Studies of Nonlinear Femtosecond Pulse Propagation in
Bulk Materials
byHilary K. Eaton
B.S. Furman University 1993

A thesis submitted to the
Faculty of the Graduate School of the
University of Colorado in partial fulfillmentof the requirements for the degree ofDoctor of Philosophy
Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry1999This thesis entitled:
Studies of Nonlinear Femtosecond Pulse Propagation in Bulk Materials
written by Hilary K. Eaton
has been approved for the Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry

Stephen R. Leone

Tracy S. Clement

Date

The final copy of this thesis has been examined by the signatories, and we find thatboth the content and the form meet acceptable presentation standards of scholarly
work in the above mentioned discipline.

iii
Eaton, Hilary K. (Ph. D.)
Studies of Nonlinear Femtosecond Pulse Propagation in Bulk Materials
Thesis directed by Professor Stephen R. Leone

Femtosecond pulse lasers are finding widespread application in a variety of fields
including medical research, optical switching and communications, plasma formation,high harmonic generation, and wavepacket formation and control. As the number ofapplications for femtosecond pulses increases, so does the need to fully understand thelinear and nonlinear processes involved in propagating these pulses through materials
under various conditions. Recent advances in pulse measurement techniques, such as
frequency-resolved optical gating (FROG), allow measurement of the full electric fieldof the pulse and have made detailed investigations of short-pulse propagation effects
feasible.
In this thesis, I present detailed experimental studies of my work involving nonlinear propagation of femtosecond pulses in bulk media. Studies of plane-wave propagation in fused silica extend the SHG form of FROG from a simple pulse diagnostic toa useful method of interrogating the nonlinear response of a material.
Studies of nonlinear propagation are also performed in a regime where temporalpulse splitting occurs. Experimental results are compared with a three-dimensional
nonlinear Schrödinger equation. This comparison fuels the development of a more
complete model for pulse splitting.
Experiments are also performed at peak input powers above those at which pulse
splitting is observed. At these higher intensities, a broadband continuum is generated.
This work presents a detailed study of continuum behavior and power loss as wellas the first near-field spatial-spectral measurements of the generated continuum light.
Nonlinear plane-wave propagation of short pulses in liquids is also investigated, andiv
a non-instantaneous nonlinearity with a surprisingly short response time of 10 fs isobserved in methanol. Experiments in water confirm that this effect in methanol is
indeed real. Possible explanations for the observed effect are discussed and several areexperimentally rejected.
This thesis applies FROG as a powerful tool for science and not just a useful pulse
diagnostic technique. Studies of three-dimensional propagation provide an in-depth
understanding of the processes involved in femtosecond pulse splitting. In addition, theexperimental investigations of continuum generation and pulse propagation in liquids
provide new insights into the possible processes involved and should provide a usefulcomparison for developing theories.

“Truth gains more even by the errors of one who, with due study and preparation,
thinks for himself than by the true opinions of those who only hold them because they
do not suffer themselves to think.” –John Stuart Mill

Acknowledgements

First and foremost, I would like to acknowledge and thank my advisor, Tracy
Clement. Although graduate school rules prevent her from being listed as such, Tracy
has served as my primary advisor for the duration of the work presented in this thesis.
Tracy took me on as her first graduate student despite the fact that my background inphysics was nearly non-existent. With much patience and effort, she was able to bringme up to speed quickly. I am very grateful for the opportunities and guidance she has
provided. I would also like to thank her for sticking by me even when her own life took
her in a new direction.
I would also like to thank Carl Koval of the Chemistry department for facing
the angry mob and encouraging me to continue with my graduate studies during aparticularly difficult time. Carl is one of the department’s greatest assets, and shouldbe acknowledged as such. JILA and especially Steve Leone deserve my gratitude forproviding me with support after Tracy accepted a new position. I am thankful thatyou kept me from slipping through the proverbial cracks, allowing me to complete thisdegree.
There are several people who contributed both to the work in this thesis and to
my development as a scientist. Scott Diddams is the post-doc with whom I worked
on several projects. Scott is a very capable scientist whose leadership and ability to
explain complicated concepts in an understandable fashion are remarkable. I would
like to extend a special thank-you to Alex Zozulya who developed much of the theory

vii
to explain our experimental data. I would also like to thank Amy Van Engen for many
enlightening and enjoyable discussions. Amy often served as a sounding-board for myideas and helped me to refine and develop them. Amy was also always available as afriend in both good and bad times. Amy, you are a wonderful and unique person, and I
will always treasure your friendship.
This brings me to the people “behind the scenes” who have provided comfort,
support and friendship through some very stressful and difficult times. Two very special
people who deserve mention are my sister, Mandi, and Lisa LePome. Mandi moved toColorado after my first year of graduate school. Since then she has been a constantsource of encouragement, laughter, good food, nice clothes, and friendship only a sister
could offer. Over the years she has become one of my closest friends and I will be very
sad to leave her. I met Lisa my first year in graduate school and then shared a housewith her for four years. Despite this, she still left for graduate school in chemistry thisfall. Lisa is one of the most caring, fun and bizarre people I have ever had the pleasureof knowing. Her zany personality made me laugh through even the darkest hours. Lisa,
if you ever need them, I’m sure we can find some foggy hills somewhere.
I would also like to mention my friends in JILA and chemistry who have mademy graduate tenure more enjoyable. It would be difficult to name everyone who has
contributed to my happiness here, so I will only briefly mention a few people withwhom I have spent the most time. I have been fortunate to share an office with four very
wonderful, intelligent and (admittedly) strange people. Sebastian, Joanna, Elizabethand Amy, you have been a source of great support and entertainment. I will never forgetthe camaraderie or the many office sports that developed. Thank you for everything.
I owe the good fortune of years of Friday night outings, canoe trips and other fun
adventures to Brad and Julie Paul. Keep those pictures off the web! (That goes for you
too Lori!) I would like to thank Matt Taubman for his encouragement in both exercising
regularly and consuming lots of good food as a reward. Matt, I will miss dancing with

viii
you. I have to say it just one more time: “Hustle me baby!” And, I would also liketo thank Jason Ensher for his friendship, for getting me involved in soccer, and for
introducing me to Brett Esry. Who knew?
Finally, I would like to acknowledge Brett Esry for his unfailing support andpatience. It has been a long two years. Thank you, Brett, for waiting for me.

Contents

Chapter
1 Introduction

1

2 Background5

2.1

Short Pulses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

5

2.2

Short Pulse Propagation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

7

2.3

History of Short Pulse Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

3 Experiment

23

3.1

Laser System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

3.2

Overview of Experimental Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

3.3

FROG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
3.3.1

Some Practical Issues Concerning FROG . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

3.3.2

Ambiguities Inherent in FROG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

3.3.3

PG FROG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

3.3.4

SHG FROG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

3.3.5

SHG FROG Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

4 Propagation in Fused Silica

60

4.1

Measuring the Nonlinear Index of Refraction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61

4.2

(1+1)-Dimensional Propagation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

x
4.3

4.4

(3+1)-Dimensional Propagation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
4.3.1

Experimental Results at 800 nm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72

4.3.2

Experimental Results at 1200 nm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76

4.3.3

Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80

4.3.4

Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94

5 Continuum Generation

96

5.1

On the Verge of Continuum Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103

5.2

Full Continuum Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
5.2.1

Qualitative Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108

5.2.2

Power Throughput as a Function of Intensity . . . . . . . . . . 110

5.2.3

Power Throughput as a Function of Time . . . . . . . . . . . . 112

5.2.4

Near-Field Spatial Spectrum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114

5.2.5

Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121

6 One-Dimensional Propagation in Liquids
6.1

6.2

Methanol Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
6.1.1

Stationary Cell Measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126

6.1.2

Flowing Methanol Measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131

6.1.3

Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139

Water Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
6.2.1

6.3

124

Data and Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145

7 Summary

147

Bibliography153

Figures

Figure2.1

Schematic diagram of the Stokes and anti-Stokes Raman scattering processes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

2.2

Change in frequency due to self-phase modulation . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

3.1

Schematic diagram of the amplified Ti:Sapphire laser system. . . . . . . 24

3.2

A typical pulse from the amplified Ti:sapphire laser system . . . . . . . 26

3.3

Beam profile before and after traversing a calcite polarizer . . . . . . . 27

3.4

Schematic diagram of the optical parametric amplifier . . . . . . . . . . 30

3.5

Normalized spectra of pulses from the OPA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

3.6

Temporal intensity and phase of a pulse from the OPA . . . . . . . . . . 31

3.7

PG FROG traces of differently chirped pulses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

3.8

Schematic diagram of PG FROG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

3.9

Schematic diagram of SHG FROG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

3.10 A measured SHG FROG trace and a FROG trace calculated from thecorresponding retrieved field. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
3.11 Measured and retrieved frequency and time marginals . . . . . . . . . . 52
3.12 A comparison of the measured and retrieved spectra for the pulse in
Fig. 3.10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

xii
3.13 An example of the agreement between an independently measured autocorrelation of a pulse and the corresponding measured and reconstructed SHG FROG delay marginals. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
3.14 A demonstration of the repeatability of SHG FROG measurements . . . 55
3.15 Phase matching efficiency curve for 50 m BBO. . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
3.16 A demonstration of the retrieval of a temporally complicated pulse . . . 58
3.17 A comparison of measured and retrieved spectra corresponding to the
FROG traces in Fig. 3.16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
4.1

Temporal intensity and phase of a pulse after one-dimensional propagation in fused silica . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

4.2

Temporal field of an intense femtosecond pulse at propagation distances in fused silica of z = 0, 1.27, and 2.54 cm . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67

4.3

Measured and calculated FWHM of the intensities of the fields presented in Fig. 4.2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69

4.4

Measured temporal and spectral fields before and after propagation
through fused silica as a function of peak input power . . . . . . . . . . 73

4.5

Measured FROG traces and spectra after propagation of chirped input
pulses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75

4.6

Temporal and spectral fields after propagation of chirped input pulses . 77

4.7

Measured fields before and after propagation at 1200 nm . . . . . . . . 79

4.8

Calculated intensity surface plots for a pulse after traversing a fusedsilica sample . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81

4.9

Calculated fields after traversing a fused silica sample . . . . . . . . . . 83

4.10 Measured spatial FWHM of beam size as a function of input power . . . 85
4.11 A comparison of the measured and calculated fields after propagation . 90
4.12 A comparison of near- and far-field theory with the far-field measurement 92

xiii
4.13 A comparison of the measured and calculated spectra corresponding to
the data in Fig. 4.12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
5.1

Far-field image of continuum generated in sapphire. . . . . . . . . . . . 99

5.2

Measured and calculated temporal fields after propagation at input powers on the verge of continuum generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104

5.3

A comparison of measured and calculated spectra in the case of nearcontinuum generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106

5.4

The percentage of power lost during propagation as a function of input
power . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111

5.5

Near-field spatial spectrum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116

5.6

On axis spectrum corresponding to Fig. 5.5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117

5.7

Lineouts of spectral intensity from a spatial-spectral measurement ofcontinuum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118

5.8

More lineouts of spectral intensity from a spatial-spectral measurementof continuum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119

5.9

On-axis spectrum of continuum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120

6.1

Temporal intensity and phase of a pulse prior to and after traversing a
1 cm sample of methanol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128

6.2

Calculated fields assuming an instantaneous and a non-instantaneous
nonlinearity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130

6.3

Measured intensity and phase of a pulse before and after traversing 1.69
cm of methanol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132

6.4

Measured spectra before and after traversing 1.69 cm of methanol . . . 134

6.5

Measured and calculated intensity and phase assuming three different
values of  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136

xiv
6.6

The difference between measured and calculated phase for the threecalculations presented in Fig. 6.5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137

6.7

Measured and calculated spectra assuming n2
and 

6.8

= 4  10 16 cm2=W= 10 fs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138

Measured intensity and phase along with calculated intensity and phaseassuming Nibbering’s reported values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140

6.9

Measured intensity and phase prior to and after propagation through1.69 cm of water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143

6.10 A comparison of the measured and calculated fields after propagation
through 1.69 cm of water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144

xv

TablesTable
3.1

Comparison of some common variations of FROG. . . . . . . . . . . . 42

6.1

Measured and literature values of n2 for water. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142

Chapter 1
Introduction

The first mode-locked pulse laser was demonstrated in 1964 and produced nanosec-

10 9 s) pulses [1]. By 1987, pulses as short as six femtoseconds (6  10 15 s)

ond (had been achieved [2]. Today, commercial laser systems routinely produce sub-100 fs
pulses, and these pulses are finding application in a variety of fields. Because of thehigh peak intensities of short pulses, femtosecond pulse propagation is a field rich innonlinear phenomena. The short duration of the pulses have made possible the observation of many light-matter interactions that were inaccessible before the advent of shortpulse lasers.
The availability of commercial femtosecond laser systems has led to many interesting and challenging problems involving short pulse propagation. First, there aremany challenges associated with generating the pulses themselves. There is a demand
for shorter pulses, more intense pulses, and pulses at wavelengths ranging from x-ray
to infrared. In addition, designer pulses with a specific temporal shape or specific phasefunction are desired. Femtosecond pulses are currently finding application in many diverse areas of science and medicine. Propagation issues play a role not only in thesecurrent-day scientific endeavors, but will also be important for many as yet unforeseen
applications.
One obvious application of short pulses is communications. When sending information packets through a fiber or air, shorter pulses mean higher information den-2sity and therefore faster transmission of the data. The high intensities associated withshorter pulses, however, can lead to nonlinear propagation effects and increased temporal spreading or pulse deformation during transmission. Temporal spreading limits
the density of pulses that can be sent down a transmission line. It also lowers the peakintensity of the pulses such that, over a long distance, the signal needs to be amplified periodically. Minimizing pulse spreading minimizes the number of amplification
stations needed as well as increases the throughput of the system.
The high intensities associated with short pulses can also benefit the communications industry. High peak intensities allow optical switches based on the nonlinear
optical response of a material to be constructed. For example, a simple optical switch
can consist of a short control beam, a nonlinear material, and a polarizing beam splitterthat is crossed with the polarization of the signal beam. When both the temporally shortcontrol beam and the signal beam are present in the nonlinear material, a polarization
rotation of the signal occurs, allowing it to proceed through the beam splitter. In thisway, the signal beam can be switched on and off.
Another example of an application of femtosecond pulses is the generation ofhigh harmonics of the central pulse frequency by focusing an intense pulse into a gas of
atoms. Experiments by Zhou et al. have found that the duration of the pulse determines
the efficiency of harmonic production and that the wavelength of the harmonics canbe tuned by adjusting the chirp of the input pulse [3]. High harmonic generation is ofinterest as a method of generating short extreme-ultraviolet and soft x-ray pulses at ahigh repetition rate in the laboratory.
Femtosecond pulses are also finding application in ultrafast pump-probe experiments. The short duration of these pulses allows researchers to probe chemical reactions on a femtosecond time scale. Another area of current interest involves using
designer femtosecond pulses to tailor atomic or molecular wavefunctions. The idea isto produce and probe coherent atomic wavepackets in a controlled and understandable

