Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 32 references

Frequency-Domain Joint Monitoring of Differential Group Delay and Dependent Loss of Optical Singleand Few-Mode Fiber Channels Based on CAZAC Sequences

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that CAZAC training sequences already in the frame let a coherent receiver monitor differential group delay and dependent loss across polarization- or mode-multiplexed channels, with experimental errors below 0.3 ps and…

desk verdict A credible CAZAC-based monitoring scheme with a real 2x2 experiment, but the 4x4 leg is synthetic and the DGD estimator's frequency-step assumption is undisclosed. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.24589 v1 pith:XSGOAPMO submitted 2025-05-30 physics.optics

Linsheng Fan , Gao Ye , Zhongliang Sun , Lingguo Cao , Hao Shi , Jianwei Tang , Shunfeng Wang , Hengying Xu
show 4 more authors
Chenglin Bai Jian Zhao Weisheng Hu Jinlong Wei
This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.optics
keywords CAZACsequencesopticalperformancemonitoringdifferentialgroupdelaypolarization-dependentlossmode-dependentmode-divisionmultiplexingcoherentDSPin-service
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 tries to show that a coherent optical receiver can monitor two multidimensional channel impairments—differential group delay (DGD) and dependent loss (DL)—at the same time and without stopping traffic, using only the constant-amplitude zero-autocorrelation (CAZAC) training sequences already transmitted for synchronization and channel estimation. The channel is treated as an m-by-m MIMO system, and its frequency response is estimated from the CAZAC sequences; singular-value decomposition of that response yields DL, while the ratio of the response at neighboring frequencies yields DGD. Experiments in a 2x2 polarization-multiplexed link and a 4x4 two-mode few-mode-fiber link report DL errors below 0.3 dB and DGD errors below 0.3 ps across the tested impairment ranges. If correct, this would give operators a hardware-free, in-service monitoring capability that scales with the number of spatial and polarization dimensions.

What carries the argument

CAZAC sequences, whose spectra are flat and whose autocorrelation is a single spike, are sent in every transmission dimension with distinct cyclic shifts. Their ideal cross-correlation lets the receiver separate each input-output impulse response $h_{p,q}[n]$ by time-domain filtering, and an FFT converts that into the full frequency-response matrix $\mathbf{H}(\omega_k)$. The two monitoring operations are then matrix decompositions: an SVD of $\mathbf{H}(\omega_k)$ for DL, and an SVD of $\mathbf{D}(\omega_k)=\mathbf{H}(\omega_{k+1})\mathbf{H}^{-1}(\omega_k)$ for DGD, with the DGD read from $\arg\{\mu_{p,k}/\mu_{q,k}\}/(\omega_{k+1}-\omega_k)$. This machinery is what makes the scheme independent of dimensionality and compatible with existing coherent DSP.

What would settle it

Set up a fiber with known strong mode coupling or add a known amount of higher-order PMD, then compare the eigenphases of $\mathbf{H}(\omega_{k+1})\mathbf{H}^{-1}(\omega_k)$ against the true group delays: if the estimated DGD deviates from the true value by more than the claimed 0.3 ps as the frequency step grows, the constant-coupling assumption is violated.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that both DGD and DL can be recovered from the estimated channel frequency-response matrix $\mathbf{H}(\omega)$ in one pass, for any number of transmission dimensions. DL is frequency-independent, so it is read off from the singular values of $\mathbf{H}(\omega)$ at a single frequency after removing chromatic dispersion and carrier phase noise. DGD is frequency-dependent, so it is read off from the eigenphases of $\mathbf{D}(\omega_k)=\mathbf{H}(\omega_{k+1})\mathbf{H}^{-1}(\omega_k)$, where frequency-independent phase contributions cancel. The paper validates the claim experimentally with a 2x2 polarization-division-multiplexing link and a 4x4 two-mode mode-division-multiplexing link, reporting errors below 0.3 dB for PDL/MDL and below 0.3 ps for PMD/DMGD under joint impairments, fast polarization scrambling, and varied OSNR.

