Cylindrical vector beam generator using a two-element interferometer

Dorilian Lopez-Mago; Job Mendoza-Hernandez; Jorge Arturo Rojas-Santana; Manuel F. Ferrer-Garcia

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 40 references

Cylindrical vector beam generator using a two-element interferometer

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A two-element interferometer turns a single laser vortex into a cylindrical vector beam.

desk verdict A practical, inexpensive two-element interferometer for generating cylindrical vector beams; the experimental demonstration is convincing but the key phase/topological-charge assumptions about the cube beamsplitter are only qualitatively verified. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.07562 v1 pith:OYFGD55P submitted 2019-08-20 physics.optics

Job Mendoza-Hernandez , Manuel F. Ferrer-Garcia , Jorge Arturo Rojas-Santana , Dorilian Lopez-Mago This is my paper · ORCID

classification physics.optics

keywords cylindricalvectorbeamshigher-orderPoincarésphereinterferometerbeamdisplacercubebeamsplitteropticalvortexpolarizationsingularityorbitalangularmomentum

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 claims that a scalar vortex beam can be converted into a cylindrical vector (CV) beam using only two off-the-shelf optical elements: a beam displacer and a cube beamsplitter arranged as an interferometer. The authors derive the output field as a coherent superposition of two Laguerre-Gaussian modes with opposite topological charge and orthogonal circular polarizations, and they show experimentally that choosing the input beam's polarization state selects radial, azimuthal, hybrid, or spiral polarization patterns, including higher-order singularities. The point of the method is that the polarization pattern is controlled entirely by the input polarization, without moving parts or custom-fabricated elements, which makes CV beam generation accessible and potentially compatible with high-power or monolithic devices.

What carries the argument

The key object is the two-element interferometer formed by a beam displacer (BD) and a cube beamsplitter (CBS) with its semi-reflecting layer parallel to the propagation direction. The BD separates the input into two parallel, orthogonally polarized vortices without changing their helicity, while the CBS reflection acts like a Dove prism: it flips the sign of the orbital angular momentum and adds a $\pi/2$ phase shift. This reflection-induced mode conversion, combined with a quarter-wave plate, produces the coherent superposition of $LG_{-m}$ and $LG_m$ with opposite circular polarizations that defines a cylindrical vector beam; the input polarization angles $\alpha$ and $\theta$ then position the state on the higher-order Poincaré sphere.

What would settle it

Send a pure $LG_m$ beam into the cube beamsplitter in the same orientation and measure the reflected beam's phase structure or orbital angular momentum spectrum; if the reflected beam does not carry charge $-m$ with a uniform $\pi/2$ phase, the predicted $U_3$ field would not occur. A second check is to measure the output Stokes images while rotating the input polarization: the pattern should rotate exactly with $\alpha$ on the higher-order Poincaré sphere, and any systematic asymmetry would trace to the beamsplitter's angle-dependent phase.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the two-element interferometer maps a homogeneously polarized vortex $LG_m(\cos\alpha\,\hat{x}+e^{i\theta}\sin\alpha\,\hat{y})$ onto a vector beam whose transverse polarization pattern is set by the input parameters $\alpha$ and $\theta$. After the beam displacer splits the beam into two parallel, orthogonally polarized copies, the cube beamsplitter transmits one copy and reflects the other; the reflection reverses the sign of the topological charge, $m\to -m$, and adds a $\pi/2$ phase. A following quarter-wave plate converts the linear polarization basis into circular, yielding $U_3=\frac{i}{\sqrt{2}}[\cos\alpha\,LG_{-m}\hat{c}_R-\sin\alpha\,e^{i\theta}LG_m\hat{c}_L]$. The authors show experimentally that $\alpha=-\pi/4$ reproduces the standard CV family, other input states give hybrid and spiral patterns, and $m=\pm2$ produces flower and spider-web singularities.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption is that the cube beamsplitter's reflection flips the sign of the vortex's topological charge and adds the same $\pi/2$ phase to both polarization components; if that reflection does not act as a Dove prism for both components, the needed superposition of opposite-helicity modes is not produced.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

A single input vortex can generate radial, azimuthal, hybrid, and spiral polarization patterns simply by setting the input polarization state.
Higher-order polarization singularities such as vectorial flowers and spider webs become available by using input vortices with $m=\pm2$.
Because the polarization pattern is set by input polarization rather than by any moving element, the device can be switched by rotating a wave plate or changing a retardance.
The all-refractive construction avoids absorptive metasurfaces and can be scaled to high-power beams or integrated into a monolithic interferometer.
The method is a practical alternative to Pancharatnam-Berry phase elements for labs that have standard optics but no custom fabrication.