3
fashion.
Short pulses are also being used in many other areas. Some of these include thestudy of plasma generation and laser-plasma interactions, probing and treating diseased
or damaged biological tissues, and the pursuit of new materials with larger nonlinear
responses.
All of these applications of short pulses involve propagation through glass or
crystal optics, air, other gases, fibers, or liquids such as laser dyes, solvents, or water. If
one wishes to understand or control the interaction of a short pulse with any system, it
is necessary to have a well characterized pulse, including knowledge of how that pulsechanges as it propagates from the source to the sample to the detector. In addition, thenonlinear interactions of short pulses with materials result in complicated phenomenathat are intriguing from the standpoint of basic scientific curiosity.
This thesis addresses the linear and nonlinear propagation of 

100 fs pulses inbulk media. Most experimental studies of pulse propagation prior to this work provided
information on only one aspect of the electric field before and after propagation, usually
the spectral or temporal intensity. Knowledge of only the spectral or temporal intensity,
however, is not sufficient to fully elucidate propagation effects. Two pulses for example
could have the same spectrum or the same intensity autocorrelation and be differently
chirped. Only by knowing the phase of the two pulses can they be distinguished. The
development of full-field measurement techniques have made possible investigations ofpulse propagation involving accurate knowledge of both the amplitude and the phaseof a femtosecond pulse. Our approach, therefore, is to measure the full electric field ofa pulse before and after traversing the material of interest and thereby glean valuable
information about the complex light-matter interactions involved in the propagation.
We accomplish this full-field measurement with the second-harmonic generation formof frequency-resolved optical gating (FROG).
Some background information relevant to short pulses and their propagation is4discussed in Chapter 2. This chapter also provides a brief history of pulse measurement techniques leading up to the development of FROG and subsequent advances intechnology.
The femtosecond laser system is described and an overview of the experimental
procedure is given in Chapter 3. This chapter also presents a discussion of the FROG
technique in general and the polarization gating and second-harmonic generation formsof FROG in detail. Specific emphasis is placed on those issues that are important for
using FROG as a high dynamic range measurement technique for measuring broadband pulses. Experimental data illustrating the capabilities of FROG as a propagation
technique are also presented.
Propagation in fused silica is investigated in Chapters 4 and 5. Propagation isinvestigated in both a one-dimensional, plane-wave regime and in a regime where selffocusing leads to complicated spatio-temporal dynamics including pulse-splitting andcontinuum generation. Experimental results are compared with a model based on the
nonlinear Schrödinger equation. At the highest powers investigated, spectral bandwidths after propagation become so large that FROG measurements are no longer practical. In this case, we present observations of continuum behavior as a function of input
power and time. This chapter also presents the first near-field spatial-spectral measurements of the continuum. Measurements in both chapters provide insight into thenature of short pulse propagation in fused silica and add significantly to the battery ofexperimental data available for comparison with advancing theories.
Propagation in liquid media is also investigated, and these results are reported in
Chapter 6. Studies in methanol reveal the presence of a non-instantaneous nonlinearity
with a very short response time. Studies in water lend credibility to the observed nonlinear response in methanol and provide a measure of the nonlinear index of refraction.
Finally, Chapter 7 provides a summary of the science presented in this thesis anddiscusses future directions.

Chapter 2
BackgroundSome background is necessary for understanding the concepts presented in thisthesis. This chapter attempts to provide the reader with the information necessary tounderstand later chapters. Relevant references are included for the interested reader.
The first section presents a brief discussion of the nature of short pulses. Section 2.2
addresses issues related to the linear and nonlinear propagation of these short pulses.
In the final section, a brief history of pulse measurement techniques demonstrates thetimeliness of these measurements and provides a motivation for the technique we havechosen.
2.1

Short Pulses
A light pulse can be described as a group of optical cycles under a pulse envelope.

A short pulse in time necessarily has a broad spectral bandwidth as a result of theFourier relationship between time and frequency. A shorter pulse requires a larger
frequency bandwidth than a longer pulse. For a given pulse length in time, the minimum
spectral bandwidth can be calculated using the time-bandwidth product. For a Gaussian
pulse and using FWHM of intensity values of the time and spectral bandwidth, theminimum time bandwidth product is 0.441. Using rms values, the minimum timebandwidth product for a Gaussian is pulse is 0.5. Reference [4] gives a table of theminimum time-bandwidth products for a variety of common pulse shapes. Pulses with a6time-bandwidth product close to the minimum value are said to be “transform-limited”.
A transform-limited, 100 fs pulse spectrally centered at 800 nm has a spectral FWHM
of roughly 9.5 nm.
A short pulse can be described as a carrier frequency, !0 , and a complex Gaussianenvelope of the form:

E (t) = exp( at2 ) exp[i(!0t + bt2 )]:In this equation,(2.1)

exp[i(!0 t + bt2 )] is the time-varying phase shift of the sinusoidal signal

within the Gaussian pulse. The total instantaneous phase is thentot (t) = !0t + bt2 :The rate at which the total phase propagates forward in time is the instantaneous frequency and is defined as the derivative of the phase with respect to time:! (t) dtot (t):dt

For the Gaussian pulse in Eq. 2.1,

! (t) =d(! t + bt2 ) = !0 + 2bt:
dt 0

(2.2)

= 0, then the instantaneous frequency varies linearly in time. In other words, theIf b 6component frequencies of the pulse are ordered in increasing or decreasing fashion intime. Such a pulse is said to be chirped. The term “chirp” comes from the sound abird makes when it chirps. In that case, acoustic frequencies increase or decrease withtime. In Eq. 2.2, b is called the chirp parameter and provides a measure of the chirp ofthe pulse. The presence of chirp increases the time-bandwidth product of a pulse by afactor ofp

1 + (b=a)2. Therefore, by propagating a chirped pulse through a medium

such that the different frequencies travel at different speeds and the chirp is reduced
or eliminated, the pulse can be compressed in time. Equation 2.2 also illustrates that7
a linear frequency chirp (linear with respect to time) occurs as a quadratic term in thephase. This point will be relevant when examining data presented in later chapters of
this thesis.
2.2

Short Pulse Propagation
As a pulse propagates, the velocity at which the carrier frequency travels througha dispersive medium is called the phase velocity. The phase velocity is determinedby the propagation constant, k , evaluated at the carrier frequency. The propagation
constant is given by k

= 2n=0 where n is the index of refraction of the material.

The velocity at which the envelope travels is called the group velocity. The groupvelocity is given by the first derivative with respect to frequency of the propagation
constant. When the group velocity itself is frequency dependent, the component frequencies of the pulse travel at different velocities. This frequency dependent groupvelocity is known as group velocity dispersion (GVD). GVD leads to changes in pulse
shape, such as compression or stretching in time, as a pulse propagates. GVD is givenby the second derivative of the propagation constant with respect to frequency. Since

k goes as n=0 , a plot of n versus the free-space wavelength, 0 , reveals regions ofpositive and negative GVD. Positive or normal dispersion occurs at wavelengths where
the curve is concave up – where the second derivative is positive. Downward curvature
indicates regions of negative, or anomalous dispersion. At visible wavelengths, mostcommon optical materials exhibit normal dispersion. With normal GVD, red-shiftedfrequencies travel faster than blue-shifted frequencies, leading to an upchirped pulse.
Propagation of an electromagnetic wave can be described by starting from Maxwell’s

8equations for a neutral, non-magnetic, dielectric medium:rE =0 @ H@tr  H = @@tDrB = 0r  D = 0:
For non-magnetic media,

B = 0 H :And the electric displacement,D, is given by
D = 0E + P :P represents the polarization, in units of electric dipole moment per unit volume, of themedium and is the only term in Maxwell’s equations that relates directly to the medium.
In the above equations, 0 is the permeability of free space, and 0 is the permittivity offree space. Taking the curl of r 

E withp100 = crE = 0and(transverse waves)

gives the one-dimensional inhomogeneous wave equation:22
r2E c12 @@tE2 =  1c2 @@tP2 :0
If the polarization,(2.3)

P , is linear in the applied field, then the propagation is linear.

This linear response of the medium is simply the index of refraction. If the appliedfield is strong enough,P can become nonlinear in the applied field. This is what ismeant when one discusses nonlinear propagation. A good introduction to nonlinear
optics can be found in Chapter 17 of Ref. [5]. A simplified description of some of the9basic concepts that will be important for understanding the work presented in this thesis
follows.

P can be expressed as a series expansion in the applied field:
P = 10E + 2E 2 + 3E3 +   :
In this expression, n provides a measure of the strength of the linear or nonlinear process and is called the susceptibility. As is expected with a series expansion, higher ordersusceptibilities have decreasing strength. In other words, higher order nonlinearities require a stronger field to have any effect on the propagation. It is for this reason that
nonlinear optical processes were largely inaccessible to researchers prior to the availability of lasers. Commercial femtosecond lasers now routinely produce pulses withpeak intensities on the order of 10

GW=cm2 or higher.

E

The second order nonlinearity, 2 2 , is responsible for second-harmonic generation and optical parametric amplification among other things. Both of these effects
arise from a transfer of energy between electromagnetic fields of different frequencies
within the material such that

!3 = !1 + !2 :Second-harmonic generation is a special case of this general expression, where !1=!2 . In this case, light at the fundamental frequency is converted to light at the sec-

= 2!1. In parametric amplification, the opposite effectoccurs. Fundamental light at !3 causes the generation of light at ! 1 and !2 , where
ond harmonic frequency: !3!1 and !2 are not necessarily equal. Second order nonlinearities only occur in noncentrosymmetric materials such as Beta-Barium Borate (BBO), Potassium Dihydrogen
Phosphate (KDP) and Lithium Niobate. A list of the second order nonlinear coefficientsof some commonly used crystals can be found in Ref. [6].
The third order nonlinearity is active in all materials, regardless of symmetry,and gives rise to some interesting effects, including four-wave mixing, Raman scatter-10ing, and the optical Kerr effect. Four-wave mixing includes all processes where one
frequency is created from the combination of three other frequencies. For example, thesituations !4= !1 + !2 + !3 , !4 = !1 + !2 !3 , !4 = !1 !2 + !3 etc. are all clas-sified as four-wave mixing. Third-harmonic generation is a special case of four-wave
mixing in which !1= !2 = !3, and !4 = 3!1. The Raman nonlinearity is also a ver-sion of four-wave mixing in which a molecule makes a transition between two states.
Figure 2.1 illustrates this process. A pump photon excites the molecule into a higher
energy virtual state from which the molecule immediately drops back down to either
state 1 or state 2. Raman scattering occurs when the molecule ends up in a different
state than it was initially such that !f= !p!1 2 (Stokes) or !f = !p + !1 2 (anti-

Stokes). In the preceding equations, !f represents the emitted frequency, !p represents
the pump frequency, and !1 2 represents the energy difference, expressed in terms offrequency, between states 1 and 2. Raman scattering can occur as either a spontaneousor stimulated process. Since at thermal equilibrium most molecules will initially be in
the lower of states 1 and 2, more light will scatter into the lower frequency (Stokes)
emission than into the higher frequency (anti-Stokes) emission. As a result, the Raman
nonlinearity should result in a shifting of pulse frequencies to the red.
The optical Kerr effect is a result of anharmonic motion of bound electrons in thematerial and results in an intensity dependent refractive index. The index of refractionof the material is then described by n

= n0 + n2 I where n0 is the linear index of refrac-tion and n2 I is the intensity dependent nonlinear index of refraction. The optical Kerr
effect is responsible for three important phenomena in nonlinear pulse propagation:
self-phase modulation (SPM), self-focusing (SF), and self-steepening(SS).

Self-Phase Modulation

In self-phase modulation, the time-varying index ofrefraction produces a time dependent phase modulation of the pulse and thereby contributes to spectral broadening of the pulse. Consider the propagation-induced phase of

11

ωp

ωf

ωp

Stokes

ωf

2

2

1

1
anti-Stokes

Figure 2.1: Schematic diagram of the Stokes and anti-Stokes Raman scattering processes.

12
a pulse:(t) = !0t

kz

where k is the propagation constant, z is the propagation distance through the medium,and !0 is the center frequency of the pulse. For a medium of length L, the phase after
propagation is given by:

(t) = !0t 2nL
where n is the total index of refraction given by n

= n0 + n2 I . Now, the instantaneous

frequency is the derivative of the phase with respect to time which is given by:

d
= !0
dt

2L dn
 dt

or

d
= !0
dt

2n2 L dI (t) :dt

The instantaneous frequency, therefore, goes as the negative of the derivative of theintensity profile with respect to time. Assuming n2 is positive, this leads to a loweringof frequencies on the leading edge of the optical pulse and an increase in frequencies
at the trailing edge of the pulse. A pulse with a smooth Gaussian envelope will thus
acquire a roughly linear frequency chirp across the central region of the pulse. Thissituation is illustrated in Fig. 2.2. Note that SPM is similar to GVD in that it produces afrequency chirp. However, SPM actually shifts some of the component frequencies ofthe pulse to new frequencies while GVD only rearranges the component frequencies.

Self-Focusing Self-focusing is a nonlinear effect that results in a spatial focusing of the beam as it propagates. SF is also a result of the optical Kerr effect. If n2
is positive, then the higher intensity regions of the pulse experience a larger index of

13

−200

−100

0
Time (fs)

100

200

Figure 2.2: A Gaussian function and the negative derivative of that Gaussian. The
derivative illustrates the change in frequency a Gaussian pulse experiences as a resultof SPM.

14
refraction than the lower intensity wings of the pulse. In this way, the pulse transforms
the medium into a weak positive lens. As the pulse is focused, the center becomes
more intense leading to a higher index of refraction and an even stronger positive lens.
In this manner, self-focusing can become a large effect very quickly. This type of SF
is known as whole beam self-focusing. In similar fashion, any small spike or ripple
on the pulse envelope can be magnified greatly and seriously distort the original pulse
shape. This type of SF is known as small-scale self-focusing. Either type of SF canbe catastrophic in an optical system. The high intensities present in the focusing pulse
can be sufficient to damage most optical elements. Two important quantities associatedwith SF are the critical power for self-focusing, given by Pcrit
and the self-focusing distance, zf

Self-Steepeningp= w0 n0 =(n2I ) [7].

