between theory and experiment.

desk verdict A useful but overclaiming minireview: the theory recap is solid, the experimental summary is convenient, but the 'first experimental observation of asymmetric solitons' headline outruns what the single-facet images and admitted residual oscillations can support. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.00696 v1 pith:AKCRQK6N submitted 2026-08-01 physics.optics cond-mat.quant-gasnlin.PS

Boris A. Malomed This is my paper · ORCID

classification physics.opticscond-mat.quant-gasnlin.PS PACS 42.65.Tg

keywords opticalsolitonsdual-corefibersnonlineardirectionalcouplerssymmetry-breakingbifurcationself-trappingall-opticalswitchingcoupledSchrodingerequationsKerrnonlinearity

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

The paper is a minireview setting out a simple but long-unverified prediction: a symmetric dual-core optical fiber, in which identical cores exchange light by tunneling, should spontaneously break that symmetry when enough energy is injected, forming stable asymmetric solitons. The accompanying theory, based on two coupled nonlinear Schrödinger equations, even fixes the exact energy at which the symmetric soliton destabilizes: E_bif = 4√(K/3). The paper's central claim is that this phenomenology was finally observed in 2020 in a 4.3 cm twin-core fiber: 75 fs pulses at 1560 nm show three distinct regimes as energy rises from 50 to 250 pJ — periodic oscillation between cores, switching and self-trapping in the opposite core, and direct self-trapping in the input core. If correct, the result turns a three-decade-old theoretical prediction into a working principle for all-optical switching and data control in photonic circuits.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the symmetry-breaking bifurcation (SBB) in the system of two linearly coupled nonlinear Schrödinger equations (Eqs. 1–2) describing the twin cores. The SBB is what turns the obvious symmetric soliton into a stable pair of asymmetric solitons once the soliton energy crosses E_bif = 4√(K/3); the paper also uses a variational approximation (Eqs. 10–16) to locate the asymmetric branches and to show the bifurcation is weakly subcritical, with asymmetric solutions appearing at E1 ≈ 2.348√K and the symmetric state losing stability at E2 ≈ 2.450√K. The same machinery produces the three qualitative regimes (oscillation, cross-core self-trapping, direct self-trapping) that t

What would settle it

Repeat the 2020 experiment with a fiber several switching lengths long (e.g., more than 5 cm) and with per-core output energy measurement: if the 100–150 pJ input does not leave most energy in the cross core with a small residual in the straight core, or if the three threshold windows shift by more than roughly their stated widths when dispersion and Raman effects are included in the model, the claimed observation of the asymmetric-soliton regime fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim: the asymmetric solitons in a symmetric nonlinear coupler, predicted in 1989 and studied theoretically for decades, were first observed experimentally in 2020 [15]. In that experiment, 75 fs pulses at 1560 nm entered one core of a 4.3 cm dual-core fiber with a linear switching length of 1.3 cm; input energy ranged from 50 to 250 pJ. The observed output images (Fig. 6) fall into three regimes matching simulations of the coupled-NLSE model: periodic inter-core oscillations (50–100 pJ), self-trapping of an asymmetric soliton in the cross core (100–150 pJ), and self-trapping in the straight core (150–250 pJ). The paper identifies these with the weakly subcritical symmetry-break

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the two-equation model, which omits third-order dispersion and the Raman self-frequency shift, adequately describes the 4.3 cm fiber, and that the camera images faithfully map onto the simulated propagation regimes; at intermediate energies the paper itself notes the fiber was too short to reach the fully self-trapped state.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

If the 2020 observation is correct, the 50–250 pJ energy windows are real fiber properties: a dual-core fiber can act as an all-optical switch that routes a soliton to one core or the other depending on input energy.
The confirmation validates the two coupled-NLSE description of these short highly nonlinear fibers, making it the natural baseline for designing future couplers and for testing where the omitted third-order dispersion and Raman terms matter.
It also supports the weakly subcritical character of the SBB, meaning the asymmetric branch first appears at slightly lower energy than the point at which the symmetric state becomes unstable; observing this directly would require high-precision experiments.
With the basic phenomenology established, the next theoretically predicted steps — soliton collisions, breathers, and semidiscrete light bullets — become concrete experimental targets.