Reading between the lines

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

The scheme is not limited to a single wavelength: since the beam displacer and beamsplitter are refractive and only the quarter-wave plate is chromatic, the same two-element interferometer should work across a broad spectral range with minor realignment.
Because the output $U_4$ is the partner field with $m\to -m$ and $\theta\to\theta+\pi$, both interferometer outputs could be used simultaneously to produce complementary polarization patterns in two arms.
The Dove-prism assumption for the beamsplitter reflection could be checked directly by measuring the orbital angular momentum spectrum of the reflected beam alone; a clean test would separate the core mechanism from the angular-dependent phase shift the authors attribute to the cube beamsplitter.
The same interferometer could be cascaded or fiber-coupled to produce vector beams in different spatial modes or to prepare quantum states in the hybrid spatial-polarization basis.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

You should know this is a solid, useful device paper. The trick is simple: a beam displacer splits a vortex into two orthogonally polarized copies, a cube beamsplitter recombines them with a reflection that inverts the vortex sign, and a quarter-wave plate converts to circular basis. The result is a compact CV beam generator made from off-the-shelf parts. The derivation (Eqs. 4–9) is clean linear optics, and the mapping to the higher-order Poincaré sphere is correct.

What's genuinely new is the specific combination of beam displacer and cube beamsplitter in this “two-element interferometer” configuration. Ref. 37 is a single-element interferometer but not for CV beams; the other compact interferometers in Refs 26–28 use different layouts. The experimental results show radial, azimuthal, hybrid, and higher-order patterns with Stokes images that match the simulations qualitatively. That's a reasonable demonstration for a device paper.

The main soft spot is the load-bearing assumption that the cube beamsplitter reflection acts like a Dove prism: flipping the sign of m and adding π/2 phase. That's cited to Ref. 38, which is about Dove prisms, not beamsplitters. The authors mention the CBS has an angular-dependent phase [40] but treat it as a small error. Since the output field is exactly the superposition of the inverted and non-inverted vortices, any deviation in the phase or the sign flip would corrupt the polarization pattern. The experiment implicitly shows the assumption works, but they never quantify the fidelity. A mode purity measurement or a direct interferometric test of the CBS's reflection phase would settle it. Also, the beam displacer phase difference is neglected, though they say it can be absorbed into θ.

These are moderate, not fatal, concerns. The paper is honest about them (it notes the S3 deviation and astigmatism). For a practical method paper, this level of validation is typical.

The paper is for anyone in structured light or laser materials processing who needs a cheap, robust, high-power-tolerant way to make CV beams. It deserves a serious referee; the assumptions should be probed but the core idea is sound. I'd send it to peer review with a request for one additional characterization experiment (e.g., Stokes-based fidelity metric) and a more careful citation of the reflection mechanism.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. This paper describes and demonstrates a two-element interferometric generator of cylindrical vector beams. A Laguerre-Gaussian vortex with elliptical polarization enters a beam displacer that separates it into two orthogonally polarized vortices; a cube beamsplitter then superposes the transmitted arm of one beam with the reflected arm of the other, where the reflection is assumed to add a π/2 phase and invert the vortex charge m. A quarter-wave plate converts the linear basis to circular, yielding Eq. (8), a superposition of opposite-charge vortices in opposite circular polarizations. The authors present Stokes-polarimetry measurements of radial, azimuthal, hybrid, spiral, and higher-order (flower/spider) polarization patterns and show how the input polarization parameters (α, θ) map to paths on the higher-order Poincaré sphere.