= (0:61)2=(8n0n2 ),Self-steepening refers to the steepening of one of the pulse

edges in the temporal domain during propagation. This pulse edge deformation is accompanied by an asymmetry in the pulse spectrum [8]. SS occurs as a result of an
intensity dependent group velocity. The group velocity decreases with increasing intensity as a result of the intensity dependent index of refraction. The leading and trailingedges of the pulse therefore travel faster than the central portion, leading to a steepeningof the trailing edge of the pulse in the temporal domain.

Nonlinear Schrödinger Equation

The basic equation describing propagation

in a weakly nonlinear medium is the one-dimensional nonlinear Schrödinger equation(NLSE):@ E k00 @ 2 E+ i 2 @t2@zi2n2 jEj2E = 0:


(2.4)

In this equation, E is the slowly varying complex amplitude of the field in the reference
frame moving at the group velocity. GVD is determined by k 00 , and the third term gives
the optical Kerr effect. The field is normalized such that jEj2 is the intensity in units of15

W=cm2.
The above mentioned linear and nonlinear effects come into play in various aspects of the research presented in this thesis. Many of these effects play a crucial rolein the generation of ultrashort pulses. Second-harmonic generation is the nonlinearity
on which the most often used measurement technique in this thesis is based. Linear andnonlinear propagation effects are important in the propagation experiments performed
throughout this thesis. The preceding discussion of these effects should provide thereader with the background necessary to understand the science presented in this thesis.
2.3

History of Short Pulse Measurement
To interrogate the processes involved in propagation of femtosecond pulses, it

is first necessary to be able to measure the pulses themselves. By measuring a pulse
before and after traversing the material of interest, one can infer valuable information
regarding the materials parameters. Changes in the pulse spectrum, intensity profile,and phase are all important. Also, for numerically modeling pulse propagation, an
accurate determination of the peak intensity of the pulse is required. This section provides a brief history of pulse measurement techniques and a description of the full-fieldtechniques available for pulse measurement today.
Acquiring the spectrum of a short pulse is not a difficult task provided one iscareful not to distort the pulse spectrum during the measurement. Measuring the temporal duration of the pulse, however, is a more daunting task because measuring a shortpulse requires an event that is even shorter. Autocorrelation techniques provide an obvious solution to this quandary because they use the pulse to measure itself. A 1974
publication by Bradley and New [9] provides an excellent overview of the measurement
techniques first used to measure short pulses such as linear and nonlinear autocorrelation.

16
Autocorrelation works by dividing the pulse to be measured into two replicas andthen interacting these two replicas over a range of delays to produce a signal. Linear
correlation relies on measuring interference fringes between the two pulses while nonlinear correlation techniques involve overlapping the two pulses in a nonlinear medium
to produce a signal. An example is overlapping the two pulses in a second-harmonic
generating crystal. In this case, the signal produced is given by the second-order correlation function:R

I (t)I (t +  )dt. This signal can be produced in the presence ofa constant background or in a background-free configuration. Because a signal will
only be observed or enhanced above background while the two pulses are overlapped,
these methods give the user some insight into the duration of the pulse. The absolutelength of the pulse, however, cannot be obtained. To place any value on the length ofthe pulse one must first assume a pulse shape. Often a pulse is assumed to be Gaussianor hyperbolic secant squared in shape. If both the autocorrelation and the spectrum areavailable, the time-bandwidth product gives some insight into phase of the pulse insofar
as it confirms the presence or absence of chirp.
Autocorrelations have been performed in a variety of configurations. Because
one arm of the autocorrelator is scanned to produce signal over a range of delays, earlyexperiments with short pulses were necessarily multi-shot experiments. In an effort tomeasure the duration of a single pulse, and not a time average length, researchers turned
to performing autocorrelations in laser dyes, observing two photon fluorescence as thesignal. Counter propagating pulses led to single shot measurements. The technique,however, did not lend itself to background free configurations and the signal to noise
ratio often led to unreliable information. Streak cameras were employed to measure
pulses of picosecond and longer duration. Early work also employed ultrafast shutters,
where one pulse is used as a gate function, allowing the signal to pass through a Kerror saturable absorber medium. Borrowing from the field of acoustics in 1971, Treacy
first applied the concept of a spectrogram to the optical regime [10]. A spectrogram17
is a two-dimensional representation of the pulse as a function of time and frequency.
Treacy was, however, unable to retrieve the full intensity and phase of the pulse. Thirdand higher correlation experiments were also performed in the first attempts to uncoversome phase information as well.
As short pulse technology progressed, techniques were developed that could better measure the intensity profile of a femtosecond pulse. Techniques based on fourwave mixing, third-harmonic generation, or a combination of sum- and differencefrequency generation were proposed and implemented to measure complicated or asymmetric intensity profiles [11, 12]. These methods worked well, however they could only
measure pulses in the visible. A much later optical Kerr shutter technique allowed measurement of pulse asymmetry and structure of pulses in the UV [13].
Other methods were designed to measure the presence of chirp [14, 15, 16].
These methods, however, were limited either because they used a streak camera andthus were not useful for very short pulses, or they could only resolve whether or not apulse was chirped. In 1991 Albrecht et al. developed a method based on two-photon
absorption to characterize the phase function of a pulse up to the fourth order. A separate technique, however, was required to gain any information about the temporal shapeor duration of the pulse [17]. Later, Le Blanc and Sauerbrey developed a technique thatavoided the use of a nonlinear detector, thus allowing measurement of pulses from theultraviolet to the XUV. Results of this technique, however, were difficult to interpret,
and the technique was only capable of resolving phase shifts of pi or larger [18].
As early as 1985, the first methods to simultaneously measure both the amplitude
and phase of femtosecond pulses appeared. The first successful technique was implemented by Diels et al. [4]. Theirs is something of a brute force method. The idea is tomeasure the pulse spectrum, the intensity autocorrelation, and the interferometric autocorrelation and then iteratively fit a pulse to the three results until the process converges
to the one pulse that could have produced all three. This technique still requires some18
previous knowledge or a reasonable estimate of the functional dependence of the pulse
and therefore isn’t particularly useful for complicated pulse shapes or modulations.
Also, there has been no discussion of the uniqueness of the solution. Naganuma presented a more rigorous variation on this theme and demonstrated that a measurement of
the interferometric intensity autocorrelation and the interferogram of the fundamental ismathematically sufficient to reconstruct the pulse with ambiguity only in the directionof time [19]. Later work resolves the time ambiguity by making measurements before
and after propagation through a piece of glass [20].
Another method relies on time domain interferometry, but requires a flat phasereference pulse [21]. Diels later introduced a more elegant technique where one applies a known reversible transformation to the pulse to be measured so as to stretchout the signal in time [22]. This pulse is then characterized by interferometric crosscorrelation with the short version of itself. The fully characterized long pulse is numerically transformed back. In practice this reversible transformation might be propagation
through a piece of glass. Of course, this method assumes a full understanding of theprocesses involved in the propagation as well as accurate parameters associated withthese processes. If the pulse is of low enough peak intensity, this assumption is not an
unreasonable one.
Each of the preceding measurement techniques for resolving the intensity andphase of a pulse involves measurements in the time domain, in the spectral domain,or in both. The real breakthrough came, however, with techniques involving measurements in a combined temporal-spectral domain. In one of the first optical temporalspectral measurements, Treacy directly measured chirp in a pulse using time-resolved
spectroscopy [23]. Dynamic spectrograms have also been applied to the determinationof the presence of temporal asymmetry and chirp in compressed pulses [24]. In fact, it
was a spectrographic technique that facilitated the compression of pulses to

6 fs for the

first time. Treacy had predicted that cubic phase would be the limiting factor in produc-19
ing short pulses [25]. The record in 1987 was

8 fs, produced by grating compressionof a pulse spectrally broadened by SPM in a single mode optical fiber [26]. Fork et al.
produced

8 fs pulses using this method. Then, by mixing six different spectral regionsof the compressed pulse with an unbroadened pulse from the amplifier and upconverting each, he was able to measure the relative delay experienced by each frequency
component. In this manner he could see that the 8 fs pulse had a residual cubic phaseterm. By adding a prism pair and adjusting the distances between prisms and gratings,
he was able to eliminate both cubic and quadratic phase and achieve

6 fs pulses [2].

Fork’s clever measurement technique formed the basis of the first spectrographic pulse
measurement techniques.
In 1991 Chilla and Martinez published a combined spectral-temporal pulse measurement technique based on Fork’s work that provided the first direct measurementof amplitude and phase [27]. The method first filters the pulse to be measured in frequency, selecting a narrow frequency range. This spectral piece is then cross correlatedwith a reference pulse to measure delay. By moving the filter and thereby selecting
different frequency regions, the derivative of the phase can be found as a function of
frequency. An integral yields spectral phase. This information, in conjunction with thepower spectrum, gives the spectral amplitude and phase of the pulse. The temporal amplitude and phase are given by Fourier transform. This technique was termed frequency
domain phase measurement or FDPM [28].
A similar technique upconverts the pulse to be measured with a spectrally narrow reference pulse [29]. At each value of delay, the spectrum is recorded. The delay at which each wavelength exhibits an intensity maximum is related to the phase.
The reference pulse is narrow so that each upconverted sum-frequency corresponds tonearly one frequency component of the pulse to be measured. A rigorous developmentof the theory behind this technique was presented. This method was experimentallydemonstrated to measure only the phase but, in theory, it has sufficient information to20
determine the full complex pulse field [30].
Both of the immediately preceding techniques are members of a larger class oftechniques whose members are each referred to as a STRUT: spectrally and temporally
resolved upconversion technique.
Kane and Trebino introduced a technique similar to FDPM, known as frequencyresolved optical gating or FROG [31]. Instead of temporally resolving spectral slices
of a pulse, however, FROG spectrally resolves temporal slices of a pulse. The temporalgating can be accomplished in several ways, but all methods rely on spectrally resolving
the signal from an autocorrelation performed in an instantaneously responding nonlinear medium. This measurement yields the spectrogram of the pulse. The intensity andphase of the pulse is then retrieved by means of an iterative two-dimensional phase retrieval algorithm that requires no assumptions about the pulse. The retrieved field has
been shown to be essentially unique [31]. The advantage of FROG over the Fourier
filtering method of Chilla and Martinez is that it is experimentally simpler and can beextended to a single shot technique. More about the FROG technique can be found in
Chapter 3.
Nearly two years after the introduction of FROG, a new technique was introduced by B.S. Prade et al. This method is experimentally simpler than FROG and canalso be performed in a single shot. The method makes two measurements of the power
spectrum of the pulse: one before and one after propagation through a known Kerr
medium where the spectrum acquires a complicated fringe structure. A retrieval algorithm starts with an initial guess for the pulse and numerically forward and backward
propagates the pulse, replacing the spectrum with the corresponding measured values
between each step, until the algorithm converges to a single input that is consistent
with both measurements. Uniqueness of the solution is not proven, but the technique
has been demonstrated to be robust by introducing known phase distortions on a pulse
and then performing the measurement. The technique also provides a measure of the

21peak intensity of the pulse assuming the nonlinear index of refraction of the material is
known accurately.
In 1995 a method was described that directly measures spectral phase, thus eliminating the need for a retrieval algorithm and the worries of uniqueness [32]. Thismethod, which is essentially the same as a technique developed in femtosecond pulse
shaping experiments [33], is called direct optical spectral phase measurement (DOSPM).
In DOSPM, the pulse to be measured is spectrally dispersed with a grating. A V-shaped
filter then selects two narrow spectral components, one of which is located at the center wavelength. Temporal beat patterns are then measured by cross correlation with anearly transform limited reference pulse. Phase differences appear as a delay of thecenter peak of the beat pattern. By varying the height of the V-shaped filter, and thus
the spectral component selected, to both positive and negative offsets, the frequency dependent phase can be directly determined. This method, however, gives no information
about the amplitude of the pulse. Both DOSPM and the second-harmonic generation
form of FROG have been shown to measure phase distortions to within

5% accuracy[34]. DOSPM was later modified to employ a multi-slit arrangement [35]. This arrangement allows for single shot measurement and is capable of measuring more complicatedor discontinuous phase profiles.
The preceding techniques are those that were available at the time the investigations presented in this thesis began. For completeness, I mention here other pulse
measurement techniques that have since been developed.
Two additional STRUTs have been developed. The first method again overlaps aspectrally narrow(1:5 nm) reference pulse with the pulse to be measured in a nonlin-

ear crystal to produce an upconversion signal, but it does so in a single shot geometry[36]. The measurement yields a real time group delay spectrogram from which amplitude and phase can be determined using a rapid retrieval algorithm. This method
boasts close to real time phase and amplitude displays. It also employs a second-order

22
nonlinear process and is therefore useful for weak signals. The second method, temporal analysis of spectral components (TASC), is experimentally the same method as
FDPM except that it uses a wider slit when selecting spectral components [37]. FDPM
is limited to measuring simple phase structures because it discards information on thefull temporal dependence of each spectral piece. TASC selects broad enough spectral
components that the temporal profile is not determined by the spectral mask. TASC is
also a second order technique capable of measuring weak pulses. The method boasts
intuitive spectrograms and no time direction ambiguity.
Two methods have recently been introduced to measure not only amplitude andphase but also peak intensity. One technique provides a measurement in the focal regionof a pulse and is based on measuring two far-field intensity patterns: one with and
one without a known nonlinear material located in the focal spot. This technique wasdubbed BRIEFING or beam reconstruction by iteration of an e-field with an induced
nonlinearity gauge [38]. A second method involves triple correlation and involves noassumptions about the analytic form of the pulse and uses no iterative algorithms [39].
In the past, femtosecond nonlinear pulse propagation has been studied by spectral
observations [40, 41], autocorrelations [42], and cross correlations [43]. Information
about the spatial effects of nonlinear pulse propagation have been obtained using the zscan technique [44, 45]. Although these techniques provide important information, theygenerally require assumptions about the pulse and they do not provide a measure of thephase. Among the full-field techniques, FROG has emerged as a powerful, robust, andwidely-used pulse diagnostic. Although FROG has primarily functioned as a diagnostic
technique, it also holds value as a tool for measuring nonlinear materials properties aswill be demonstrated in the following chapters.