Load-bearing premise

The whole DGD extraction depends on the fiber's coupling matrices and carrier phase noise staying frequency-independent between adjacent frequency bins, so that $\mathbf{H}(\omega_{k+1})\mathbf{H}^{-1}(\omega_k)$ contains only pure delay phases; if coupling changes appreciably within that step, higher-order PMD and coupling dispersion leak into the DGD estimate.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A coherent receiver that already uses CAZAC training symbols can add DGD and DL monitoring with no extra optics, no added hardware, and no interruption of live traffic.
  • The same estimation pipeline works for PDM (2x2 MIMO) and two-mode MDM (4x4 MIMO) with similar error bounds, supporting the claim of dimensional scalability.
  • PDL/MDL and PMD/DMGD can be reported simultaneously; the experiments show each estimate stays accurate while the other impairment is varied.
  • Monitoring accuracy has a known floor near zero DL, because the eigenvalue-based DL estimate is contaminated by SNR, a limitation the paper states explicitly.
  • Because the method is modulation-format transparent and sits inside the DSP, it can be added to existing coherent transceivers without calibration downtime.

Reading between the lines

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

  • I infer that the same estimated channel frequency response could also yield chromatic dispersion estimates, since CD is included in the model, but the paper's experiments do not demonstrate CD monitoring, so this is an extension rather than a claim.
  • The quoted error bounds come from controlled emulators and offline DSP; field deployment would need to test how often the CAZAC training sequence must be reinserted as polarization and mode coupling drift, which the paper does not address.
  • Quantifying the maximum acceptable frequency step as a function of mode-coupling strength would turn the constant-coupling-per-step assumption into an engineering bound; the paper leaves this as future work.
  • The dimensionality claim is plausible because the math is written for an m-by-m matrix, but strong mode coupling with rapidly varying coupling matrices could violate the constant-coupling assumption, and the paper tests two-mode homogeneous few-mode fiber rather than strongly coupled multimode fiber.
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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a frequency-domain optical performance monitoring method for coherent MIMO fiber channels based on CAZAC training sequences. The channel frequency response H(ω_k) is estimated by exploiting the perfect autocorrelation of CAZAC sequences and cyclic shifts among dimensions. DL is obtained from the singular values of W(ω_k)=H(ω_k)H^H(ω_k), which cancels common phase terms; DGD is extracted from the eigenphases of D(ω_k)=H(ω_{k+1})H^{-1}(ω_k), under the claim that carrier phase noise and inter-channel coupling are frequency-independent over the adjacent frequency bins. Experiments include a 2×2 PDM link over SSMF with emulated PDL and DGD, and a 4×4 MDM setup where MDL and DMGD are injected digitally at the receiver. The paper reports DL estimation errors below 0.3 dB and DGD errors below 0.3 ps across the tested ranges.