Reading between the lines

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

The exact bifurcation energy E_bif = 4√(K/3) suggests a design rule the paper does not state: by engineering the coupling constant K (core separation or barrier), one can tune the switching threshold in physical units, since E_bif scales as √K.
The visual match between camera images and simulated spatiotemporal plots could be made quantitative by measuring the output energy ratio across the two cores at each input energy; the predicted asymmetric branch starts at cos(2θ) = ±1/√3, a specific testable value.
Because the same coupled-NLSE system describes two-component Bose-Einstein condensates, the confirmed thresholds in optics lend indirect support to analogous symmetry-breaking predictions in BECs, a connection the paper mentions only as an emulation possibility.
The residual oscillations noted at 150 pJ suggest that a longer fiber (or lower loss) would show whether the cross-core self-trapped state becomes fully stationary; that is a direct, testable extension.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Dear X,

The paper is a compact minireview of soliton symmetry breaking in dual-core fibers. The theoretical part is accurate and well organized: the exact bifurcation energy E_bif = 4 sqrt(K/3), the variational threshold values, and the subcritical character are all restated correctly. That section will serve as a quick reference for anyone entering the field. The experimental part usefully compiles the 2020-2024 results and states the input-energy windows for the three regimes (oscillatory, cross-core self-trapping, straight-core self-trapping). If you need a one-page map of this literature, this is a good place to start.

The soft spot is the headline claim. Section 3 says Fig. 6 provides 'the first experimental observation of the asymmetric solitons in the symmetric nonlinear optical coupler.' But the review itself admits that at 150 pJ the fiber was too short to reach the fully self-trapped state, and that the 200/250 pJ outputs are asymmetric solitons 'with residual oscillations.' A single output image at z = 4.3 cm cannot distinguish a transient switching state from a stationary two-component soliton, and no quantitative comparison (width, energy partition, overlap with simulation) is reported. So the claim is stronger than the exhibited evidence. I'd want the wording softened to something like 'first experimental demonstration of self-trapping in the asymmetric state,' plus a discussion of what exactly is meant by 'soliton' here.

There are also small mechanical issues: Eq. (20) writes both initial conditions for u, and the Smirnova graphene-coupler reference appears twice ([24] and [34]). The 'perspectives' section is thin—mostly a list of directions rather than concrete predictions.

On circularity: it is fair to note that the key experiments include the author as a co-author, and that the theory summary leans on his own prior work. That raises the bar for independent confirmation but is not disqualifying in a review. The missing piece is an independent or quantitative validation of the experimental images.

Who gets value from this: newcomers to nonlinear fiber couplers, and researchers wanting a compact citation for the 2020 experiment. As a rigorous proof of the existence of asymmetric solitons, it is not enough. I would send it to peer review—the topic is important and the review form is standard—but with a request to tone down the claim, add quantitative comparison, and fix the mechanical errors.

Best

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper is a minireview of bright solitons in dual-core nonlinear optical fibers/couplers. It restates the standard linearly coupled NLSE model, the exact symmetry-breaking-bifurcation (SBB) energy E_bif = 4√(K/3) ≈ 2.31√K, and the variational-approximation results for symmetric and asymmetric soliton branches, including the weakly subcritical character of the SBB. It then reviews recent experiments, chiefly Ref. [15], claiming the first experimental observation of asymmetric solitons in a symmetric coupler, with energy intervals 50–100, 100–150, and 150–250 pJ corresponding to oscillatory switching, self-trapping in the cross core, and self-trapping in the straight core. The paper also mentions follow-up experiments in asymmetric dual-core fibers and discusses future directions.

Significance. If the central experimental claim is accepted, the review closes a roughly thirty-year gap between the 1989–1996 theoretical predictions and their experimental realization, and it would be a useful compact reference for the field. The paper has the merit of collecting the exact bifurcation value, the variational estimates, and the experimental parameter windows in one place, and the reproduced theoretical formulas are internally consistent. However, the load-bearing experimental claim is not supported by the evidence presented in the manuscript: the review relies on qualitative single-output camera images, admits residual oscillations and insufficient fiber length, and does not quantify the comparison between experiment and simulation. The significance of the review therefore hinges on whether the original experimental papers provide quantitative evidence that is not reproduced here.

major comments (3)