Chapter 3
Experiment

3.1

Laser System
All of the experiments presented in this thesis were performed using an ampli-

fied, femtosecond, Ti:Sapphire laser system. The system consists of an Argon ion
laser pumped Ti:Sapphire oscillator, a single-grating pulse stretcher, a Nd:YAG pumped
Ti:Sapphire regenerative amplifier, and a single-grating compressor. A schematic diagram of the laser system can be seen in Fig. 3.1. The Argon-ion-laser-pumped Ti:Sapphireoscillator produces 80 fs pulses, with a central wavelength of 800 nm, at a repetition
rate of roughly 100 MHz. The average power out of the oscillator is 400 mW. Pulses
from the oscillator proceed into a single grating stretcher where they are spectrally
dispersed such that different frequencies travel different path lengths and each pulse
stretches out in time. At the output of the stretcher, pulses have a duration on the orderof 200 ps. The peak intensity of pulses at this point has dropped by nearly four orders ofmagnitude. The stretched pulses are then amplified in a Nd:YAG-pumped Ti:Sapphire
regenerative amplifier operating at 1 kHz. A single pulse from the amplified pulse train
is selected by a Pockels cell in the pulse switchyard, and that pulse proceeds to thecompressor. The compressor spectrally disperses the pulse, with different frequencies
traveling different path lengths, to compensate for the stretching incurred earlier andto offset any dispersion that occurred in the amplifier and transport optics. The compressed pulses have a duration of 80 fs, a central wavelength of 800 nm, and an average

24

Argon Ion
Pump Laser

Ti:Sapphire
Oscillator

400 mW
80 fs
800nm~100 MHz

Pulse
Stretcher
200 ps1W
1 mJ/pulse
80 fs
800 nmPulse
Compressor

Pulse
Switchyard
1 kHz

Regenerative
Amplifier

Nd:YAG
Pump Laser

Figure 3.1: Schematic diagram of the amplified Ti:Sapphire laser system.

25
power of 1 W. The pulses occur at a repetition rate of 1 kHz and have 1 mJ of energy
per pulse. The pulses are nearly bandwidth-limited, with a spectral full-width at half
maximum (FWHM) of 12 nm. Pulses typically have a small amount of residual cubic phase. Figure 3.2 shows a typical output pulse in both the temporal and spectral
domains.
All components of the laser system are fully enclosed and have servo-controlled,heated baseplates to minimize the effects of fluctuations in the ambient environment.
Despite these efforts, however, the pulses drift in duration, center frequency, and chirp
content with changes in room temperature of as little as 2 degrees Celsius. A temperature drift of more than 2 degrees Celsius often causes the oscillator to cease modelocking. For these reasons, the room conditions and laser performance must be closely
monitored.
Laser performance is monitored in three ways; (1) An Ocean Optics fiber spectrometer observes the center frequency and shape of the spectral intensity profile ofpulses from the amplified pulse train by monitoring pulses transmitted through the highreflectivity end mirror of the amplifier cavity. (2) The transmitted pulses are also detected by a fast photodiode and the pulse train is displayed on an oscilloscope. Changes
in relative peak heights of pulses in the train indicate a change in alignment of pulses
into the amplifier, and therefore a change in laser performance. (3) The polarization
gating (PG) form of frequency-resolved optical gating (FROG) is used to monitor the
beam after the compressor. PG FROG provides a nearly real time observation of pulse
duration and chirp and will be discussed in more detail later in this chapter.
Aberrations in the calcite polarizers in the pulse switchyard distort the beam profile of the amplified pulses before they are compressed. Figure 3.3 displays contour
plots of CCD images of the beam before and after propagation through one of the polarizers. An amplified pulse passes through these polarizers on its way to the compressor.
These distortions can result in regions of high spatial intensity or “hot spots” on the

26

2
(a )
1

0 .5

0

-1

P h a se (ra d )A xia l In te n sity

1 .0

0 .0
-2 0 0-1 0 0

0

100

-2
200

D e lay (fs)Axial Intensity

1.0

(b)

0.5

0.0

775

800

825

Wavelength (nm)Figure 3.2: A typical pulse from the amplified Ti:sapphire laser system: (a) its temporal
intensity (solid line) and phase (points), and (b) its spectrum.

Height (mm)Height (mm)Width (mm)Figure 3.3: Beam profile before (left) and after (right) propagation through calcite polarizers in pulse switchyard.

Width (mm)27

28
beam. These hot spots can potentially damage optics and can result in propagation datathat is difficult to interpret. Therefore, we spatially filter the beam in order to have abetter spatial profile for performing experiments. For experiments in which only a low
intensity beam is used, the beam is sent through an ambient spatial filter consisting of
a 30 cm focal-length lens, an 80 m diamond pinhole, and a 15 cm focal-length recollimating lens. In addition, a vacuum spatial filter is used for high intensity beams. A
75 cm focal-length lens focuses the beam into a 300 m pinhole located approximately
at the center of a 1 meter long glass vacuum chamber at a pressure of2  10 2 Torr.

A second 75 cm focal-length mirror recollimates the spatially filtered beam outside thevacuum chamber.
A spatial filter works in the following manner. The beam from the laser is mostly
Gaussian with some high frequency noise added. Beam propagation through a lens
produces the spatial Fourier transform in the focal (or transform) plane such that low
frequency components appear closest to the axis and high frequency components appear further out. Insertion of an aperture in the beam selects only the low frequency
components. A second lens recollimates the beam and performs the inverse Fouriertransform. The beam is now devoid of high frequency noise. In a sense, spatial filters
trade high frequency noise for low frequency noise because the top-hat type filtering
performed in the focal plane adds some low frequency noise in the spatial wings. Thisadded low frequency noise is convolved with the nearly-Gaussian pulse, however, andis therefore usually quite small. The resulting pulse is more uniformly Gaussian than
the input pulse and is far less likely to damage optics or to cause appreciable experimental error due to “hot spots” on the beam. When choosing lens and aperture sizes
for a spatial filter, the minimum noise wavelength, n, transmitted by the aperture ofdiameter d is given by:

n=2

f
;
d

(3.1)

29
where f is the focal length of the first lens and  is the optical wavelength of the light.
A recommended aperture diameter, dopt , is given by:

dopt =

f
;
a

(3.2)

where a is the beam radius prior to the first lens [46]. For an ideal Gaussian pulse, thisaperture diameter passes 99.3% of the total beam energy and blocks spatial wavelengths

2

smaller than a. The fraction of power passed through an aperture of diameter d is givenby:P

Ptotal= 1 exp"#

1  ad 2 :
2 f

(3.3)

For some experiments, pulses centered at wavelengths other than 800 nm areneeded. These pulses are generated by a home-built optical parametric amplifier (OPA)
similar to the one described by Yakovlev [47]. A diagram of the OPA is shown in
Fig. 3.4. Roughly 1 J of the amplified laser beam is selected and focused into a 2
mm thick piece of sapphire to generate a broadband continuum. The continuum serves
as a seed for the parametric amplification. The infrared portion of the continuum iscollinearly combined with about 500 J of 800 nm pump light in a 4 mm thick BBO
crystal in a Type-1 phase matching configuration. Different spectral components ofthe seed beam arrive at the BBO crystal at different times and are phase matched at
different angles. By adjusting the delay of the continuum and angle tuning the nonlinear
crystal, the desired infrared wavelength can be amplified. The OPA shown in Fig. 3.4
uses a single pass amplification. This OPA can easily be adapted to a double passconfiguration with the addition of a dichroic beam splitter, a couple of mirrors, and atranslation stage. The OPA can be tuned continuously from 1100 to 1400 nm. Pulses
are compressed with a standard prism pair. Typical pulse energies range from 1 J to
50 J. Figure 3.5 shows the normalized OPA output spectra for several angles of thecrystal. Figure 3.6 shows the temporal intensity and phase of a pulse centered near
1200 nm. Short, Gaussian, IR pulses can readily be obtained.

30
Femtosecond OPA:
Continuum
Generation in
2 mm Sapphire
R=99%

Dichroic B.S.

-2x telescope

B.S.

4 mm thick BBO
Type-1 Phase matching

Rotate Polarization
OutputFigure 3.4: Schematic diagram of optical parametric amplifier. The notation B.S. indicates beam splitters and the dotted rectangle indicates a translation stage.

Normalized Intensity

1.0

IR Energy/Pulse
1 µJ
2 µJ
10µJ
23µJ
52µJ
20µJ

0.5

FWHM
21 nm
25 nm
22 nm
28 nm
32 nm
39 nm

0.0
1100

1200

1300

1400

Wavelength (nm)Figure 3.5: Normalized spectra of pulses from the OPA corresponding to different
angles of the BBO crystal. The energy per pulse and spectral FWHM are also listed foreach case.

31

2
1.0

OPA: 1 pass amplification

1

0

0.5

Phase (rad)Intensity

FWHM = 50 fs

-1

0.0
-200

-100

0

100

-2
200

Delay (fs)Figure 3.6: Temporal intensity (solid line) and phase (points) for a pulse from the OPA
centered spectrally at 1200 nm.

32
3.2

Overview of Experimental Method
All propagation experiments are conducted using frequency-resolved optical gat-ing (FROG) to obtain the full electric field of the pulses. Specific details of each experiment are presented with the data in later chapters. A brief overview of the experimental
method is described here.
Pulses from the compressor are spatially filtered and directed to the entranceof the FROG apparatus. The on-axis portion of the beam is selected using a 1 mm
aperture. This beam is measured with FROG and provides the reference field for theexperiments. A nonlinear sample is then placed in the beam path prior to the FROG
apparatus and a second measurement is made. Comparison of the field after propagation
with the reference field gives insight into the processes involved in propagation throughthat material. Beam size and average power are also measured at the entrance face ofthe sample. The average power at the entrance face of the sample can be altered byrotating one of a pair of polarizers placed in the beam path before the spatial filter. A
brief introduction to FROG as a technique follows in Section 3.3. Specifics of our SHG
FROG device and related experimental considerations are presented in Section 3.3.4.
3.3

FROG
Frequency resolved optical gating (FROG) was developed in 1993 as a method

for acquiring the full field of a pulse without making assumptions about pulse shape[31, 48]. By full field, we refer only to the axial temporal slowly varying amplitude and()phase of a pulse: E t /p

I (t)ei'(t) , and not to the full spatio-temporal field. FROG isa spectrally resolved autocorrelation technique, and yields the spectrogram of the pulse()

to be measured. A spectrogram, S !;  , is a two-dimensional representation of the33pulse as a function of time and frequency:

S (!;  ) =

Z 1

1

()

2

E (t) g (t  ) exp ( i!t) dt ;(where E t denotes the complex electric field, and g t(3.4)

 ) is a variable-delay gatefunction. The gating can be performed using nearly any instantaneously responding
nonlinearity. Experimentally, a FROG device splits the pulse to be measured into two
replicas. These two replicas interact in a nonlinear medium yielding an autocorrelation signal. This autocorrelation signal is then spectrally resolved, and the resulting
spectrum is recorded on a CCD.
The first FROG apparatus used self-diffraction as the nonlinearity and is referred
to as SD FROG [31]. Other FROG devices introduced include polarization gating(PG) [49, 50], second-harmonic generation (SHG) [51, 52], third-harmonic generation (THG) [53], and transient grating (TG) [54] FROG. All of these versions, with the
exception of SHG FROG, rely on third order nonlinearities for performing the autocorrelation. SHG is a second order nonlinearity. The spectrogram obtained with each ofthese geometries is of a different mathematical form. Since in FROG the pulse is used() (to gate itself, the quantity E t g t( ) ) is simply the autocorrelation signal which wewill denote Esig t;  .
The signal field in the case of each of the FROG geometries mentioned above areshown below:

SD : Esig (t;  ) = E 2 (t) E  (t  )PG : Esig (t;  ) = E (t) jE (t  )j2SHG : Esig (t;  ) = E (t) E (t  )THG : Esig (t;  ) = E 2 (t) E (t  ) :

(3.5)

()

In these expressions, E t denotes the complex-valued electric field, and  is the delay
between pulses in the autocorrelation. Depending on which pulse is delayed in TG

34
FROG, the signal field is mathematically equivalent to that of SD or PG FROG.
In each case, the spectrogram obtained is referred to as the measured “FROG
trace”. The FROG trace is a plot of intensity versus frequency and time delay. The
electric field of the pulse that created the FROG trace can be essentially uniquely determined from the FROG trace. Ambiguities associated with the various types of FROG
will be discussed in Section 3.3.2.
Once the FROG trace has been measured, the next step is to retrieve the electricfield of the pulse that created the trace. The spectrogram obtained in the FROG measurement can easily be transformed into a two-dimensional phase retrieval problem by asimple change of variables. An in-depth discussion of this transformation can be foundin Ref. [55]. The two-dimensional phase retrieval problem is a well known problem
in the field of image science. The method of retrieving the intensity and phase of apulse from the FROG trace is to apply an iterative phase retrieval algorithm. The taskof the FROG retrieval algorithm is to find a signal field that satisfies two constraints.
The first constraint is that the measured FROG trace must be the squared magnitude of( )the one-dimensional (1-D) Fourier transform of Esig t;  with respect to time:

IF ROG (!;  ) =

Z 1

1

2

Esig (t;  ) exp ( i!t) dt :(3.6)

The second constraint is the mathematical form of the signal field as given by Eq. 3.5.
This constraint is the ability of the calculated field to be generated from a realistic signal
field by a known nonlinear optical process. The basic FROG algorithm is as follows. A
1-D Fourier transform algorithm is employed that involves Fourier transforming back

( )

(

)

and forth between Esig t;  and Esig !;  . The first constraint is applied in the fre-()

quency domain, where the magnitude of Esig !;  is replaced by the square root of
the measured FROG trace. The second constraint is applied in the temporal domain.
This process is iterated until the algorithm converges. Convergence is determined byconsidering the root mean square (rms) difference between the measured FROG trace

35
and the trace computed from the retrieved pulse field. When this “FROG error” is acceptably low, the algorithm is said to have converged. The FROG error is computed
as a normalized intensity and is therefore unitless. The value of the FROG error atwhich the algorithm is considered converged differs depending on the type of FROG
involved, and the size of the grids used in acquiring and retrieving the FROG trace. For
a 128128 grid, SHG FROG error is typically less than

0:002.