Significance. If the DGD extraction is valid, the scheme is a useful in-service monitoring method: it uses training sequences already embedded in the frame, requires no additional optics or high-bandwidth equipment, and is in principle extendable to higher dimensions. The CAZAC-based channel estimation is well founded: the ideal autocorrelation property cleanly separates MIMO impulse responses, and the DL extraction via HH^H is a sensible way to remove delay phases and CD. The 2×2 experiments are fairly extensive, sweeping emulated PDL, DGD, RSOP up to 20 Mrad/s, and OSNR, and the 4×4 experiments use multiple random seeds with consistent errors. The main weakness is that the DGD estimator's validity rests on an unstated and untested frequency-independence assumption, and the key experimental parameters are not reported.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section II.D, Eq. (16)] The extraction of DGDp,q from the eigenvalues of D(ω_k)=H(ω_{k+1})H^{-1}(ω_k) assumes that the coupling matrices U_l and V_l in Eq. (2) are frequency-independent over the adjacent-bin spacing Δω=ω_{k+1}-ω_k. This assumption is not justified, and it is exactly what real frequency-dependent polarization and mode coupling would violate; the resulting eigenphases would mix true DGD with higher-order PMD and coupling dispersion. The manuscript does not report the CAZAC length N, the bin spacing Δω, the number of frequency points M_f, or the signal bandwidth used for monitoring, so the reader cannot assess whether Δω is small compared with the channel correlation bandwidth. Please report these parameters and add an experiment or simulation with frequency-dependent coupling matrices.
  2. [Section IV.A, Eq. (21)] The 4×4 validation injects MDL and DMGD after reception using a random 4×4 SOP matrix that is frequency-independent by construction, and the 20-m FMF link has its inherent DMGD trimmed out with delay lines. This procedure cannot falsify the frequency-independence assumption because the injected coupling does not vary with frequency. The reported ~0.3 ps DMGD accuracy therefore only demonstrates self-consistency of the estimator under its own hypothesis; it does not validate the method under realistic frequency-dependent mode coupling. A validation that includes wavelength-dependent coupling (for example, emulating two or more coupling sections with different SOP matrices, or using a fiber length with known DMGD) is needed.
  3. [Section II.D and Fig. 3(b)] The eigenvalue sorting and phase-unwrapping strategy for the eigenvalues μ_{p,k} is not described. Without a defined ordering across frequency points, the pairing of the m eigenvalues and the assignment of DGDp,q are ambiguous, and the reported accuracy could depend on an undocumented sorting rule. Please specify the algorithm and its parameter choices.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section II.B, Eq. (6)] The CAZAC sequence definition in Eq. (6) is garbled in the typeset text; the formula is not legible, and the index range of n is inconsistent with the surrounding description. Please correct the equation.
  2. [References] Reference [13] (J.-S. Chen et al., grating profile optimization) does not appear to support the time-of-flight DMGD measurement statement; please replace it with a proper citation for time-of-flight DMGD measurement.
  3. [Section II.B] The cyclic shift interval is set to N/4, but the choice of N is not discussed. Since the shift must exceed the channel impulse response length, a criterion for selecting N and the shift would improve reproducibility.
  4. [Figures 5-12] The figure captions are often too terse; they should state the fixed parameters and the number of trials for each panel. The figure callouts in the text (e.g., CAZAC.Est 1–5) are not defined in the captions.
  5. [Abstract and Conclusion] The overhead of the periodic CAZAC training sequence is not quantified; please provide the frame structure and state the training overhead percentage relative to payload data.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: DGD and DL estimates are read from CAZAC-derived channel matrices via SVD and inter-frequency matrix ratios, then validated against physical emulator presets and known injected values; the untested frequency-independence of coupling is a validation gap, not a circular reduction.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained rather than circular. Channel estimation (Eqs. 9-11) uses standard CAZAC correlation properties to recover h[n] and hence H(omega_k); DL is then read from the SVD eigenvalues of the estimated H (Eqs. 12-15), and DGD from the eigenvalues of the inter-frequency matrix ratio D(omega_k)=H(omega_{k+1})H^{-1}(omega_k) (Eq. 16). No parameter of the estimator is fitted to the preset DGD or DL values: in the 2x2 experiments the targets are physical emulator settings (PDLE-100 and PE4200) and in the 4x4 experiments they are digitally injected matrices with known rho_i and tau_i. The self-citations [10] and [31] are used only for context and for the auxiliary low-PDL SNR-bias explanation (Eq. 20); they do not define or force the monitored quantities. The DGD step does assume U and V in Eq. (2) are frequency-independent over Delta omega, and the 4x4 validation injects a frequency-independent coupling matrix, so that experiment does not test this assumption; that is a validation scope limitation, not a case where the prediction is equivalent to its input by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard CAZAC properties, a linear MIMO AWGN channel model, and a frequency-independence assumption for coupling and phase noise that is not quantified. The CAZAC length N, the cyclic shift N/4, and the frequency step are hand-chosen design parameters, not fitted to the target impairments. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (4)
  • CAZAC sequence length N = not reported
    TS length controls channel estimation accuracy and must exceed the expected channel impulse response length, but the paper never states N; it is a hand-chosen design parameter.
  • Cyclic shift interval N/4 = N/4
    Chosen to separate the four MIMO subchannels in time; valid only if channel memory is shorter than N/4, which is asserted but not measured.
  • Frequency spacing omega_{k+1} - omega_k = not reported
    DGD is extracted from the eigenphase of H(omega_{k+1})H^{-1}(omega_k); the step size determines the unambiguous DGD range and the validity of the first-order approximation, but no value is given.
  • Number of frequency points M_f = not reported
    Averaging DL estimates across frequency points is part of the method, but M_f is never specified.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Fiber channel is linear and the noise is AWGN
    Section II.A Eq. (1); nonlinear effects and non-Gaussian noise are neglected, standard for coherent OPM but unstated in scope.
  • standard math CAZAC sequences have flat spectra and one-tap autocorrelation
    Section II.B Eqs. (6)-(7); this is a known property of CAZAC sequences.
  • ad hoc to paper Carrier phase noise and inter-channel coupling are frequency-independent over the frequency step used
    Section II.D; the paper states this to justify D(omega_k)=H(omega_{k+1})/H(omega_k), but real mode coupling matrices are frequency-dependent and the small-step approximation is not quantified.
  • domain assumption The cyclic shift interval N/4 exceeds the channel impulse response length
    Section II.B; otherwise the four shifted training sequences alias into each other during channel estimation.
  • domain assumption SVD of the CD-compensated channel matrix isolates DL and DGD in the diagonal singular-value matrix
    Section II.A Eq. (4); assumes a segmented model where each segment has deterministic impairments and random coupling is unitary.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Frequency-Domain Joint Monitoring of Differential Group Delay and Dependent Loss of Optical Singleand Few-Mode Fiber Channels Based on CAZAC Sequences." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/XSGOAPMO