[Section III, energy intervals after Fig. 6] The central claim—"The findings summarized here and shown in Fig. 6 provide the first experimental observation of the asymmetric solitons ..."—is not established by the evidence shown. The experiment records only a single output-facet camera image at z = 4.3 cm. A static image at one propagation distance cannot distinguish a stationary two-component soliton from a transient nonlinear switching state. The text itself states that at 150 pJ "the length of the fiber is not sufficient to achieve the fully self-trapped state" and that the 200/250 pJ outputs are "strongly asymmetric solitons with residual oscillations." Residual oscillations imply the observed state is not the stationary soliton of Eqs. (1)–(2). To support the priority claim, the review should provide quantitative diagnostics from the original experiments: measured energy partition between cores, pulse widths, comparison of out
[Section III, Fig. 4 and energy intervals] The model omits third-order dispersion and the Raman self-frequency shift, and the review invokes these as a post hoc explanation for "some differences between the experimental findings and predictions." No estimate is given for the magnitude of these higher-order effects in the 75 fs, 1560 nm, 50–250 pJ regime. Since the identification of the observed states as asymmetric solitons depends on the adequacy of the two-equation model, this is a load-bearing point. The review should either quantify these corrections (from known fiber parameters or from simulations that include them) or explicitly frame the experimental results as evidence of self-trapped asymmetric pulses in a regime where the ideal model is approximate, rather than as a clean confirmation of the stationary soliton solutions.
[Section III, Fig. 4] The mapping between the physical experimental units and the scaled simulation units is not given. The simulations in Fig. 4 use dimensionless amplitudes a = 1.15, 2.0, 2.6 and inverse width η = 0.78, while the experimental energies are quoted in pJ over three intervals. Without the conversion factors (coupling constant K, dispersion β2, and the normalization of u and v), the reader cannot verify that the simulated transitions correspond to the experimental 100–150 and 150–250 pJ windows. This conversion is essential to the claim that the theoretically predicted regimes were "directly observed." Please provide the scaling relations and, if possible, the physical values of K and the pulse parameters.

minor comments (5)

[Eq. (20)] The initial condition should read v(τ, z=0) = 0, not u(τ, z=0) = 0 for the second core; as written, both conditions are for u.
[After Eq. (20)] The stated input energy E = 2a²η⁻¹ is inconsistent with the definition in Eq. (5). For u = a sech(ητ), v = 0, Eq. (5) gives E = a²/η. Please check the normalization.
[Section II, Eqs. (14)–(16)] The sentence "the remaining equation (15) for the energy-distribution angle θ" is confusing: Eq. (15) determines T⁻¹ in terms of E and θ. The equation that determines θ is (14) (after eliminating T), leading to Eq. (16). Please correct the cross-reference and, if possible, display the unnumbered dϕ/dz equation as a numbered equation.
[References] Refs. [24] and [34] are identical (Smirnova et al., graphene coupler, Phys. Rev. B 88, 045443). Please remove the duplicate.
[Section II, Eq. (8)] The notation E± for the energy of symmetric/antisymmetric solitons could be confused with the total energy E in Eq. (5) and with the input amplitude a. Consider using E_sym/E_asym or a different symbol.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the exact bifurcation energy is anchored to independent work, the variational predictions are explicitly approximate and cross-checked against the exact formula, and the experimental confirmation is empirical evidence rather than an input to the theory.

full rationale

The paper is a minireview, not a new derivation. Its central theoretical anchor, the exact symmetry-breaking-bifurcation energy E_bif = 4 sqrt(K/3) (Eq. 9), is attributed to the independent work of Wright, Stegeman, and Wabnitz [36], and is not derived from any quantity that depends on the paper's own conclusions. The variational equations (13)-(19) are explicitly based on the stated sech ansatz (10)-(11), and the paper itself notes that the VA prediction E2 = sqrt(6K) differs from the exact E_bif by a relative error of 0.057; this is a check of an approximation against an independent exact result, not a fit. The simulated propagation regimes in Fig. 4 are produced by forward integration of the coupled-NLSE model (Eqs. 1-2) with stated input parameters (a, eta), not by fitting to the experimental output energies. The experimental energy intervals (50-100, 100-150, 150-250 pJ) are reported as observations, not as quantities forced by the theory. Self-citation is present — the author co-authored the key experimental papers [15,31,32] — but the experimental data are external empirical evidence; the claim of 'first experimental observation' is an attribution, not an equation that reduces to the theory. The paper's own caveats about residual oscillations, insufficient fiber length, and omitted third-order dispersion/Raman effects are limitations on the strength of the experimental confirmation, not circular steps. Under the strict criterion of exhibiting a specific reduction of a claimed derivation to its inputs, no such reduction exists here.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The review introduces no new free parameters, axioms, or entities: it restates the coupled-NLSE model, the variational approximation, and the bifurcation analysis from the literature it cites. The listed entries are the input parameters that determine the simulation outcomes in Fig. 4 and the domain assumptions that carry the experimental interpretation, including the acknowledged omission of higher-order dispersive and Raman effects.