Several versions of the retrieval algorithm for FROG have been published [31,48, 50, 51, 56, 57, 58]. Some have included an additional constraint in the form of
an independently measured spectrum, but this added constraint causes instabilities andstagnation of the algorithm and therefore should not be used [52]. The most robustalgorithm available during the time these thesis investigations were performed involves
the use of generalized projections. The method of generalized projections basicallyinvolves projecting the solution back and forth onto two sets, each of which constitutes
the set of all fields that satisfy a particular constraint. In the case of FROG, each ofthese sets corresponds to one of the two algorithmic constraints discussed earlier. A
projection onto the other set involves moving to the closest point inside that set, where
the closest point is determined by minimizing a defined distance metric between thetwo sets. These distance metrics necessarily differ for different FROG types and will
not be discussed in detail here. Further information on the application of the methodof generalized projections can be found in Refs. [52] and [57]. It should be noted
here that generalized projections do not guarantee convergence. However, the method
typically has been found to work very well in FROG applications, especially whenused in combination with other algorithmic methods. It is interesting to note that the
FROG algorithm typically converges fastest when the initial guess for the field is oneof random noise, not a Gaussian pulse. The FROG algorithm used for the experiments
presented in this thesis combines several algorithmic techniques, switching between
methods as each one stagnates. The algorithm we use is a software package available

36
from Femtosoft technologies. It should be noted that in April of this year, a genetic
algorithm was introduced [58]. This algorithm retrieves SHG FROG traces better thanthe composite algorithm used in these studies. The genetic algorithm is much slower
to converge, but converges to lower errors, and is a very promising FROG algorithmic
technique.
One reason that the FROG algorithm converges well despite the absence of aguarantee of convergence with generalized projections is that the FROG trace is overdetermined. An electric field sampled at N points has

2N degrees of freedom, N in mag-nitude and N in phase. The FROG trace, however, has N 2 pixels. It is for this reason
that a measured FROG trace having a fairly large amount of random noise can still be
retrieved well. In fact, the algorithm often converges to a field that produces a lessnoisy calculated FROG trace [59]. The overdetermined nature of the FROG trace also
reveals systematic errors in acquiring the trace by failure of the algorithm to converge[60]. Systematic errors cause nonconvergence because of the physically realizable field
constraint included in the retrieval algorithm.
Another very useful feedback mechanism inherent in FROG is the presence ofconsistency checks of the measured FROG trace. These consistency checks occur in theform of 1-D curves called marginals that are obtained by integrating the FROG traceover the frequency or delay variable. The mathematical form of the marginals obtained
depend, of course, on the type of FROG being implemented. Since the SHG form of
FROG is used for collecting most of the data presented in this thesis, its marginals are
discussed here.
The frequency marginal is obtained by integrating the FROG trace over the delay
variable,  . For the case of SHG frog, the resulting curve is given by [61]:!
MSHG(!) = 2I (!)  I (!)(3.7)

which is simply the autoconvolution of the fundamental pulse spectrum. In Eq. 3.7,

37
!
MSHG
(!) denotes the frequency marginal, and I (!) denotes the pulse spectrum. There-

fore, all that is needed to perform a consistency check on the FROG measurement is toindependently measure the pulse spectrum, calculate the autoconvolution of that spectrum, and compare to the frequency marginal. Not only can this method be used tocheck for systematic errors, but it is also useful for alignment of the nonlinear crystal
in the FROG device and for correcting for phase matching problems that occur in the
crystal.
The delay marginal for SHG FROG is obtained by integrating the FROG traceover the frequency variable, ! , and is given by [61]:MSHG( ) =

Z 1

1

I (t) I (t  ) dt

(3.8)

Equation 3.8 is simply the second-order autocorrelation of the pulse. Hence, a second consistency check is to perform an independent second order autocorrelation andcompare to the delay marginal.

3.3.1

Some Practical Issues Concerning FROG
As with any measurement technique, the data must be sampled properly. The

FROG sampling rate (FSR) is satisfied when all non-zero FROG data lie completely
within the FROG grid, where non-zero is defined as an intensity equal to or greaterthan

10 4 times the peak intensity [60]. In other words, since the temporal and spectral

domains are related by a Fourier transform, the time step must be chosen such that the
spectrum does not extend off the edge of the FROG grid. The step sizes in the twodomains are related by the following expressions:t = f1 and f = fns(3.9)

t = n1 f(3.10)

s

or

38
where

t is the temporal sampling interval, fs is the sampling frequency, f is the

spectral sampling interval, and n is the number of samples in the temporal and spectral
domains. Sampling near the FSR limit allows one to use the smallest possible grid andtherefore allows quick algorithmic convergence, however the retrieved field often has
a sharp, jagged profile. Since all necessary data are present, more attractive spectral
and temporal profiles can be obtained by symmetrically adding zeroes to both endsof the data set in one domain and Fourier transforming to the other. Another obvious
way of avoiding jagged retrieved field profiles is to sample data on a larger grid andtherefore above the FSR. FROG traces are most visually appealing when both the delay
and frequency domains are equally sampled. However, any sampling rate that satisfies
the FSR is sufficient.
Careful calibration of the frequency and delay axes is also particularly important.
Since the step size in each domain, as well as the central wavelength of the data are used
as input parameters in the retrieval algorithm, accuracy of these parameters determines
the accuracy of the retrieved field. It has been shown that inaccuracy on the order of
10% in the input parameters introduces roughly 10 to 20% inaccuracy in retrieved pulse
parameters such as temporal and spectral FWHM and phase distortion [52]. Since thetwo domains are related by Fourier transform, an error in any calibration will affect all
aspects of the retrieved field.

3.3.2

Ambiguities Inherent in FROG
FROG essentially retrieves the full field of the measured pulse, however there

are a few ambiguities inherent in various forms of FROG that should be mentioned.
Three ambiguities are inherent in all forms of FROG [31, 48]. The first ambiguity is
an arbitrary constant phase factor, which is irrelevant in ultrashort pulse measurements.
The second ambiguity is an arbitrary shift in time and is similarly unimportant. The( )third ambiguity is the distinction between Esig t;  and Esig

( t;  ). The latter sig-39nal, however, is not consistent with the mathematical form of the signal field constraint
and therefore cannot occur in FROG. Additional ambiguities are specific to various
versions of FROG. SHG FROG, for instance, has two important ambiguities. The firstof these is the direction of time. Since SHG is a second order technique and produces
traces that are symmetric with respect to time, an upchirped pulse cannot inherently be
distinguished from a downchirped pulse. The direction of time of the retrieved pulse
must be determined independently. Methods for resolving this ambiguity will be discussed in Section 3.3.4. The second SHG FROG ambiguity exists in the relative phaseof multiple pulses. In this case relative phases of ' and '+  yield the same FROG

trace. A similar ambiguity in the relative phase of multiple pulses exists for the THG
form of FROG. In this case, however, it is for relative phases of ' and ' 

2=3. Forthe SD, PG, and TG forms of FROG, no additional ambiguities are known.
It was mentioned previously that the PG form of FROG is used as a pulse diagnostic technique for the work presented in this thesis. PG FROG was chosen as apulse diagnostic because the associated FROG traces are essentially a graphic displayof pulse instantaneous frequency versus time and are thus very intuitive. PG FROG canbe used in a single-shot configuration and thus can yield nearly real time qualitative
information about the pulse. Figure 3.7 shows simulated PG FROG traces for a flat
phase, a downchirped, and an upchirped pulse. The delay axis increases from the top to
the bottom of each graph, and the wavelength axis increases from left to right. Intensity
is plotted on an arbitrary color scale, with the most intense regions in the center of the
FROG trace falling off to lower intensities at the edges of the signal. The approximate
temporal duration of the pulse can be determined by observing the width of the signal
along the delay axis. With frequent monitoring, the trace is a good indicator of changes
in the output of a laser system.
The SD and TG forms of FROG also yield intuitive traces, while SHG and THG
do not. The SHG and THG forms however offer higher sensitivity than their more

40

Delay

a)

Wavelength

Delay

b)

Wavelength

Delay

c)

Wavelength
Figure 3.7: PG FROG traces for (a) an unchirped pulse, (b) a downchirped pulse, and(c) an upchirped pulse.

41
intuitive counterparts. As mentioned earlier, some forms of FROG have importantambiguities as well. The type of FROG used for any application should be chosen tomeet the needs of each individual experiment. Table 3.1 gives a summary comparisonof the various forms of FROG mentioned here.
FROG techniques are generally simple to implement, insensitive to noise, andprovide the user with a full-field characterization of a pulse with only minor ambiguities. The technique can be very broadband and has been implemented for pulses
in the ultraviolet, visible, and infrared. FROG was first introduced as a multiple shottechnique, but can also be adapted to single shot measurements [49, 62, 63]. FROG has
been demonstrated for pulses with energies as low as 1 pJ [55] and when combined with
spectral interferometry can measure a pulse train with average energy of only 42 zeptojoules, or

42  10 21 J [64]. Since any nearly instantaneously responding nonlinearity

can be used, FROG can be tailored to fit individual requirements. Non-instantaneous
nonlinearities present in the autocorrelation crystal can also be accounted for in the
retrieval process [50]. Since FROG has inherent consistency checks, systematic errors
can be easily identified and removed. Recently, efforts have been made to extend FROG
to a real-time measurement technique [65, 66], and a method of placing error bars on a
FROG measurement has been determined [67].
Several improvements on the basic FROG technique have been invented, someof which have been given excessively cute names. TADPOLE is a combination of
FROG and spectral interferometry that allows the measurement of very weak pulses[64]. TREEFROG allows simultaneous recovery of two independent ultrashort pulses
from a single spectrogram. TREEFROG has been implemented in a mulitshot configuration using SHG FROG [68] and in a single shot configuration using PG FROG [69].
Multi-pulse Interferometric (MI) FROG is an extension of FROG that allows real-time,
single-shot imaging of ultrafast phase shifts. This technique is also capable of resolving
three pulses in a single shot [70]. MI FROG has been applied to pump-probe coherent

Sensitivity:(multi-shot, single shot)

Ambiguities:

1 J, 10 J

0.1 J, 1J

1 pJ, 10 nJ+

Time direction;
relative phase ofmultiple pulses:', ' 

Short wavelength
signalRequirespolarizers

Not phasematched; requires
thin nonlinear
mediumDisadvantages:

No

Very sensitive

Yes

SHG

Automatic phasematching

Yes

PG

Additional advantages:

Intuitive traces?

SD

3 nJ, 30 nJ+

Relative phase ofmultiple pulses:', ' 23

Very shortwavelength signal

Very large
bandwidth

No

THG

Table 3.1: Comparison of some common variations of FROG.

10 nJ, 0.1 JInvolves threebeams

Background-free

Yes

TG

42

43
spectroscopy, measuring ultrafast, high-field ionization rates in gases [71, 72]. A version of FROG using the Kerr nonlinearity in an optical fiber has the same sensitivity as
SHG FROG, but it does not have an ambiguity in the direction of time [73, 74]. A version of FROG using cascaded second-order nonlinearities also boasts high sensitivity
without the time direction ambiguity [75, 76].
FROG has primarily been applied as a laser diagnostic [77, 78, 79, 80, 81] until recent years when it has been extended to a variety of other scientific endeavors.
FROG has been used for the measurement of nonlinear materials properties [82]. It has
been applied to understanding modelocking dynamics in external cavity semiconductor
diode lasers [83]. It has also been used in the study of relativistic accelerations in plasmas [84] and ionization induced pulse shortening and retardation [85]. FROG has also
been used in feedback systems to generate tailored pulses from a compressor [86, 87]
and in using tailored pulses to control condensed-phase vibrational excitation [88].
For the purpose of this thesis, I now delve into a little more detail on the PG and
SHG forms of FROG in general and discuss the details relevant to our implementationof these devices.

3.3.3

PG FROG
The polarization gating form of FROG is the most intuitive form of FROG and isused in this work as a laser diagnostic. A diagram of the apparatus is shown in Fig. 3.8.
The pulse to be measured is split into two replicas. One replica, the probe beam, issent through a pair of crossed polarizers. The more intense gate beam undergoes apolarization rotation of 45 degrees by out of plane propagation before interacting withthe probe beam in a thin piece of fused silica. The gate beam induces a birefringencein the fused silica through the optical Kerr effect. When the probe beam overlaps thegate beam in the fused silica, the probe beam undergoes a slight polarization rotation,
allowing a portion of it to pass through the second polarizer to the detector. PG FROG44

PG FROG:out of plane
propagation

C.L.
CCD
Imaging
spectrometer

BS
f.s.

delay arm

Figure 3.8: Schematic diagram of polarization gating FROG. C.L. denotes cylindricallens; BS, beamsplitter; and f.s., fused silica. Polarizing beam splitter cubes are drawn
as squares with a diagonal line through the center.

45
can be arranged in a multishot or single shot configuration. Multiple shot configurations
rely on scanning one arm through a range of delays. A single shot configuration isused here. In this arrangement, a cylindrical lens focuses both the probe and gate
beams to vertical lines in the fused silica. The beams are crossed horizontally at anangle in the fused silica. In this way, each position along the axis of beam overlap
corresponds to a specific value of relative delay between the two beams. The entire
autocorrelation signal can then be imaged onto the slits of an imaging spectrometer, andthe entire FROG trace can be acquired in a single shot with a CCD camera. Although
our diagnostic system employs a single shot geometry, because of the speed of the CCD,
actual FROG traces are acquired by averaging over several shots. All adjustments to thelasers are made manually, therefore integration over several pulses is sufficient to allow
pseudo-real time viewing of how these adjustments affect the output pulses. Pulses
are monitored with PG FROG while the length of the compressor is adjusted to set thechirp of the laser pulses to the desired level.
The thickness of the nonlinear medium in PG FROG is important. If the medium
is too thick, the pulse to be measured will broaden temporally and acquire a linear chirp
on propagation through the glass. If the medium is too thin, the signal will be distorted
by an etalon effect. Light can reflect off the back surface of the glass, travel to the front
surface, and reflect back into the direction of signal. If the nonlinear medium is too
short, the time it takes for the light to travel back and forth in the glass can be shorter
than the duration of the pulse. This is especially true for longer pulses such as the ones
used in these investigations. For this reason, a 1 mm thick piece of fused silica is used.
The difference in angle of propagation between probe and gate beams should be
kept as small as is reasonably possible. This angle is typically less than 10 degrees.
As each beam propagates through the crystal it experiences an angle dependent path
length, and hence an angle dependent delay. The difference in delay experienced by thetwo beams leads to a blurring of the time delay at any given spatial coordinate. This

46
blurring effect also increases with the thickness of the nonlinear medium.
Since, in this single-shot configuration, the delay is mapped to a spatial coordinate, spatial quality of the beams is particularly important [55]. For this reason, if
the PG FROG were to be used to obtain more quantitative information, the input beam
should be spatially filtered. In our experiments, there was no spatial filtering before
the PG FROG device. For this reason, it is likely that comparisons between PG and
SHG measurements taken simultaneously reveal inaccuracies in the PG measurement.
The retrieved fields from traces acquired in rapid succession with PG FROG also vary
appreciably. It is for these reasons that the PG form of FROG is used solely as a qualitative pulse diagnostic in these experiments. Because of its intuitive traces, it serves
this purpose well.