@misc{pith2026250524589,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Frequency-Domain Joint Monitoring of Differential Group Delay and Dependent Loss of Optical Singleand Few-Mode Fiber Channels Based on CAZAC Sequences},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/XSGOAPMO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.24589}
}
read the original abstract

This paper addresses the challenges of monitoring optical-fiber channels subject to complex, multidimensional impairments-such as dynamic interference across polarization or modal dimensions-where conventional methods suffer from high equipment costs, poor impairment discrimination and limited scalability. We propose an in-service, frequency-domain joint monitoring scheme based on constant-amplitude zero-autocorrelation (CAZAC) sequences. Exploiting their flat spectra and ideal autocorrelation, we model the channel as a multi-input multi-output (MIMO) system and estimate its frequency response to extract both differential group delay (DGD) and dimension-dependent loss (DL) regardless of dimensionality. Experimental validation in polarization-division-multiplexing (PDM) and mode-division-multiplexing (MDM) scenarios demonstrates robust performance: in a 2x2 PDM setup, polarization-dependent loss (PDL) error stays below 0.3 dB and polarization-mode dispersion (PMD) accuracy is 0.3 ps; in a 4x4 MDM system, mode-dependent loss (MDL) and differential mode-group delay (DMGD) errors remain around 0.3 dB and 0.3 ps, respectively. Fully compatible with existing coherent DSP without additional hardware, the scheme enables continuous, cost-effective, real-time monitoring of multidimensional optical channels.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.24589 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Linear MIMO transmission channel model [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Schematic diagram of the design of TS in a dual-mode transmission system and the corresponding monitoring principles for PDL, DGD, MDL, and DMGD. The CAZAC sequences can be embedded in the transmission data stream as training data. When the CAZAC sequence is employed as the TS for channel estimation, its length should be determined according to the expected maximum channel impulse response. Since the accuracy of cha… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Estimation flowchart. (a) DL estimation process (b) DGD estimation process. Begin   ( ) ( ) ( ) SVD ( ) H    k k k  =  k W H H W 1, 2, , () , , , k k k m k Get the eigenvalues of        W 1, 2, , 10 1, 2, , max( , , , ) 10log min( , , , ) k k m k dB k k m k DL        =   End Begin   ( ) ( ) / ( ) SVD ( )    k k+1 k  =  k D H H D 1, 2, , () , , , k k k m k Get the eigenvalues of  … view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The monitoring accuracy (a) and stability (b) of PDL, as well as the monitoring accuracy (c) and stability (d) of DGD, under five different experimental conditions [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: At a fixed preset PDL of 3 dB, the monitoring accuracy (a) and stability (c) of PDL under varying DGD values, as well as the monitoring accuracy (b) and stability (d) of PDL under different RSOP values. indicates the number of frequency points employed for monitoring w…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The monitoring accuracy (a) and stability (b) of DGD with a fixed preset value of 20 ps under varying PDL values [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The monitoring accuracy (a) and stability (b) of DGD with a fixed preset value of 20 ps under varying RSOP values [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: The monitoring accuracy (a) and stability (b) of DGD with a fixed preset value of 20 ps under varying OSNR values. confirming the accuracy and robustness of the monitoring approach. Moreover, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_9.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