Significance. If the characterization in Eqs. (6)-(9) is correct, the paper offers a simple, robust, off-the-shelf alternative to q-plates and metasurfaces, with a clear mapping to the higher-order Poincaré sphere and plausible monolithic and high-power variants. The analytic model is explicit, the experiments cover a broad set of cylindrical-vector-beam families, and the component count is genuinely minimal. The main weakness is that the central model imports a Dove-prism-like reflection behavior from Ref. [38] to a cube beamsplitter without independent verification, and the experimental comparison is qualitative. These issues are addressable and do not undermine the potential value of the device, but they are load-bearing for the paper's central claim.

major comments (2)

[§3, Eqs. (6)-(8)] The derivation assumes two properties of the cube-beamsplitter reflection: a π/2 phase shift and an inversion m→−m for both reflected beams. Ref. [38] supports the charge inversion for a Dove prism, not for a cube beamsplitter; the geometry of reflection at the internal coating is different, and the reflection phase is not shown to be π/2 for both polarization components. Because Eq. (8) is the theoretical backbone for all subsequent experimental claims, this assumption is load-bearing rather than a detail. Please add an independent determination of the CBS reflection operation, for example by sending a known LG mode through the reflected arm alone and measuring the output mode and relative phase, and use the result to update Eqs. (6)-(9). The paper's own caveat in §5 that the CBS has an angular-dependent phase shift (Ref. [40]) makes this verification necessary; any deviation from π/2 changes the relative phase between the c_R and c_L components and moves the output to a different point on the higher-order Poincaré sphere than the one claimed.
[§5, Figs. 2-4] The experimental validation is qualitative: agreement between theory and experiment is judged visually, and the measured Stokes images are not compared numerically with the simulations. Since the theory already encodes the unverified CBS phase and mode-inversion assumptions, visually similar patterns are not a strong independent check; a range of phase errors near π/2 would still produce recognizable radial or azimuthal patterns. Please provide a quantitative fidelity metric, for example normalized root-mean-square errors of S1, S2, and S3, a correlation coefficient between measured and predicted Stokes images, or measured S3 statistics, for the cases in Figs. 2 and 4, and state the implied uncertainty in the CBS phase.

minor comments (4)

[§3, after Eq. (7)] The transformation of U3' and U4' into U3 and U4 by the quarter-wave plate at 45° is not written explicitly; please include the QWP Jones matrix or specify the convention for c_R and c_L so that the sign of θ in Eq. (8) is unambiguous.
[§5] The statement that deviations are attributed to the angular dependence of the CBS cites Ref. [40], which concerns polarizing beam-splitter cubes; please clarify how this reference applies to the non-polarizing BS013 used here and give a quantitative estimate of the expected phase variation.
[§3, Eqs. (4)-(5)] The phase difference between the ordinary and extraordinary paths in the beam displacer is neglected with a note that it can be compensated through θ, but no calibration is described; please state whether the waveplates were used to cancel this phase and how the residual was assessed.
[Abstract and §4] The phrase 'a single vortex beam' could be read as a fixed input mode; because the topological charge m is changed between measurements to obtain the different families, please clarify that the input vortex charge is a control parameter.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the output field is a genuine model prediction from independently controlled input parameters, not a fit or self-citation result.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained: Eq. (8) is obtained by applying explicit, stated transformation rules to the input field Eq. (2): the beam displacer separates the polarization components, the cube beamsplitter transmits a replica while reflecting with a pi/2 phase shift and an m-to-minus-m inversion taken from the external Dove-prism result of Ref. [38], and the quarter-wave plate converts the basis to circular polarization. No parameter is fitted to the output field; alpha, theta, and m are independently controlled input variables, and the measured Stokes parameters are compared with the theoretical field rather than used to infer it. There are no self-citations carrying the argument; the cited Dove-prism OAM inversion is an external result, and the claim that a cube beamsplitter reflection behaves analogously is an assumption that could be wrong but is not circular. The acknowledged angular-dependent phase shift introduced by the CBS [40] is a limitation and error source, not a circular step. Under the stated rules, no equation or claim reduces by construction to its own inputs, so the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No parameters are fitted to data; alpha, theta, and m are experimentally controlled inputs. The central derivation relies on three component-level assumptions about the beam displacer, the cube beamsplitter reflection, and the quarter-wave plate. No new physical entities are introduced.