3.3.4

SHG FROG
SHG FROG employs a second order nonlinearity and is therefore the most sen-sitive of the most commonly employed FROG techniques. It is capable of making highdynamic range measurements, making it suitable for propagation experiments where
small changes in the low intensity wings of the pulse bear important information about
the physics involved in the propagation process. A diagram of the SHG FROG apparatus is shown is Fig. 3.9. The pulse to be measured is split into two replicas using a
1.6 mm thick beamsplitter with a broadband Inconel coating. Front surface metallic
reflectors are used to minimize dispersion as the pulse propagates to the frequencyconversion crystal. A 10 cm focal length spherical mirror focuses the two replicas ofthe pulse into the second harmonic conversion crystal, and the resulting signal at 2! isimaged onto the entrance slits of an imaging spectrometer. The pulse in one arm of theinterferometer is delayed with respect to the other by a stepper-motor controlled translation stage. The spectrum at each delay is recorded with a thermoelectrically-cooled,
16-bit CCD camera. For each value of delay, the signal is averaged over 300 pulses.

47

SHG FROG

delay arm

BS

BBO

spectrometerand CCD
cameraFigure 3.9: Schematic diagram of SHG FROG apparatus. BS denotes the beam splitter;and BBO, the second harmonic generating crystal. (From Ref. [89].)

48
FROG spectrograms are recorded on 128 by 128 or 256 by 256 grids depending on
the spectral content of the pulse to be measured. Typical peak intensities recorded on
the camera produce 50,000 counts, while the dark current level is at 970 counts. In
addition, the noise level is 2–5 counts, providing a signal-to-noise ratio of better than
10,000:1. Propagation experiments using SHG FROG are conducted by measuring thepulses with and without a nonlinear sample in the beam.
There are several important issues that should be taken into consideration whenusing SHG FROG. A good discussion of some of the issues can be found in Ref. [52].
One obvious issue is the ambiguity of the direction of time. This time ambiguity can beremoved in three ways: 1) repeat the measurement after chirping the pulse in a known
manner, such as propagating the pulse through a glass with known dispersion, 2) propagate through a thin piece of glass such that surface reflections introduce a small pulse
behind the main pulse [78], or 3) have some a priori understanding of the processes
that produced the measured pulse. Initially we chose the first option, propagating thepulse through a 5 cm thick piece of BK-7 glass. As our research progressed, however,
we switched to the third option, using information from our developing model of pulse
propagation as described in later chapters [90, 91].
As mentioned earlier, SHG FROG yields a trace that is symmetric about delay. One may find it tempting then to only measure half the trace, thereby reducing
the amount of time required to complete a measurement. However, if the trace is notcentered at the exact zero delay point, some broadening of the measured pulse could
result. Also, acquiring half of the trace and numerically inserting the mirror image
before running the algorithm has the unfortunate side effect of symmetrizing noise as
well. Asymmetric noise will be discarded by the algorithm because of the physicallyrealizable signal constraint, but symmetric noise will remain. Therefore, acquiring only
half of a trace, or symmetrizing a fully acquired trace, serves to increase the effects ofnoise and should thus be avoided. It is also noteworthy that the symmetric nature of the

49
FROG trace does not imply that only symmetric pulses can be retrieved. The symmetryof the trace has no bearing on the symmetry of the retrieved pulses.
Because SHG FROG is such a sensitive technique, it is imperative to limit the intensity of light being measured. Because of the high intensities present in the focus of
the two beams, it is relatively easy to damage the nonlinear crystal. Also, if conversion
efficiency in the crystal is too high, depletion of the input fields occurs, invalidating the( ) = E (t) E (texpression for the signal field: Esig t;  ). In this case, the algo-rithm will necessarily fail to converge to the correct pulse. A rule of thumb guideline isto keep the peak intensity conversion efficiency below 3% [52].
Propagation of intense femtosecond pulses through several centimeters of a bulk
nonlinear medium such as fused silica can result in complicated temporal and spectral
intensity profiles, as well as dramatic spectral broadening. As an example, the intensity
in the wings of the spectrum after propagation (at wavelengths that are 50 nm fromthe spectral peak) can be just three orders of magnitude less than the peak intensity.
Compare this to our input pulse, where the intensity spans six orders of magnitude overthe same 50 nm spectral region. Because of the large spectral bandwidths of the propagated fields it is important to take into account the finite phase matching bandwidth of
the second harmonic conversion process. This finite phase matching bandwidth arises
from a phase mismatch between the fundamental and second harmonic frequencies.
The conversion efficiency due to phase mismatch is given by [7, 92]sin(kL=2) 2=
(3.11)
kL=2 ;
where k = (2!=c)[ne (2!;  ) no (! )], ! and 2! are the fundamental and second

harmonic frequencies, ne and no are the extraordinary and ordinary refractive indices,

L is the length of the crystal, and  is the phase matching angle in the crystal. Therefore, the thinner the crystal, the larger the range of frequencies that can be converted
for a given crystal orientation. For lower peak intensity propagation experiments,

50
where the resulting pulse spectral bandwidth is lower, we use a 100 m thick pieceof

BaB2O4 (BBO) as the SHG crystal. For experiments in which high peak in-tensities lead to dramatically broadened pulses, we use a 50 m piece of BBO. In bothcases, the crystal is cut at an angle of 

= 29:1Æ for type-I phase matching at 800 nm.

For all experiments, the frequency marginal is used to check and correct for problems
associated with the phase-matching bandwidth of the nonlinear crystal.

3.3.5

SHG FROG Data
An example measured SHG FROG trace and the calculated FROG trace corre-

sponding to the retrieved field are shown in Fig. 3.10. The FROG trace was collected
and retrieved on a 128 by 128 pixel grid, and the FROG error associated with this retrieval is0:00312. The measured and retrieved traces match very well, indicating good

convergence of the algorithm. A further test of the convergence of the algorithm is tocompare the marginals of the measured FROG trace to those of the retrieved trace. A
comparison of the marginals for the traces shown in Fig. 3.10 is shown in Fig. 3.11.
Agreement is excellent in both the frequency and time domains.
That the measured and retrieved fields are in such close agreement is very good.
But it is also important to verify that the measured and retrieved FROG traces correspond to the pulse actually being measured. For this, it is necessary to compare FROG
results with independently measured parameters. One comparison that is easy to implement in the laboratory is a comparison between the retrieved pulse spectrum and an
independently measured spectrum. An example using the same retrieved field as above
is shown in Fig. 3.12. The agreement shown in this figure is typical. The SHG form of
FROG is also particularly nice in that its delay marginal is simply the second order intensity autocorrelation of the pulse. As a further demonstration that SHG FROG indeed
measures the actual pulse field, an example of an independently measured autocorrelation compared with both the measured and reconstructed delay marginals is shown inSH Wavelength (nm)51

Measured
380
390
400
410
420
-500

0

500

SH Wavelength (nm)Delay (fs)Retrieved
380
390
400
410
420
-500

0

500

Delay (fs)Figure 3.10: A measured SHG FROG trace and a FROG trace calculated from thecorresponding retrieved field.

52Frequency Marginals

Time Marginals

1.0

Intensity

Intensity

1.0

0.5

0.5

0.0

0.0

390

400

-400

Wavelength (nm)

-200

0

200

400

Delay (fs)Figure 3.11: Measured (solid lines) and retrieved (points) frequency and time marginals
corresponding to the FROG traces presented in Fig. 3.10.

Axial Intensity

1.0

0.5

0.0
760

780

800

820

Wavelength (nm)Figure 3.12: Independently measured spectrum (solid line) along with retrieval spectrum (points) for the pulse measured in Fig. 3.10.

53
Fig. 3.13. Once again, agreement is very good.
Figure 3.14 shows the retrieved fields from two separate measurements. The
top graph plots the temporal fields as a function of intensity and phase. The bottom
graph plots the retrieved pulse spectra. These two FROG measurements were performed roughly 15 minutes apart and demonstrate the repeatability of the measurement
technique.
The preceding measurements were all made using pulses having a relatively narrow spectral bandwidth. As mentioned previously, in propagation experiments one
often needs to measure a pulse that has been spectrally broadened appreciably. Even
using the thin BBO crystal, phase matching can become an issue. The phase matchingefficiency for the 50 m BBO crystal used in some experiments has a FWHM of 52 nm.
The pulses measured in these experiments typically have a bandwidth after conversion
to the second harmonic of 40 nm (FWHM), thus the phase matching bandwidth provided by this crystal is sufficient for conversion of most of the spectrum. However, theconversion efficiency is not constant over the entire bandwidth of the pulse. Figure 3.15
shows the phase matching efficiency curve for 50 m of BBO cut at an angle of 29.1Æ
for type-I phase matching. Fortunately, this does not present a formidable problem
because of the consistency check provided by the frequency marginal. As has been
demonstrated previously [78], the FROG trace can be corrected prior to being input
into the retrieval algorithm by using the frequency marginal and the autoconvolutionof the fundamental spectrum. This correction eliminates bandwidth limitations due tofinite phase matching efficiencies, as well as grating and detector responses.
Comparison of the frequency marginal with the autoconvolution of the fundamental spectrum is also used for alignment of the second harmonic conversion crystal.
The angle of the crystal is tuned for the smallest difference between the autoconvolution
and the frequency marginal. At this angle, there is optimal overlap of the conversion
efficiency curve with the second harmonic pulse spectrum.

54

Measured SHG Autocorrelation
Reconstructed delay marginal
Measured delay marginalSHG Intensity

1.0

0.5

0.0
-200

-100

0

100

200

Delay (fs)Figure 3.13: An example of the agreement between an independently measured autocorrelation of a pulse and the corresponding measured and reconstructed SHG FROG
delay marginals.

55

1.0

4

0

0.5

Phase (rad)Intensity

2

-2

-4

0.0

-200

-100

0

100

200

Delay (fs)Intensity

1.0

0.5

0.0

760

780

800

820

Wavelength (nm)Figure 3.14: Retrieved intensity and phases (top) and retrieved spectra (bottom) of two
SHG FROG measurements. The excellent agreement illustrates the repeatability of the
SHG FROG technique.

Phase Matching Efficiency

56

1.0

0.5

0.0
360

400

440

480

Second Harmonic Wavelength (nm)Figure 3.15: Phase matching efficiency curve for 50 m BBO.

57
Measurement of more complicated pulses that result from highly nonlinear propagation is also accomplished well by SHG FROG. Gray scale intensity plots of themeasured and retrieved FROG traces of a complicated pulse are shown in Fig. 3.16.
The square root of the second harmonic intensity is shown for display purposes to emphasize the wings of each trace. Darker shading corresponds to higher intensity regions,and a contour plot with a contour interval of 40 units is overlaid on each trace. The actual intensity values (not the square root) range from 2 to 

45; 000 counts. Very good

agreement between the two traces is seen, even at the lowest intensity values. As discussed previously, the thin second harmonic crystal used in these experiments enables
the full second harmonic spectrum of the pulse to be measured.
Figure 3.17 shows the spectrum recovered from the FROG algorithm (dashes)
and an independently measured fundamental spectrum (solid line) corresponding to
the data in Fig. 3.16. The spectra are plotted on a log scale to emphasize the very
good agreement in the wings, down to the noise level of the spectrometer. The shortwavelength side of the measured fundamental spectrum cuts off before the noise levelis reached due to the spectrum extending beyond the edge of the CCD camera in the
spectrometer. The excellent agreement between the two spectra demonstrates the highdynamic range capabilities of SHG FROG which make it suitable for characterizing thebroad-bandwidth pulses that can result from nonlinear propagation.

Figure 3.16: Measured and recovered SHG FROG traces, plotted as the square root of intensity, of a spectrally broad andtemporally complicated pulse. Darker regions correspond to regions of higher intensity. The contour interval is 40 units.

58

59

measuredrecovered

1

Axial Intensity

0.1

0.01

1E-3

1E-4

750

800

850

Wavelength (nm)Figure 3.17: Independently measured (solid line) and recovered (dashed line) spectra
corresponding to the FROG traces shown in Fig. 3.16. (From Ref. [89])Chapter 4
Propagation in Fused Silica

Full-field measurements of femtosecond pulses provide valuable information in
the study of ultrafast phenomena. For example, improvements in measurement techniques have contributed to a more comprehensive understanding of femtosecond lasers[4, 93, 77]. Femtosecond pulse diagnostics should not, however, be limited to the study
and optimization of femtosecond sources. The study of light-matter interactions in general can benefit greatly from knowledge of the amplitude and phase of the electric field.
Measurements of the nonlinear indices of refraction of materials [94, 82, 95] and thecharacterization of nonlinear propagation in optical fibers [96] demonstrate the utility of these full-field measurements. Such experiments not only elucidate light-matterinteractions but can also serve to test the measurement technique itself.
In this chapter, we extend these full field measurements to the study of propagation of short pulses through fused silica. Section 4.1 presents early attempts to measure
the nonlinear index of refraction of various materials using FROG. Difficulties in thesemeasurements led to a study of one-dimensional (plane wave) propagation in fused silica (Section 4.2). These studies also serve to demonstrate the validity of FROG as atechnique for investigating nonlinear pulse propagation. In Section 4.3, the experimental method is applied to the more complicated case of three-dimensional pulse propagation where nonlinear effects cause the pulse to change spatially as well as temporally
during propagation. In this more complicated propagation regime, the combined effects

61of group velocity dispersion and optical nonlinearities lead to the splitting of a pulse
into two or more sub-pulses.
4.1

Measuring the Nonlinear Index of Refraction
The original goal of our investigations was to provide accurate measurements of

the nonlinear index of refraction of various materials. The index of refraction of a given
medium can be expressed as the sum of the linear index of refraction plus the nonlinear
index of refraction times the intensity of the laser pulse and is typically written:

n = n0 + n2 I:(4.1)