32 extracted references · 31 canonical work pages

  1. [10]

    Transceiver impairment robust and joint monitoring of PDL, DGD, and CD using frequency domain pilot tones for digital subcarrier multiplexing systems,

    L. Fan, Y. Yang, Q. Zhang, S. Gong, Y. Jia, C. Cheng, and Y. Yao, “Transceiver impairment robust and joint monitoring of PDL, DGD, and CD using frequency domain pilot tones for digital subcarrier multiplexing systems,” J. Opt. Commun. Netw., vol. 16, no. 8, pp. 822–831, 2024

    work page 2024

  2. [31]

    Robust PDL compensation and monitoring scheme using frequency domain pilot tones for coherent digital subcarrier multiplexing system ,

    L. Fan, Y. Yang, S. Gong, Q. Zhang, and Y. Yao, “Robust PDL compensation and monitoring scheme using frequency domain pilot tones for coherent digital subcarrier multiplexing system ,” J. Lightw. Technol , vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 136–148, Jan. 2024

    work page 2024

  3. [1]

    The future of communications is massively parallel

    P. J. Winzer, “The future of communications is massively parallel”, J. Opt. Commun. Netw., vol. 15, no. 10, pp. 783-787, Oct. 2023

    work page 2023

  4. [2]

    Chapter 7 - Optical performance monitoring,

    A. E. Willner, Z. Pan, and C. Yu, “ Chapter 7 - Optical performance monitoring,” in Optical Fiber Telecommunications V B (Fifth Edition) , I. P. Kaminow, T. Li, and A. E. Willner, Eds. Burlington: Academic Press, 2008, pp. 233–292

    work page 2008

  5. [3]

    Optical performance monitoring: A review of current and future technologies

    Z. Dong, F. N. Khan, Q. Sui, K. Zhong, C. Lu and A. P. T. Lau, “Optical performance monitoring: A review of current and future technologies ”, J. Lightw. Technol., vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 525-543, Jan. 2016

    work page 2016

  6. [4]

    Wide -dynamic-range DGD monitoring by partial optical signal spectrum DOP measurement,

    S. M. R. Motaghian Nezam, L. -S. Yan, J. E. McGeehan, Y. Q. Shi, A. E. Willner, and S. Yao, “Wide -dynamic-range DGD monitoring by partial optical signal spectrum DOP measurement,” in Proc. Opt. Fiber Commun. Conf. Exhib., Anaheim, California, Mar. 2002, pp. 924–926

    work page 2002

  7. [5]

    PMD estimation and its enabled feedforward adaptive equalization based on superimposed FrFT training sequences

    L. Wang, H. Jiang, H. He, F. Luo and M. Tang, “PMD estimation and its enabled feedforward adaptive equalization based on superimposed FrFT training sequences”, Opt. Lett., vol. 46, pp. 1526-1529, 2021

    work page 2021

  8. [6]

    Estimating network components polarization- dependent loss using performance statistical measurements,

    J. Girard -Jollet, M. Lonardi, P. Ramantanis, P. Serena, C. Lasagni, P. Layec, and J. -C. Antona, “Estimating network components polarization- dependent loss using performance statistical measurements,” in Proc. Eur. Conf. Opt. Commun., Sep. 2021, pp. 1–4

    work page 2021

Show all 32 references
  1. [7]

    Digital PDL compensation in 3D stokes space,

    N. J. Muga and A. N. Pinto, “Digital PDL compensation in 3D stokes space,” J. Lightw. Technol., vol. 31, no. 13, pp. 2122–2130, Jul. 2013

    2013

  2. [8]

    Joint DGD, PDL and chromatic dispersion estimation in ultra -long-haul WDM transmission experiments with coherent receivers,