assumptions (3)

domain assumption Reflection at the cube beamsplitter inverts OAM helicity (m to -m) and imparts a pi/2 phase shift, equivalent to a Dove prism, for both incident polarizations.
This behavior is essential for generating the superposition in Eqs. (6) and (7); it is assumed based on Ref. [38] (Gonzalez et al.) and is not directly measured in this experiment.
domain assumption The beam displacer separates the input into two orthogonally polarized beams with identical spatial mode and no relative phase.
Eqs. (4) and (5) assume the two output beams are copies of the LG mode with only amplitude and polarization differences; the authors state a phase difference may arise but was neglected and not compensated in the experiments.
standard math The quarter-wave plate at 45 degrees converts the Cartesian polarization basis to the circular basis c_R = x - i y, c_L = x + i y.
Used to obtain Eqs. (8) and (9); standard Jones calculus for a quarter-wave plate.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Cylindrical vector beam generator using a two-element interferometer." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/OYFGD55P

@misc{pith2026190807562,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Cylindrical vector beam generator using a two-element interferometer},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/OYFGD55P}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.07562}
}

read the original abstract

We realize a robust and compact cylindrical vector beam generator which consists of a simple two-element interferometer composed of a beam displacer and a cube beamsplitter. The interferometer operates on the higher-order Poincare sphere transforming a homogeneously polarized vortex into a cylindrical vector (CV) beam. We experimentally demonstrate the transformation of a single vortex beam into all the well-known CV beams and show the operations on the higher-order Poincare sphere according to the control parameters. Our method offers an alternative to the Pancharatnam-Berry phase optical elements and has the potential to be implemented as a monolithic device.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.07562 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** Experimentally generated cylindrical vector beams. The results [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Experimental measurement of the output polarization patterns [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (2 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Experimentally generated higher-order polarization singularities. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Visual representation of the input and output polarization states [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

40 extracted references · 40 canonical work pages

[40]

Larry Pezzaniti and Russell A

J. Larry Pezzaniti and Russell A. Chipman. Angular dependence of polarizing beam-splitter cubes. Applied Optics, 33:1916, 1994. 17

work page 1916
[38]

Gonz´ alez, Gabriel Molina-Terriza, and Juan P

N. Gonz´ alez, Gabriel Molina-Terriza, and Juan P. Torres. How a dove prism transforms the orbital angular momentum of a light beam. Opt. Express, 14:9093, 2006

work page 2006
[1]

Brown and Qiwen Zhan

Thomas G. Brown and Qiwen Zhan. Focus issue: Unconventional po- larization states of light. Opt. Express, 18:10775–10776, 2010

work page 2010
[2]

Cylindrical vector beams: from mathematical concepts to applications

Qiwen Zhan. Cylindrical vector beams: from mathematical concepts to applications. Advances in Optics and Photonics , 1:1–57, 2009

work page 2009
[3]

Vectorial optical ﬁelds: recent advances and future prospects

Jian Chen, Chenhao Wan, and Qiwen Zhan. Vectorial optical ﬁelds: recent advances and future prospects. Science Bulletin, 63:54–74, 2018

work page 2018
[4]

Galvez, Shreeya Khadka, William H

Enrique J. Galvez, Shreeya Khadka, William H. Schubert, and Sean Nomoto. Poincar´ e-beam patterns produced by nonseparable superpo- sitions of Laguerre–Gauss and polarization modes of light. Appl. Opt., 51:2925–2934, 2012

work page 2012
[5]

A new type of vector ﬁelds with hybrid states of polarization

Xi-Lin Wang, Yongnan Li, Jing Chen, Cheng-Shan Guo, Jianping Ding, and Hui-Tian Wang. A new type of vector ﬁelds with hybrid states of polarization. Opt. Express, 18:10786–10795, 2010

work page 2010
[6]