free parameters (2)

a (input amplitude of the launched pulse) = 1.15, 2.0, 2.6 in scaled units (Fig. 4)
Chosen by hand to represent the low, intermediate, and high energy regimes (50-100, 100-150, 150-250 pJ) of the 2020 experiment; not fitted here, but the regime classification in Fig. 4 depends on these choices.
eta (inverse temporal width of the launched pulse) = 0.78 in scaled units (Fig. 4), corresponding to 75 fs pulses
Fixed input width in the experiment and simulation; a free input parameter of the initial conditions (20) that sets the energy scale E = 2 a^2 / eta.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption The dual-core coupler is adequately modeled by the two linearly coupled NLSEs (Eqs. 1-2) with Kerr nonlinearity and anomalous GVD.
Invoked in Section 2 as the basic model (cited to Refs. [3], [8], [35]); the whole experimental interpretation of Section 3 rests on this model, and the review itself notes that omitted third-order dispersion and Raman effects explain residual discrepancies.
domain assumption The variational ansatz (Eqs. 10-11), sech profiles plus possibly nonzero chirp, captures the symmetry-breaking bifurcation of coupler solitons.
The review derives Eqs. (13)-(19) from this ansatz and takes its accuracy from comparison with the exact threshold (Eq. 9) and with numerics in Ref. [40]; the ansatz's adequacy is assumed, not proven here.
standard math Stability of the bifurcation branches is classified by elementary bifurcation theory as in Ref. [50].
Used to mark branches stable or unstable in Fig. 3 without renewed analysis; standard mathematics the review inherits from the literature.
domain assumption The camera images in Fig. 6 can be mapped unambiguously onto the simulated propagation regimes of Fig. 4.
Section 3 assigns energy intervals to the oscillatory, cross-core trapping, and straight-core trapping regimes by visual matching of output patterns; this mapping is the bridge between theory and the claimed experimental confirmation.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Solitons in optical couplers: introduction and perspectives." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/AKCRQK6N

@misc{pith2026260800696,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Solitons in optical couplers: introduction and perspectives},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/AKCRQK6N}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.00696}
}

read the original abstract

This minireview provides a brief summary and a discussion of directions for further development of theoretical and, chiefly, experimental studies of bright solitons in optical couplers, i.e., dual-core waveguides which combine the linear inter-core coupling (tunneling of light between the parallel cores with the intra-core group-velocity dispersion and self-focusing Kerr (cubic) nonlinearity. Following a short introduction to the field, the article focuses on a brief review of relatively recent experimental results for the switching of solitons in dual-core nonlinear optical fibers and the spontaneous emergence of stable asymmetric two-core solitons in the couplers with the symmetric dual-core structure.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.00696 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2. A typical example of two components of a stable asymmetric soliton, with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** FIG. 3. The dependence of the asymmetry parameter cos(2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (3 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4. Switching between the coupler’s cores, produced by simulations of Eqs. (1) and (2) with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_4.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5. A schematic picture of the propagation of an optical pulse initially coupled into one core [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_5.png]

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: FIG. 6. A sequence of camera images of the output intensity patterns, taken in the fiber facet, for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

66 extracted references · 66 canonical work pages

[34]

D. A. Smirnova, A. V. Gorbach, I. V. Iorsh, I. V. Shadrivov, and Y. S. Kivshar, Nonlinear switching with a graphene coupler, Phys. Rev. B88, 045443 (2013)

work page 2013
[15]