    G. Bosco, R. Cigliutti, E. Torrengo, A. Carena, V. Curri, P. Poggiolini, and F. Forghieri, “Joint DGD, PDL and chromatic dispersion estimation in ultra -long-haul WDM transmission experiments with coherent receivers,” in Proc. Eur. Conf. Opt. Commun., Sep. 2010, pp. 1–3

    2010

  3. [9]

    Optical performance monitoring in digital coherent receivers,

    Fabian. N. Hauske, M. Kuschnerov, B. Spinnler, and B. Lankl, “Optical performance monitoring in digital coherent receivers,” J. Lightwave Technol., vol. 27, no. 16, pp. 3623–3631, Aug. 2009

    2009

  4. [11]

    Machine learning techniques for optical performance monitoring and modulation format identification: a survey,

    W. S. Saif, M. A. Esmail, A. M. Ragheb, T. A. Alshawi, and S. A. Alshebeili, “Machine learning techniques for optical performance monitoring and modulation format identification: a survey,” IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor., vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 2839–2882, Fourthquarter 2020

    2020

  5. [12]

    Joint CD, DGD, and PDL estimation enabled by FrFT based time-frequency reconstruction

    T. Jiang, Y. Xiang, L. Wang, and M. Tang, “Joint CD, DGD, and PDL estimation enabled by FrFT based time-frequency reconstruction” J. Lightwave Technol., vol. 41, no. 9, pp. 2623–2630, May 2023

    2023

  6. [13]

    Grating profile optimization for narrow -band or broad -band infrared emitters with differential evolution algorithms

    J.-S. Chen, P. D. Lin, F. -C. Chiu, and Y. -B. Chen, “Grating profile optimization for narrow -band or broad -band infrared emitters with differential evolution algorithms” Opt. Lett. , vol. 37, no. 16, pp. 3399 – 3401, Aug. 2012

    2012

  7. [14]

    DGD and dispersion measurement of few mode fibres based on mode excitation,

    Y. Liu, L. Zhang, L. Shen, X. Sun, S. Chen, and J. Li, “DGD and dispersion measurement of few mode fibres based on mode excitation,” in Asia Commun. Photon. Conf. , Guangzhou, Guangdong, Nov. 2017, p. M1J.5

    2017

  8. [15]

    Microwave interferometric technique for characterizing few mode fibers,

    L. Wang, C. Jin, Y. Messaddeq, and S. LaRochelle, “Microwave interferometric technique for characterizing few mode fibers,” IEEE Photonics Technol. Lett., vol. 26, no. 17, pp. 1695–1698, Sep. 2014

    2014

  9. [16]

    Simultaneous measurement of chromatic and modal dispersion in FMFs using microwave photonic techniques,

    Z. Yang, R. Mi, N. Zhao, L. Zhang, and G. Li, “Simultaneous measurement of chromatic and modal dispersion in FMFs using microwave photonic techniques,” IEEE Photonics J., vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 1–9, Jun. 2017

    2017

  10. [17]

    Simple and precise characterization of differential modal group delay arising in few -mode fiber,

    Z. Fu, J. Zhang, Z. Zhang, S. Fu, Y. Qin, L. Shen, M. Cheng, Q. Yang, M. Tang, D. Liu, and L. Deng, “Simple and precise characterization of differential modal group delay arising in few -mode fiber,” Opt. Lett., vol. 46, no. 12, pp. 2856–2859, Jun. 2021

    2021

  11. [18]

    Few mode transmission fiber with low DGD, low mode coupling, and low loss,

    L. Gruner-Nielsen, Y. Sun, J. W. Nicholson, D. Jakobsen, K. G. Jespersen, R. Lingle, and B. Palsdottir, “Few mode transmission fiber with low DGD, low mode coupling, and low loss, ” J. Lightwave Technol., vol. 30, no. 23, pp. 3693–3698, Dec. 2012

    2012

  12. [19]

    Spatially and spectrally resolved imaging of modal content in large - mode-area fibers ,

    J. W. Nicholson, A. D. Yablon, S. Ramachandran, and S. Ghalmi, “Spatially and spectrally resolved imaging of modal content in large - mode-area fibers ,” Opt. Express , vol. 16, no. 10, pp. 7233–7243, May 2008

    2008

  13. [20]