Tailored intensity landscapes by tight focusing of singular vector beams

Eileen Otte, Kemal Tekce, and Cornelia Denz. Tailored intensity landscapes by tight focusing of singular vector beams. Opt. Express , 25:20194–20201, 2017

work page 2017

Show all 40 references

[7]

Polarization ﬂowers

Isaac Freund. Polarization ﬂowers. Opt. Comm., 199:47–63, 2001

2001
[8]

Tight focusing of spirally polarized vortex beams

Jixiong Pu and Zhiming Zhang. Tight focusing of spirally polarized vortex beams. Optics & Laser Technology, 42:186–191, 2010. 13

2010
[9]

Porﬁrev, Andrey V

Alexey P. Porﬁrev, Andrey V. Ustinov, and Svetlana N. Khonina. Polar- ization conversion when focusing cylindrically polarized vortex beams. Scientiﬁc Reports, 6:6, 2016

2016
[10]

Biss, Kathleen S

David P. Biss, Kathleen S. Youngworth, and Thomas G. Brown. Dark- ﬁeld imaging with cylindrical-vector beams. Applied Optics, 45:470–479, 2006

2006
[11]

Hell and Jan Wichmann

Stefan W. Hell and Jan Wichmann. Breaking the diﬀraction resolution limit by stimulated emission: stimulated-emission-depletion ﬂuorescence microscopy. Optics Letters, 19:780–782, 1994

1994
[12]

David G. Grier. A revolution in optical manipulation. Nature, 424:810, 2003

2003
[13]

Optical cage generated by azimuthal- and radial-variant vector beams

Zhongsheng Man, Zhidong Bai, Jinjian Li, Shuoshuo Zhang, Xiaoyu Li, Yuquan Zhang, Xiaolu Ge, and Shenggui Fu. Optical cage generated by azimuthal- and radial-variant vector beams. Applied Optics, 57:3592– 3597, 2018

2018
[14]

Turpin, V

A. Turpin, V. Shvedov, C. Hnatovsky, Yu V. Loiko, J. Mompart, and W. Krolikowski. Optical vault: A reconﬁgurable bottle beam based on conical refraction of light. Optics Express, 21:26335–26340, 2013

2013
[15]

Cre- ation of tunable multiple 3d dark spots with cylindrical vector beam

Xiaoyu Weng, Xiumin Gao, Hanming Guo, and Songlin Zhuang. Cre- ation of tunable multiple 3d dark spots with cylindrical vector beam. Applied Optics, 53:2470–2476, 2014

2014
[16]

Microdrilling in steel using ultrashort pulsed laser beams with radial and azimuthal polarization

Martin Kraus, Marwan Abdou Ahmed, Andreas Michalowski, Andreas Voss, Rudolf Weber, and Thomas Graf. Microdrilling in steel using ultrashort pulsed laser beams with radial and azimuthal polarization. Optics Express, 18:22305–22313, 2010

2010
[17]

Shvedov, and Wieslaw Krolikowski

Cyril Hnatovsky, Vladlen G. Shvedov, and Wieslaw Krolikowski. The role of light-induced nanostructures in femtosecond laser micromachin- ing with vector and scalar pulses. Optics Express, 21:12651–12656, 2013

2013
[18]

Optical-vortex laser ablation

Junichi Hamazaki, Ryuji Morita, Keisuke Chujo, Yusuke Kobayashi, Satoshi Tanda, and Takashige Omatsu. Optical-vortex laser ablation. Optics Express, 18:2144–2151, 2010. 14

2010
[19]

Shvedov, Natalia Shostka, Andrei V

Cyril Hnatovsky, Vladlen G. Shvedov, Natalia Shostka, Andrei V. Rode, and Wieslaw Krolikowski. Polarization-dependent ablation of silicon us- ing tightly focused femtosecond laser vortex pulses.Optics Lett., 37:226– 228, 2012

2012
[20]