To measure the nonlinear index of refraction, one needs to measure the phase changeacquired as a pulse traverses the material of interest. Assuming the change in phase of
the pulse, (t), is derived solely from self-phase modulation,  (t) is proportional

to the change in index of refraction times the length of the medium. The change in(t) is given by (t) = 2 n I (t) L

index of refraction is simply n2 I , and

 2

(4.2)

where  is the optical wavelength, and L is the length of the medium. Solving for n2
yieldsn2 =  (t)2L I (t) :(4.3)

The change in phase can be measured by making two separate measurementswith FROG: one before (reference) and one after propagation through the sample. A

 (t). Since the change in phase
is assumed to be solely the result of self-phase modulation,  (t) should be proportional to the intensity profile, I (t). It is common to separate the effects of GVD andsimple subtraction of retrieved phase profiles yields

SPM because GVD temporally rearranges frequencies within the pulse while SPM creates new frequencies. Contributions to the phase change from group velocity dispersion

62
can be calculated and added to the reference phase before subtraction of the two phaseprofiles. Some relevant equations are given later in this section. A fit of the measured
intensity profile to the measured phase change gives a constant of proportionality,  ,such that

n2 =

 
2L I0(4.4)

where I0 denotes the peak intensity of the pulse.
The peak intensity can be recovered from the FROG measurement, along withindependent measurements of beam size and average power of the pulses. The measured average power divided by the repetition rate of the laser equals the energy perpulse. Energy per pulse is equivalent to the integral of the pulse intensity over space
and time:

Energy=pulse =Z 1Z 2Z 1

0

1

0

I (r; t) r dr d dt:

(4.5)

If we assume a Gaussian spatial profile,

!02

Energy=pulse = I0 2

Z 1

1

I (t) dt:

(4.6)

1=e2 beam waist, !0, is determined from an intensity profile captured by a CCD
R1camera. The integral 1 I (t) dt can be obtained from a FROG measurement of theThe

reference field thus allowing n2 to be determined.
Measurements of this type are performed using the method presented by Taylor
et al. [82]. The PG form of FROG is used for these initial measurements, with a
0.5 mm slit inserted before the cylindrical lens. This slit is centered on the beam andselects the most intense portion of the spatial profile. This aperture eliminates spatial
averaging effects in the single-shot polarization gate geometry [82]. Measurements are
performed with samples of fused silica of varying lengths. In order to induce phasechanges of greater than

1 radian, sample lengths greater than 0:64 cm are used. After

63
propagation through the fused silica, the intensity profile is broadened significantly.
Because of this broadening, a problem then arises in performing the fit between change
in phase and the intensity profile. Using each of the two measured intensity profiles for
performing the fit yields values of n2 that differ by as much as

10%. Figure 4.1 shows aplot of intensity versus time for a pulse before and after propagation through a 2.54 cm
sample of fused silica. The measured phase difference between the two pulses is also
shown. Values of n2 at 800 nm using the two intensity curves areand

1:81  10 16 cm2/W.

1:62  10 16 cm2/W

Pulse broadening due to GVD alone cannot account for such a large change.
Assuming a Gaussian input pulse, the spectral field of the pulse is given by [97]E ( ; z) = A0 exp x expiy(z)2where A0 is a complex amplitude factor,x=

TG2 (0)4 (1 + a2 )

2

(4.7)

is frequency, and x and y are given by2and y (z) = 4 (1 +aTaG2(0)) k z:

(4.8)

00

2

TG (0) represents the 1=e2 width of the input pulse in time, a is the input chirp parameter,
and k 00 — the second derivative of the wave vector k — determines the group velocity
in the material. The

1=e2 width of a pulse broadened during propagation through amaterial of length z is then given by

TG (z ) =For an unchirped input pulse, with ar

4 [x2 + y2 (z)]:

(4.9)

x

= 0, substituting Eq. 4.8 into Eq. 4.9 gives

TG (z ) = TG (0)

1 + Lz2 !1=2dwhere Ld is a characteristic length due to GVD and is given by

TG (0)2Ld =2jk00j :(4.10)

64

2

0.8

n2=1.62 x 10

-16n2=1.81 x 10

-16

1

0.6
0
0.4

Phase (rad)Normalized Intensity

1.0

-1

0.2

0.0
-300

-200

-100

0

100

200

-2
300

Delay (fs)Figure 4.1: Retrieved intensity as a function of delay before (solid line) and after(dashed line) propagation through 2.54 cm of fused silica. Circles indicate phase difference. Calculated values of n2 corresponding to each intensity profile are also shown.

65
A calculation of the expected pulse broadening due to GVD of a 92 fs pulse —a typical pulsewidth in our experiments — traversing 2.54 cm of fused silica reveals
that the pulse should broaden by about
conditions is on the order of

5 fs. The observed broadening under the same

90 fs. Clearly, then, the assumption that GVD and SPM

can be treated separately works well only for short samples and longer pulses where
broadening effects are minimized. It is only by looking at the combined effects of
GVD and SPM on pulse propagation that such observations can be explained.
4.2(1+1)-Dimensional Propagation
Fused silica is often used in applications involving short pulses in the visible andnear infrared because it has low dispersion and is therefore presumed to contribute little
to the broadening of femtosecond pulses. This may not be the case, however, whenintensities greater than 

1 GW=cm2 are present. At these intensities the nonlinear

contribution to the index of refraction becomes important. Furthermore, the interplay
between the nonlinearity and the linear dispersion can lead to surprisingly large changes
in the pulse width over relatively small propagation lengths as seen in Fig. 4.1.
Neglecting changes in the transverse spatial profile, the propagation of a pulse
in a nonlinear, dispersive medium can be modeled by the (1+1)-dimensional nonlinear
Schrödinger equation (NLSE):@ E k00 @ 2 E+ i 2 @t2@zi2n2 jEj2E = 0:(4.11)( )In this equation, E z; t is the slowly varying complex amplitude of the field in therest frame moving at the group velocity. The GVD is determined by k 00 , which is thesecond derivative of the wave vector k with respect to frequency, evaluated at the center
frequency. The third term gives the effects due to the instantaneous nonlinearity. The
field is normalized such that jEj2

= I is the intensity in units of W/cm2.

Figure 4.2 shows the evolution of the on-axis temporal field of an intense pulse

66
as it propagates through fused silica. All fields are retrieved from SHG FROG measurements. In Fig. 4.2(a), the intensity and phase of the input pulse is plotted. Plots (b)and (c) of this figure show the intensity and phase of the same pulse after propagation
through 1.27 cm and 2.54 cm of fused silica, respectively. In addition, plots (b) and (c)show the calculated intensity and phase using the measured field of Fig. 4.2(a) as an
initial condition to Eq. 4.11.
As is illustrated in Fig. 4.2(b) and (c), good agreement exists between the measurement and the model. The peak intensity of the input pulse isaddition, 

57 GW=cm2. In= 800 nm and k00 = 360 fs2 =cm are used as parameters for the calcula-tion. The value of n2 can then be used as a fitting parameter. For these measurements,

n2 = 2:5  10 16 cm2 /W gives the best agreement between experiment and theory. Thisvalue of n2 is in good agreement with other recent measurements [94, 82].
To lowest order, Eq. 4.11 includes the effects of group velocity dispersion andtemporal self-phase modulation. During propagation at 800 nm, in the regime of positive GVD (k 00 ) and positive n2 , both dispersion and temporal SPM will act to impose apredominantly positive chirp on the pulse. GVD then acts to broaden the chirped pulse.
Similar results have been observed in optical fibers where the (1+1)-D NLSE, Eq. 4.11,
also applies. The data in Fig. 4.2, however, provide the first amplitude and phase measurements detailing the interplay of positive GVD and SPM in bulk propagation.
The use of Eq. 4.11 to model the experimental conditions is justified as longas the field is well approximated by a plane wave during its propagation. For theseexperiments, a large diameter beam with confocal parameter z0= n0!02= on theorder of many tens of meters is used. The confocal parameter is defined as twice theRayleigh range and the Rayleigh range is the distance a Gaussian beam propagatesfrom the focal waist, !0 , to the point where the diameter has increased by a factor ofp

2. In other words, the confocal parameter gives the full distance between positionspwhere the spot size is 2!0 in a focusing beam. Self-focusing due to the nonlin-

67

1.0

4

(a)

z=0.0 cm
2

0.5

0
-2

1.0

(b)

z=1.27 cm

-4
4
2

0.5

0
-2

Phase (radians)

Normalized Axial Intensity

0.0

0.0
1.0

(c)

z=2.54 cm

-4
4
2

0.5

0
-2

0.0
-200

0

200

-4

Time (fs)Figure 4.2: Temporal field of an intense femtosecond pulse at propagation distances infused silica of z = 0, 1.27, and 2.54 cm. The experimentally measured intensity (solidlines) and phase (solid triangles) are shown in all three plots. The calculated intensity(dashed lines) and phase (open circles) are also shown in plots (b) and (c). (From Ref.
[98]).

68
ear index of refraction can also affect the plane wave nature of the beam. The peak
power of pulses used in these measurements is near

10 GW. This power is many or-ders of magnitude above the critical power for self-focusing which is approximately= (0:61)2=(8n0n2 ). In fused silica, at a wavelength of 800 nm,
this expression evaluates to Pcrit = 2:6 MW. The critical power for self-focusing isgiven by Pcrit

only defined for continuous wave propagation, and therefore the number given here
is only a guideline. Even though the peak power is well above the critical power for
self-focusing, the pulse propagates as a plane wave because the self-focusing length,
defined as zf

p= !0 n0= (n2I ), is on the order 50 cm, which is more than twenty

times greater than the propagation length. The validity of this plane wave approximation is further confirmed by comparing the results calculated by Eq. 4.11 with theresults of a three-plus-one-dimensional [(3+1)-D] model presented later in this chapter.
For the experimental conditions presented here, both the (1+1)-D and (3+1)-D models
give nearly identical results.
The importance of the interplay between SPM and positive GVD is further illustrated in Fig. 4.3, where the full-width at half maximum (FWHM) of the measured
and calculated intensities are plotted as a function of propagation length. In addition,
the FWHM for the case of GVD alone is also plotted. As can be seen, inclusion of thenonlinearity results in dramatic pulse broadening over GVD alone. The fact that thecalculated FWHM is slightly less than the measured value is still under investigation.
One possible explanation for this discrepancy was investigated. It is well known
that the nonlinear susceptibility of fused silica is comprised of both a near-instantaneouselectronic response and a slower nuclear response. The slower response, called the Raman response, is due to nuclear vibrations excited by the optically induced perturbationof the electronic structure. The characteristic Raman response time is on the order of

50 100 fs and can comprise up to 20% of the total nonlinear response [99, 100, 101].
We hypothesized that the Raman response of the fused silica could be responsible for

69

180

Intensity FWHM (fs)160

Measured
Calculated
Calculated with GVD alone

140
120
100
80
0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

Propagation Length (cm)Figure 4.3: Measured and calculated FWHM of the intensities of the fields presented
in Fig. 4.2. All calculations us the measured field of Fig. 4.2(a) as input. (From Ref.
[98]).

70
the observed differences between the calculated and measured broadening. To test this,the Raman response was added into the model by replacing the nonlinear term of the(1+1)-D NLSE,

n2 jE (t)j2
withn2
In this equation,(

tion and f t

(1) jE (t)j2 +

Z t

1



t0 ) jE (t0 )j2 dt0 :f (tis the fraction of the nonlinearity resulting from the Raman contribu-t0 ) is the normalized Raman response function, which is approximatedby [101]1+(!r r )2t
exp
sin(! t) :f (t) =!r r2For the numerical simulations,rr(4.12)

is varied, r is the Raman response time taken to be 50

fs, and the dimensionless quantity !r r is taken to be 4.2. Calculations using this modified equation show that contributions from the Raman effect should not be observedin this regime. In fact, appreciable contributions from the Raman nonlinearity do notappear until peak intensities reach

100 GW=cm2 and higher. Peak intensities in theseone-dimensional propagation experiments are an order of magnitude below that level.
Other experiments, based on cross-correlations alone observe a similar discrepancy between measured and calculated broadening [102].
Despite the small discrepancy between calculated and measured broadening,
agreement between the experiment and the model is quite good. These positive results give us confidence that the SHG-FROG technique can be successfully applied
to the more complicated propagation measurements presented in later sections of thischapter.

71
4.3(3+1)-Dimensional Propagation
As shown in the previous section, plane-wave propagation in the regime of posi-tive GVD and positive n2 leads to a lengthening of the pulse in time due to the combination of dispersion and SPM continuously separating the component wavelengths ofthe pulse. The addition of transverse dimensions to the problem, however, can result ininteresting and complicated spatio-temporal effects, including temporal pulse splitting[103, 104, 105, 106]. We emphasize this in contrast to the (1+1)-D situation presented
in the previous section and in contrast to nonlinear propagation in single-mode opticalfibers where pulse splitting is not observed due to the spatial constraints of the field[107]. For Gaussian input pulses, the (1+1)-D NLSE does not predict pulse splitting
even with higher intensities and greater propagation distances. Temporal pulse splitting during nonlinear propagation in bulk media has been verified experimentally by
spectral [108, 41] and autocorrelation measurements [42, 109]. These measurements,
however, lack full information about the amplitude and phase of the field. In order toprovide a more complete picture of the complicated dynamics involved in the pulse
splitting process, we use SHG-FROG to measure the complete on-axis temporal fieldof a pulse after propagation in a self-focusing regime. These experiments allow us tomake detailed comparisons with theoretical models and gain a better understanding of
the processes involved in the propagation.
For the following measurements, the output from the laser system is spatiallyfiltered, strongly attenuated, and focused with a

50 cm focal length lens to a spot size

70 m FWHM at the entrance face of a 2.54 cm long fused silica sample. After
propagation, the pulse is allowed to diverge for  75 cm. The central portion of theofbeam is then selected with an aperture and used as input to the SHG-FROG. In contrast
to the (1+1)-D experiments mentioned in the previous section, the peak power of thepulses used in these experiments is much lower. Typically, the peak power is only one

72
to three times the critical power for self-focusing. Both the self-focusing length and theconfocal parameter are on the order of the propagation length, however, meaning thattransverse changes in the beam may no longer be neglected.