    Measurement of differential modal group delay of a few -mode fiber using a fourier domain mode - locked laser,

    V. Kelkar, S. Swain, and D . Venkitesh, “Measurement of differential modal group delay of a few -mode fiber using a fourier domain mode - locked laser,” Opt. Lett., vol. 43, no. 9, pp. 2165–2168, May 2018

    2018

  14. [21]

    Characterization of differential modal group delay in few -mode fiber using a digital re -sampling technique,

    Z. Ye, J. Li, Y. Qin, M. Xiang, and S. Fu, “Characterization of differential modal group delay in few -mode fiber using a digital re -sampling technique,” Opt. Lett., vol. 48, no. 2, p. 223, Jan. 2023

    2023

  15. [22]

    Multi -Path delay estimation for IM-DD system by power cepstrum,

    J. Liang, J. Tang, J. Wei, Z. Sun, L. Fan, Z. Xu, H. Ji, L. Liu, S. Wang, X. Li, T. Ji, Y. Yang, J. Li, Z. He, and W. Hu, “Multi -Path delay estimation for IM-DD system by power cepstrum,” J. Lightw. Technol., vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 1098–1105, Feb. 2025

    2025

  16. [23]

    Digital signal processing for MDG estimation in long -haul sdm transmission ,

    R. S. B. Ospina, D. A. A. Mello, L. Zischler, R. S. Luí s, B. J. Puttnam, H. Furukawa, M. v. d. Hout, S. van der Heide, C. Okonkwo, R. Ryf, and G. Rademacher, “Digital signal processing for MDG estimation in long -haul sdm transmission ,” J. Lightw. Technol. , vol. 42, no. 3, ...

    2024

  17. [24]

    J. N. Damask, Polarization optics in telecommunications , vol. 101. Springer Science & Business Media, 2004

    2004

  18. [25]

    Statistics of group delays in multimode fiber with strong mode coupling,

    K. -P. Ho and J. M. Kahn, “Statistics of group delays in multimode fiber with strong mode coupling, ” J. Lightw. Technol. , vol. 29, no. 21, pp. 3119–3128, Nov. 2011

    2011

  19. [26]

    S. S. Haykin, Adaptive filter theory. Pearson Education India, 2002

    2002

  20. [27]

    Automated measurement of polarization mode dispersion using jones matrix migenanalysis,

    B. L. Heffner, “Automated measurement of polarization mode dispersion using jones matrix migenanalysis, ” IEEE Photon. Technol. Lett., vol. 4, pp. 1066-1069, 1992

    1992

  21. [28]

    Some unique properties and applications of perfect squares minimum phase CAZAC sequences,

    U. H. Rohrs and L. P. Linde, “Some unique properties and applications of perfect squares minimum phase CAZAC sequences,” in Proc. South Afr. Symp. Commun. Signal Process, Cape Down, South Africa, Sep. 1992, pp. 155–160

    1992

  22. [29]

    Training -Aided frequency-domain channel estimation and equalization for single -carrier coherent optical transmission systems,

    F. Pittalà, I. Slim, A. Mezghani, and J. A. Nossek, “Training -Aided frequency-domain channel estimation and equalization for single -carrier coherent optical transmission systems,” J. Lightw. Technol. , vol. 32, no. 24, pp. 4849–4863, Dec. 2014

    2014

  23. [30]

    Mode -dependent loss and gain: Statistics and effe ct on mode -division multiplexing,

    K.-P. Ho and J. M. Kahn, “Mode -dependent loss and gain: Statistics and effe ct on mode -division multiplexing,” Opt. Exp. , vol. 19, no. 17, pp. 16612–16635, 2011

    2011

  24. [32]

    Mode -Dependent loss and gain estimation in sdm transmission based on MMSE equalizers,

    R. S. B. Ospina, M. van den Hout, J. C. Alvarado -Zacarias, J. E. Antonio- Ló pez, M. Bigot-Astruc, A. A. Correa, P. Sillard, R. Amezcua -Correa, C. Okonkwo, and D. A. A. Mello, “Mode -Dependent loss and gain estimation in sdm transmission based on MMSE equalizers,” J. Lightwa...

    1968

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.