Padgett, Mikhail Vas- netsov, Valeriy Pasko, Stephen M

Graham Gibson, Johannes Courtial, Miles J. Padgett, Mikhail Vas- netsov, Valeriy Pasko, Stephen M. Barnett, and Sonja Franke-Arnold. Free-space information transfer using light beams carrying orbital an- gular momentum. Optics Express, 12:5448–5456, 2004

2004
[21]

Willner, and Siddharth Ramachandran

Nenad Bozinovic, Yang Yue, Yongxiong Ren, Moshe Tur, Poul Kris- tensen, Hao Huang, Alan E. Willner, and Siddharth Ramachandran. Terabit-scale orbital angular momentum mode division multiplexing in ﬁbers. Science, 340:1545–1548, 2013

2013
[22]

Generation of a radially polarized laser beam by use of a conical Brewster prism

Yuichi Kozawa and Shunichi Sato. Generation of a radially polarized laser beam by use of a conical Brewster prism. Optics Letters, 30:3063– 3065, 2005

2005
[23]

Vogel, and Thomas Graf

Marwan Abdou Ahmed, Andreas Voss, Moritz M. Vogel, and Thomas Graf. Multilayer polarizing grating mirror used for the generation of radial polarization in yb:yag thin-disk lasers. Optics Letters, 32:3272– 3274, 2007

2007
[24]

Si- multaneous generation of multiple vector beams on a single SLM.Optics Express, 25:25697–25706, 2017

Carmelo Rosales-Guzm´ an, Nkosiphile Bhebhe, and Andrew Forbes. Si- multaneous generation of multiple vector beams on a single SLM.Optics Express, 25:25697–25706, 2017

2017
[25]

Generation of arbitrary vector beams with a spatial light modulator and a common path interferometric arrangement

Xi-Lin Wang, Jianping Ding, Wei-Jiang Ni, Cheng-Shan Guo, and Hui- Tian Wang. Generation of arbitrary vector beams with a spatial light modulator and a common path interferometric arrangement. Optics Letters, 32:3549–3551, 2007

2007
[26]

Generation of vector beam with space-variant distribution of both polarization and phase

Hao Chen, Jingjing Hao, Bai-Fu Zhang, Ji Xu, Jianping Ding, and Hui- Tian Wang. Generation of vector beam with space-variant distribution of both polarization and phase. Opt. Lett., 36:3179–81, 2011

2011
[27]

An eﬃcient and robust scheme for controlling the states of polarization in a sagnac interferometric con- ﬁguration

Si-Min Li, Sheng-Xia Qian, Ling-Jun Kong, Zhi-Cheng Ren, Yongnan Li, Chenghou Tu, and Hui-Tian Wang. An eﬃcient and robust scheme for controlling the states of polarization in a sagnac interferometric con- ﬁguration. Europhysics Letters, 105:64006, 2014. 15

2014
[28]

Compact, ro- bust, and high-eﬃciency generator of vector optical ﬁelds

Rui Liu, Ling-Jun Kong, Wen-Rong Qi, Shuang-Yin Huang, Zhou-Xiang Wang, Chenghou Tu, Yongnan Li, and Hui-Tian Wang. Compact, ro- bust, and high-eﬃciency generator of vector optical ﬁelds. Optics Let- ters, 44:2382–2385, 2019

2019
[29]

J. P. Balthasar Mueller, Noah A. Rubin, Robert C. Devlin, Benedikt Groever, and Federico Capasso. Metasurface polarization optics: In- dependent phase control of arbitrary orthogonal states of polarization. Phys. Rev. Lett., 118:113901, 2017

2017
[30]

Polarization pattern of vector vortex beams generated by q-plates with diﬀerent topological charges

Filippo Cardano, Ebrahim Karimi, Sergei Slussarenko, Lorenzo Mar- rucci, Corrado de Lisio, and Enrico Santamato. Polarization pattern of vector vortex beams generated by q-plates with diﬀerent topological charges. Appl. Opt., 51:C1–C6, 2012

2012
[31]

Giovanni Milione, H. I. Sztul, D. A. Nolan, and R. R. Alfano. Higher- order poincar´ e sphere, stokes parameters, and the angular momentum of light. Physical Review Letters, 107:053601, 2011