V. H. Nguyen, L. X. T. Tai, I. Bugar, M. Longobucco, R. Buzcynski, B. A. Malomed, and M. Trippenbach, Reversible ultrafast soliton switching in dual-core highly nonlinear optical fibers, Opt. Lett.45, 5221-5224 (2020)

work page 2020
[1]

W. P. Huang, Coupled-mode theory for optical waveguides: an overview, J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 11, 963-983 (1994)

work page 1994
[2]

M. J. F. Digonnet and H. J. Shaw, Analysis of a tunable single-mode optical fiber coupler, IEEE J. Quant. Electr.18, 746-754 (1982)

work page 1982
[3]

Trillo, S

S. Trillo, S. Wabnitz, E. M. Wright, and G. I. Stegeman, Soliton switching in fiber nonlinear directional couplers, Opt. Lett.13, 672-674 (1988)

work page 1988
[4]

B. A. Malomed, A variety of dynamical settings in dual-core nonlinear fibers, In:Handbook of Optical Fibers, Vol. 1, pp. 421-474 (G.-D. Peng, Editor: Springer, Singapore, 2019)

work page 2019
[5]

Saitoh, Y

K. Saitoh, Y. Sato, and M. Koshiba, Coupling characteristics of dual-core photonic crystal fiber couplers, Opt. Exp.11, 3188-3195 (2003)

work page 2003
[6]

W. N. MacPherson, J. D. C. Jones, B. J. Mangan, J. C. Knight, and P. St. J. Russell, Two- core photonic crystal fibre for Doppler difference velocimetry, Opt. Commun.223, 375-380 (2003)

work page 2003

Show all 66 references

[7]

Longobucco, J

M. Longobucco, J. Cimeka, L. ˇCurillac, D. Pysz, R. Buczy´ nski, and I. Bug´ ar, All-optical switching based on soliton self-trapping in dual-core high-contrast optical fibre, Optical Fiber Technology51, 48-58 (2019). 15

2019
[8]

S. M. Jensen, he nonlinear coherent coupler, IEEE Journal of Quantum Electr.18,1580-1583 (1982); A. A. Maier, Optical transistors and bistable devices utilizing nonlinear transmission of light in systems with unidirectional coupled waves Sov. J. Quant. Electron.12, 1490-1494 (1982)

1982
[9]

S. R. Friberg, Y. Silberberg, M. K. Oliver, M. J. Andrejco, M. A. Saifi, and P. W. Smith, Ultrafast all-optical switching in dual-core fiber nonlinear coupler, Appl. Phys. Lett.51, 1135- 1137 (1987)

1987
[10]

S. R. Friberg, A. M. Weiner, Y. Silberberg, B. G. Sfez, and P. S. Smith, Femtosecond switching in dual-core-fiber nonlinear coupler, Opt. Lett.13, 904-906 (1988)

1988
[11]

D. R. Heatley, E. M. Wright, and G. I. Stegeman, Soliton coupler, Appl. Phys. Lett.53, 172-174 (1988)

1988
[12]

Kr´ olikowski and Y

W. Kr´ olikowski and Y. S. Kivshar, Soliton-based optical switching in waveguide arrays, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B13, 876-887 (1996)

1996
[13]

S. C. Tsang, K. S. Chiang, and K. W. Chow, Soliton interaction in a two-core optical fiber, Opt. Commun.229, 431-439 (2004)

2004
[14]

Lederer, G

F. Lederer, G. I. Stegeman, D. N. Christodoulides, G. Assanto, M. Segev, and Y. Silberberg, Discrete solitons in optics, Phys. Rep.463, 1-126 (2008)

2008
[16]

B. A. Malomed, G. D. Peng, and P. L. Chu, A nonlinear optical amplifier based on a dual-core fiber, Opt. Lett.21, 330-332 (1996)

1996
[17]

Y. D. Wu, Coupled-soliton all-optical logic device with two parallel tapered waveguides, Fiber Integr. Opt.23, 405-414 (2004)

2004
[18]

Hatami-Hanza, P

H. Hatami-Hanza, P. L. Chu, B. A. Malomed, and G. D. Peng, Soliton compression and splitting in double-core nonlinear optical fibers. Opt. Commun.134, 59-65 (1997)

1997
[19]