2011
[32]

Evans, D

Giovanni Milione, S. Evans, D. A. Nolan, and R. R. Alfano. Higher order pancharatnam-berry phase and the angular momentum of light. Phys. Rev. Lett., 108:190401, 2012

2012
[33]

Classical and quantum properties of cylindri- cally polarized states of light

Annemarie Holleczek, Andrea Aiello, Christian Gabriel, Christoph Mar- quardt, and Gerd Leuchs. Classical and quantum properties of cylindri- cally polarized states of light. Optics Express, 19:9714, 2011

2011
[34]

Yao and Miles J

Alison M. Yao and Miles J. Padgett. Orbital angular momentum: ori- gins, behavior and applications. Adv. Opt. Photon. , 3, 2011

2011
[35]

Accurate encoding of arbitrary complex ﬁelds with amplitude-only liquid crystal spatial light modulators

Victor Arriz´ on, Guadalupe M´ endez, and David S´ anchez de La-Llave. Accurate encoding of arbitrary complex ﬁelds with amplitude-only liquid crystal spatial light modulators. Opt. Express, 13:7913–7927, 2005

2005
[36]

Mode transformations in terms of the constituent Hermite-Gaussian or Laguerre-Gaussian modes and the variable-phase mode converter

Anna T O Neil and Johannes Courtial. Mode transformations in terms of the constituent Hermite-Gaussian or Laguerre-Gaussian modes and the variable-phase mode converter. Optics Communications, 181:35–45, 2000

2000
[37]

Ferrari and Erna M

Jos´ e A. Ferrari and Erna M. Frins. Single-element interferometer.Optics Communications, 279:235–239, 2007. 16

2007
[39]

Polarized light and optical systems

Young G Chipman R A, Lam W T. Polarized light and optical systems . CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2019

2019

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [40]

Larry Pezzaniti and Russell A

J. Larry Pezzaniti and Russell A. Chipman. Angular dependence of polarizing beam-splitter cubes. Applied Optics, 33:1916, 1994. 17

work page 1916

[2] [38]

Gonz´ alez, Gabriel Molina-Terriza, and Juan P

N. Gonz´ alez, Gabriel Molina-Terriza, and Juan P. Torres. How a dove prism transforms the orbital angular momentum of a light beam. Opt. Express, 14:9093, 2006

work page 2006

[3] [1]

Brown and Qiwen Zhan

Thomas G. Brown and Qiwen Zhan. Focus issue: Unconventional po- larization states of light. Opt. Express, 18:10775–10776, 2010

work page 2010

[4] [2]

Cylindrical vector beams: from mathematical concepts to applications

Qiwen Zhan. Cylindrical vector beams: from mathematical concepts to applications. Advances in Optics and Photonics , 1:1–57, 2009

work page 2009

[5] [3]

Vectorial optical ﬁelds: recent advances and future prospects

Jian Chen, Chenhao Wan, and Qiwen Zhan. Vectorial optical ﬁelds: recent advances and future prospects. Science Bulletin, 63:54–74, 2018

work page 2018

[6] [4]

Galvez, Shreeya Khadka, William H

Enrique J. Galvez, Shreeya Khadka, William H. Schubert, and Sean Nomoto. Poincar´ e-beam patterns produced by nonseparable superpo- sitions of Laguerre–Gauss and polarization modes of light. Appl. Opt., 51:2925–2934, 2012

work page 2012

[7] [5]

A new type of vector ﬁelds with hybrid states of polarization

Xi-Lin Wang, Yongnan Li, Jing Chen, Cheng-Shan Guo, Jianping Ding, and Hui-Tian Wang. A new type of vector ﬁelds with hybrid states of polarization. Opt. Express, 18:10786–10795, 2010

work page 2010

[8] [6]

Tailored intensity landscapes by tight focusing of singular vector beams

Eileen Otte, Kemal Tekce, and Cornelia Denz. Tailored intensity landscapes by tight focusing of singular vector beams. Opt. Express , 25:20194–20201, 2017

work page 2017