Chevriaux, R

D. Chevriaux, R. Khomeriki, and J. Leon, Bistable transmitting nonlinear directional couplers, Mod. Phys. Lett. B20, 515-532 (2006)

2006
[20]

Trillo and S

S. Trillo and S. Wabnitz, Coupling instability and power-induced switching with 2-core dual- polarization fiber nonlinear coupler, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B5, 483-491(1988). 16

1988
[21]

Villeneuve, C

A. Villeneuve, C. C. Yang, P. C. J. Wigley, G. I. Stegeman, J. S. Aitchison, and C. N. Ironside, Ultrafast all-optical switching in semiconductor nonlinear directional couplers at half the band-gap, Appl. Phys. Lett.61, 147-149 (1992)

1992
[22]

Hochberg, T

M. Hochberg, T. Baehr-Jones, C. Walker, and A. Scherer, Integrated plasmon and dielectric waveguides, Opt. Exp.12, 5481-5486 (2004)

2004
[23]

Petr´ aˇ cek, Nonlinear directional coupling between plasmonic slot waveguides, Appl

J. Petr´ aˇ cek, Nonlinear directional coupling between plasmonic slot waveguides, Appl. Phys. B112, 593-598 (2013)

2013
[25]

W. C. K. Mak, B. A. Malomed, and P. L. Chu, Solitary waves in coupled nonlinear waveguides with Bragg gratings, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B15,1685-1692 (1998)

1998
[26]

Y. Sun, T. P. White, and A. A. Sukhorukov, Coupled-mode theory analysis of optical forces between longitudinally shifted periodic waveguides, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B30, 736-742 (2013)

2013
[27]

G. D. Peng, P. L. Chu, and A. Ankiewicz, Soliton propagation in saturable nonlinear fiber couplers –variational and numerical results, Int. J. Nonlin. Opt. Phys.3, 69-87 (1994)

1994
[28]

W. C. K. Mak, B. A. Malomed, and P. L. Chu, Soliton Coupling in Waveguide with Quadratic Nonlinearity, Phys. Rev. E55, 6134-6140 (1997)

1997
[29]

Albuch, B

L. Albuch, B. A. Malomed, Transitions between symmetric and asymmetric solitons in dual- core systems with cubic-quintic nonlinearity, Math. Comput. Simul.74,312-322 (2007)

2007
[30]

Longobucco, I

M. Longobucco, I. Astrauskas, A. Pugˇ zlys, D. Pysz, F. Uherek, A. Baltuˇ ska, R. Buczy´ nski, and I. Bug´ ar, Broadband self-switching of femtosecond pulses in highly nonlinear high index contrast dual-core fibre. Opt. Commun.472, 126043 (2020)

2020
[31]

N. V. Hung, L. X. T. Tai, M. Longobucco, I. Bugar, I. Astrauskas, A. Pugˇ zlys, A. Baltuˇ ska, R. Buczy´ nski, B. A. Malomed, and M. Trippenbach, Self-trapping and switching of solitonic pulses in mismatched dual-core highly nonlinear fibers, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals167, 113...

2023
[32]

L. X. T. Tai, M. Longobucco, N. V. Hung, B. Paluba, M. Trippenbach, B. A. Malomed, I. Astrauskas, A. Pugˇ zlys, A. Baltuˇ ska, R. Buczy´ nski, and I. Bugar, Analysis of high-contrast all-optical dual wavelength switching in asymmetric dual-core fibers, Opt. Lett.49, 149-152 (2024). 17

2024
[33]

X. Shi, B. A. Malomed, F. Ye, and X. Chen, Symmetric and asymmetric solitons in a nonlocal nonlinear coupler, Phys. Rev. A85,053839 (2012)

2012
[35]

A. W. Snyder, D. J. Mitchell, L. Poladian, D. R. Rowland, and Y. Chen, Physics of nonlinear fiber couplers, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B8, 2102-2112 (1991)

1991
[36]

E. M. Wright, G. I. Stegeman, S. Wabnitz, Solitary-wave decay and symmetry-breaking in- stabilities in two-mode fibers, Phys. Rev. A40,4455 (1989)

1989
[37]

Par´ e and M

C. Par´ e and M. Florja´ nczyk, Approximate model of soliton dynamics in all-optical fibers, Phys. Rev. A41, 6287-6295 (1990)

1990
[38]

A. I. Maimistov, Propagation of a light pulse in nonlinear tunnel-coupled optical waveguides, Kvantovaya Elektron. (Moscow)18, 758-761 (1991) [Sov. J. Quant. Electr.21, 687-690 (1991)

1991
[39]

P. L. Chu, B. A. Malomed, and G. D. Peng, Soliton switching and propagation in nonlinear fiber couplers: analytical results, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B10, 1379-1385 (1993)

1993
[40]

B. A. Malomed, I. M. Skinner, P. L. Chu, and G. D. Peng, Symmetric and asymmetric solitons in twin-core nonlinear optical fibers. Phys. Rev. E53, 4084-4091 (1996)

1996
[41]

Akhmediev and A

N. Akhmediev and A. Ankiewicz, Novel soliton states and bifurcation phenomena in nonlinear fiber couplers, Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 2395-2398 (1993)

1993
[42]

J. M. Soto-Crespo and N. Akhmediev, Stability of the soliton states in a nonlinear fiber coupler, Phys. Rev. E48, 4710-4715 (1993)

1993
[43]

Trillo, G

S. Trillo, G. Stegeman, E. Wright, and S. Wabnitz, Parametric amplification and modulational instabilities in dispersive nonlinear directional couplers with relaxing nonlinearity, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B6, 889-900 (1989)

1989
[44]

J. H. Li, K. S. Chiang, and K. W. Chow, Modulation instabilities in two-core optical fibers, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B28, 1693-1701 (2011)

2011
[45]

Anderson, Variational approach to nonlinear pulse propagation in optical fibers, Phys

D. Anderson, Variational approach to nonlinear pulse propagation in optical fibers, Phys. Rev. A27, 3135-3145 (1983)

1983
[46]

Anderson, M

D. Anderson, M. Lisak, and T. Reichel, Asymptotic propagation properties of pulses in a soliton-based optical-fiber communication system, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B5, 207-210 (1988)

1988
[47]

Romagnoli, S

M. Romagnoli, S. Trillo and S. Wabnitz, Soliton switching in nonlinear couplers, Opt. Quan- tum Electron.24, S1237-S1267 (1992). 18

1992
[48]

B. A. Malomed, Variational methods in fiber optics and related fields, in: Prog. Optics43, 71-193 (E. Wolf, editor: North Holland, Amsterdam, 2002)

2002
[49]

Dror and B

N. Dror and B. A. Malomed, Symmetric and asymmetric solitons and vortices in linearly coupled two-dimensional waveguides with the cubic-quintic nonlinearity, Physica D240, 526- 541 (2011)

2011
[50]

Iooss and D

G. Iooss and D. D. Joseph,Elementary Stability and Bifurcation Theory(Springer: Berlin, 1980)

1980
[51]

G. P. Agrawal,Nonlinear Fiber Optics, Fourth edition (Academic Press: San Diego, 2007)

2007
[52]

Rastogi, K

V. Rastogi, K. S. Chiang. and N. N. Akhmediev, Soliton states in a nonlinear directional coupler with intermodal dispersion, Phys. Lett. A301, 27-34 (2002)

2002
[53]

L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz,Quantum Mechanics(Nauka Publishers: Moscow, 1989)

1989
[54]

I. M. Uzunov, R. Muschall, M. G¨ olles, Y. S. Kivshar, B.A. Malomed, and F. Lederer, Pulse switching in nonlinear fiber directional couplers, Phys. Rev. E51, 2527-2537 (1995)

1995
[55]

Sakaguchi and B

H. Sakaguchi and B. A. Malomed, Symmetry breaking of solitons in two-component Gross- Pitaevskii equations, Phys. Rev. E83, 036608 (2011)

2011
[56]

S. L. Doty, J. W. Haus, Y. Oh, and R. L. Fork, Soliton interactions on dual-core fibers, Phys. Rev. E51, 709-717 (1995)

1995
[57]

P. Li, L. Li, and B. A. Malomed, Multisoliton Newton’s cradles and supersolitons in regular and parity-time-symmetric nonlinear couplers, Phys. Rev. E89, 062926 (2014)

2014
[58]

G. D. Peng, B. A. Malomed, and P. L. Chu, 1998, Soliton collisions in a model of a dual-core nonlinear optical fiber. Physica Scripta, Physica Scripta58, 149-158 (1998)

1998
[59]

L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz,Mechanics(Nauka Publishers: Moscow, 1988)

1988
[60]

A. B. Aceves, C. De Angelis, A. M. Rubenchik, and S. K. Turitsyn, Multidimensional solitons in fiber arrays, Opt. Lett.19, 329-331 (1994)

1994
[61]

A. B. Aceves, C. De Angelis, G. G. Luther, and A. M. Rubenchik, Opt. Lett.19, 1186-1188 (1994)

1994
[62]

A. B. Aceves, G. G. Luther, C. De Angelis, A. M. Rubenchik, and S. K. Turitsyn, Energy localization in nonlinear fiber arrays: collapse-effect compressor, Phys. Rev. Lett.75, 73-76 (1995)

1995
[63]

Matsumoto, S

M. Matsumoto, S. Katayama, and A. Hasegawa, Optical switching in nonlinear waveguide arrays with a longitudinally decreasing coupling coefficient, Opt. Lett.20, 1758-1760 (1995). 19

1995
[64]

Blit and B

R. Blit and B. A. Malomed, Propagation and collisions of semidiscrete solitons in arrayed and stacked waveguides, Phys. Rev. A86, 043841 (2012)

2012
[65]

Silberberg, Collapse of optical pulses, Opt

Y. Silberberg, Collapse of optical pulses, Opt. Lett.22, 1282-1284 (1990)

1990
[66]

Minardi, F

S. Minardi, F. Eilenberger, Y. V. Kartashov, A. Szameit, U. R¨ opke, J. Kobelke, K. Schuster, H. Bartelt, S. Nolte, L. Torner, F. Lederer, A. T¨ unnermann, and T. Pertsch, Three-dimensional light bullets in arrays of waveguides, Phys. Rev. Lett.105, 263901 (2010)

2010
[67]

Eilenberger, K

F. Eilenberger, K. Prater, S. Minardi, R. Geiss, U. R¨ opke, J. Kobelke, K. Schuster, H. Bartelt, S. Nolte, A. T¨ unnermann, and T. Pertsch, Observation of discrete, vortex light bullets, Phys. Rev. X3, 041031 (2013). 20

2013

Pith tools

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

[1] [34]

D. A. Smirnova, A. V. Gorbach, I. V. Iorsh, I. V. Shadrivov, and Y. S. Kivshar, Nonlinear switching with a graphene coupler, Phys. Rev. B88, 045443 (2013)

work page 2013

[2] [15]

V. H. Nguyen, L. X. T. Tai, I. Bugar, M. Longobucco, R. Buzcynski, B. A. Malomed, and M. Trippenbach, Reversible ultrafast soliton switching in dual-core highly nonlinear optical fibers, Opt. Lett.45, 5221-5224 (2020)

work page 2020

[3] [1]

W. P. Huang, Coupled-mode theory for optical waveguides: an overview, J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 11, 963-983 (1994)

work page 1994

[4] [2]

M. J. F. Digonnet and H. J. Shaw, Analysis of a tunable single-mode optical fiber coupler, IEEE J. Quant. Electr.18, 746-754 (1982)

work page 1982

[5] [3]

Trillo, S

S. Trillo, S. Wabnitz, E. M. Wright, and G. I. Stegeman, Soliton switching in fiber nonlinear directional couplers, Opt. Lett.13, 672-674 (1988)

work page 1988

[6] [4]

B. A. Malomed, A variety of dynamical settings in dual-core nonlinear fibers, In:Handbook of Optical Fibers, Vol. 1, pp. 421-474 (G.-D. Peng, Editor: Springer, Singapore, 2019)

work page 2019

[7] [5]

Saitoh, Y

K. Saitoh, Y. Sato, and M. Koshiba, Coupling characteristics of dual-core photonic crystal fiber couplers, Opt. Exp.11, 3188-3195 (2003)

work page 2003

[8] [6]

W. N. MacPherson, J. D. C. Jones, B. J. Mangan, J. C. Knight, and P. St. J. Russell, Two- core photonic crystal fibre for Doppler difference velocimetry, Opt. Commun.223, 375-380 (2003)

work page 2003