4.3.1

Experimental Results at 800 nm
Figure 4.4 shows the results of successive SHG FROG measurements for in-creasing input powers. The intensity and the phase in the time domain are shown in theleft column. Independently measured spectra and the spectra recovered from the SHG
FROG measurements serve as a check of FROG convergence and are shown in the rightcolumn. The top row of Fig. 4.4 is the input field, with a temporal intensity FWHM
of 92 fs. The time-bandwidth product is 0.6, and some uncompensated second- andthird-order phase variations are evident. Moving down the rows of Fig. 4.4, the pulse
undergoes a partial splitting, a full splitting, and then multiple splittings. The fully
split pulses of Figs. 4.4(c) and (d) are nearly two times shorter than the input pulse,
having durations on the order of!inst = !050 fs. With the instantaneous frequency defined asd=dt, the predominant negative curvature of the temporal phase im-plies upchirped pulses. The calculated critical power for self-focusing in fused silica is

Pcrit = 2:6 MW for values of n0 = 1:45, n2 = 2:51016 cm2 /W, and 0 = 800 nm.
The measured peak powers for Fig. 4.4(b), (c), and (d), are 1.7 Pcrit , 1.9 Pcrit , and 2.3

Pcrit , respectively. The associated spectra for the split pulses show pronounced broadening and modulation, with the characteristic modulation frequency being equal to theinverse of the time spacing between the pulses. Agreement between the measured andthe recovered spectra is considered very good in view of the complicated structure. Experiments were performed which show that increasing the length of the sample has thesame qualitative effect as increasing the peak input intensity.
From a simple physical standpoint, the basic process of pulse splitting can beunderstood as follows. Initially, strong self-focusing moves off-axis energy toward

73

Figure 4.4: Left column: Measured temporal intensity (lines) and phase (points) of the
input pulse (a) and the pulse after propagation through 2.54 cm of fused silica (b)–(d).
Plots (b)–(d) correspond to a peak input power of 1.7 Pcrit , 1.9 Pcrit , and 2.3 Pcrit ,respectively. Right column: The corresponding independently measured (lines) andretrieved (points) spectra. (From Ref. [91])74
the peak of the pulse and compresses it in both space and time [110]. As the peakintensity increases, effects due to SPM also increase, thereby generating new frequency
components. The combination of the SPM-induced upchirp and positive GVD thenact to push the energy away from the temporal center of the pulse, initiating pulse
splitting. As this process continues, the peak intensity drops, stopping the collapse at
the temporal pulse center. Off-axis energy, however, continues to focus away from thetemporal center such that two pulses are resolved [105].
Variations in the phase of the input pulse can strongly affect the output. It is
possible to create a predominantly linearly chirped input pulse by lengthening or shortening the grating compressor of the chirped pulse amplification system. Experiments
were performed using both upchirped and downchirped input pulses. The sample is a
2.54 cm long piece of fused silica. The upchirped pulse for these measurements has

147 fs, and the downchirped pulse has a temporal FWHM of
153 fs. The time-bandwidth product of the input pulse in both cases is  0:8. Each ofa temporal FWHM ofthe chirped input pulses propagates through the fused silica sample at two different peak

45 and 49 GW=cm2 for the upchirped
and downchirped pulses, respectively. The higher input peak intensity is 57 GW=cm2

intensities. The lower peak intensity values arefor both upchirped and downchirped pulses.
Figure 4.5 shows the measured SHG FROG traces obtained with chirped input
pulses in each of the higher power cases. In addition, both the retrieved and independently measured spectra are plotted for comparison. The characteristic shape of the
SHG FROG trace for pulse splitting with a downchirped pulse [Fig. 4.5(a)] is very
different than when the input pulse is upchirped [Fig. 4.5(c)]. An upchirped input
pulse leads to SHG FROG traces after propagation which are largely diamond shaped,with decreasing intensity in the center of the trace, implying greater splitting. The
downchirped input pulse, on the other hand, maintains a significant intensity in thecenter of the trace. Figure 4.6 shows the retrieved time and spectral domain intensity385

1.0 (b)(a)
Intensity

SH Wavelength (nm)

75

396

0.5

0.0

408
-350

0

760 780 800 820 840

350

Wavelength (nm)Time (fs)1.0 (d)(c)
Intensity

SH Wavelength (nm)

388

396

405

0.5

0.0
-350

0
Time (fs)350

760 780 800 820 840
Wavelength (nm)Figure 4.5: Left column: Measured SHG FROG traces after propagation with (a)downchirped and (b) upchirped input pulses. Right column: Corresponding independently measured (lines) and retrieved (points) spectra. The peak intensity is 57 GW/cm2
in each case. (From Ref. [98])76
and phase for each of the four input pulse cases. At higher peak powers, the amountof pulse splitting and spectral modulation increases. When an initially downchirped
pulse [Figs. 4.6(a) and (b)] splits temporally, the resulting pulses are about two times
narrower than those produced from the splitting of an upchirped pulse [Figs. 4.6(c) and(d)]. In addition, the spectra in Figs. 4.6(e) and (f) (downchirped input) are narrower
than the spectra of Figs. 4.6(g) and (h) (upchirped input). A simple explanation forthese observations arises from the fact that both positive GVD and SPM (from positiven2 ) act to produce positive, linear chirp over the central region of the pulse. Thus, an
initial upchirp on the pulse acts as a head start to the propagation induced upchirp, resulting in broader pulses. On the other hand, an initial downchirp, acts to negate thepropagation induced upchirp, yielding shorter split pulses at the output. The narrowerand deeply modulated spectrum seen with the downchirped input can be interpreted as
destructive interference between existing frequencies and new frequencies created by
SPM. Note also that the spectral phase after propagation for all four cases has an overall
concave-up curvature, regardless of the sign of the chirp of the input pulse. This phasecurvature implies an upchirp across the total split field such that the leading pulse isspectrally red-shifted compared to the trailing pulse. This upchirp is due to the combined effects of positive GVD and self-phase modulation in the regime of positive n2 ,as discussed in the (1+1)-D case.

4.3.2

Experimental Results at 1200 nm
Measurements were also performed using the output of a femtosecond opticalparametric amplifier (OPA). When pumped at 800 nm, the OPA produces signal fields
with wavelengths in the range of 1100-1400 nm. This is an interesting regime in whichto study propagation because these wavelengths are predominantly used for opticalcommunications in fused silica fibers. In addition, in this wavelength range, the GVD
in fused silica decreases in magnitude and then changes sign from positive to negative

77

1.0

0.5

0

0.5

0

0.0

-4

0.0

-4

4

1.0

0.5

0

0.5

0

0.0

-4

0.0

-4

1.0

(b)

4

(c)

1.0

(e)

(f)

(g)

4

4

4

0.5

0

0.5

0

0.0

-4

0.0

-4

4

1.0

0.5

0

0.5

0

0.0

-4

0.0

-4

1.0

(d)

-400 -2000

200 400

Time (fs)(h)

Spectral Phase (rad)Normalized Axial Intensity

1.0

Phase (rad)4(a)

Spectral Intensity

1.0

4760 780 800 820 840

W avelength (nm)Figure 4.6: Retrieved fields from SHG FROG: (a)–(d) temporal intensity (lines) andphase (points); (e)–(h) associated spectral intensity (lines) and phase (points). Plots (a)and (b) correspond to downchirped input pulses at 49 and 57 GW/cm2 , respectively; (c)and (d), to upchirped input pulses at 45 and 57 GW/cm2 , respectively. (From Ref. [98])78
near 1250 nm, while n2 remains approximately constant. With negative GVD (anomalous dispersion) and positive n2 , it has been predicted that spatio-temporal solitons canpropagate [111]. From a practical point of view, such 3-D solitons could have important
implications for optical communications and all-optical switching [112, 113].
To insure good beam quality, the output of the OPA is spatially filtered and recollimated before being focused onto the entrance face of the fused silica sample inthe same manner described for the

800 nm experiments. Beam parameters are approx-

imately the same as those used at 800 nm, so that qualitative comparisons can be madebetween the two situations. Results at the wavelength of 1200 nm are shown in Fig. 4.7.
In this figure, the temporal intensity and phase before and after propagation through3.0 cm of fused silica sample are shown. The corresponding spectra recovered fromSHG FROG and the independently measured spectra are also shown. Here again, very
good agreement between the recovered and measured spectra is demonstrated. The input field of Fig. 4.7(a) has a FWHM duration of 92 fs, but the large negative curvatureof the phase indicates the existence of significant linear upchirp. The time-bandwidth
product is three times the transform limit which implies that 30 fs pulses could be
generated if the upchirp were properly compensated. After propagation through the
fused silica, the pulse begins to split, as can be seen in Figure 4.7(c). The input peak

9 MW, and assuming the value of n2 is the same at both 800 and
1200 nm, this equals 1.5 Pcrit . With a 10% increase in the power above 9 MW, rapid
power in this case isspectral broadening and continuum generation are observed. The splitting observed inFig. 4.7(c) is comparable to the splitting observed with an upchirped input pulse at 1.2

Pcrit at 800 nm. The splitting at 1200 nm, however, is more symmetric. One would
expect the splitting to be less pronounced at 1200 nm because of the decrease in the
GVD at these wavelengths. The amount of splitting observed here is thus surprising.

79

15

1.0 (a)1.0 (b)

0

0.5

-5

Axial Intensity

5

Phase (rad)Axial Intensity

10

0.5

-10
0.0

0.0

-15
15

1.0 (c)1.0 (d)

0

0.5

-5

Axial Intensity

5

Phase (rad)Axial Intensity

10

0.5

-10
0.0

-15
-200

-100

0

Time (fs)

100

200

0.0
1100

1200

1300

Wavelength (nm)Figure 4.7: Measured fields at 1200 nm. (a) Intensity (line) and phase (points) of the
input field, and (b) the corresponding independently measured spectrum (line) and thespectrum retrieved from SHG FROG (points). Plots (c) and (d) show the same pulse
after propagation through 3.0 cm of fused silica. (From Ref. [98])

80
4.3.3

TheoryAs opposed to our plane-wave experiments, to model the pulse-splitting experi-ments presented here, it is necessary to take into account the spatial dimension of thebeam. If azimuthal symmetry is assumed, the transverse dimension can be added to thenonlinear Schrödinger equation in the following manner:

i 2
ik000 @ 2 E
E+
2k0 ? 2 @t2

@E
@z

kn
i 0 2 jEj2 E = 0:n0(4.13)The only differences between this equation and Eq. 4.11 are the addition of the

2? and the additional radial dependence of the field, E (z; r; t). The
wave vector is k = 2n0 =, with n0 being the linear index of refraction at the center
wavelength. Again, the field is normalized such that jEj2 = I is the intensity in unitsof W=cm2 . Equation 4.13 is referred to as the (3+1)-D nonlinear Schrödinger equation
radial Laplacian(NLSE), and takes into account diffraction, linear dispersion, spatial self-focusing, andtemporal self-phase modulation. It has been predicted that self-focusing could eventually lead to catastrophic collapse of the pulse as focusing increases the peak intensity,
which in turn increases the focusing effect [114]. The (3+1)-D NLSE has been used,however, to show that below a certain power threshold GVD is sufficient to stop thiscollapse and temporal pulse splitting results [115]. Numerical solutions of Eq. 4.13
are performed using the Crank-Nicholson method to compute the derivatives. For all
simulations, the real input field is assumed to have a Gaussian spatial profile and eithera Gaussian or hyperbolic secant squared temporal profile. Both temporal profiles havebeen found to yield similar numerical results, and the initial temporal profile is chosenthat most closely resembles the experimental input pulse for each set of conditions. All
parameters used, such as temporal and spatial beam size and initial peak intensity, aretaken from experiment. The value of n2 is again taken to be

2:5  10 16 cm2=W.

Figure 4.8 shows the results of numerical simulations of propagation of a Gaus-

3 0 cm of fused silica. At the lowest input power, Ppeak = 0:2 Pcrit,sian input pulse through :0

Ppk=1.8Pcrit

r

r

t

400 fst

Ppk=1.6Pcritr

Ppk=2Pcrit

r

t

t

Figure 4.8: Calculated (using Eq. 4.13) intensity surface plots for a Gaussian input pulse after propagation through 3.0 cm offused silica.

All plots for 30 mm
fused silica

200 µm

Ppk=0.2Pcrit81

82
the pulse has remained mostly Gaussian, with essentially only the effects of GVD andSPM coming into play. When the input peak power is increased to 1.6 Pcrit , selffocusing has significantly compressed the pulse in space, and the pulse is also compressed in time. This pulse sharpening effect was predicted and measured more than
30 years ago [110, 116]. Put simply, this pulse sharpening effect is the result of theself-focusing induced transfer of off-axis energy toward the peak of the pulse. At thesame time, SPM has created many new frequencies within the pulse. At a peak powerof 1.8 Pcrit , GVD has begun to spread the component frequencies in time, initiating
pulse splitting. At this point, the peak intensity of the pulse has dropped. With a peak
power of 2.0 Pcrit , the pulse completely splits in time and two sub-pulses are resolved,
each of which are narrower in time than the original pulse.
The theory predicts a pulse splitting that is symmetric in intensity. The experiment, however, reveals asymmetric pulse splitting. Figure 4.9 shows a comparisonof the model with experiment at two different input peak powers. At the higher input
power, the experiment shows split pulses with the trailing pulse larger than the leading
pulse. There is also a corresponding rapid change in the phase at the trailing edge ofthe pulse. These two observations are consistent with the formation of a shock front.
The increased intensity at the peak of the pulse leads to a higher index of refraction
for those pulse components. The center of the pulse experiences a larger group delay
than the wings of the pulse, resulting in a piling up of energy at the trailing edge of thepulse. Space-time focusing is believed to contribute to the observed asymmetry [105].
Cubic phase variations on the initial field are expected to play a lesser role [117]. Unlike the (1+1)-D case, peak intensities in this self-focusing regime reach high enoughlevels that the Raman response of fused silica is likely to become important during
the propagation. The peak intensity of the self-focused field approaches the

TW=cm2level, however, no intensity-dependent loss indicative of multi-photon ionization or absorption is observed. Furthermore, no visible signs of permanent damage are observed

83

Measurement

Theory1.7Pcrit

Ppk=4.5 MW
1.0

Ppk=4.5 MW
20

1.0

-5

Intensity (a.u.)

0

0.0

0.5

0

0.0
-200

0

200

Phase (rad)0.5

Phase (rad)Intensity (a.u.)

5

-20
-250

Time (fs)0250Time (fs)Ppk=4.9 MW

Ppk=5.0 MW

1.9Pcrit

1.0

20

1.0

Intensity (a.u.)

0

0.5

0

Phase (rad)0.5

Phase (rad)Intensity (a.u.)

5

-5
0.0

0.0
-200

..

0

Time (fs)

200

-20
-250

0

250

Time (fs)Figure 4.9: Calculated (using Eq. 4.13) and measured fields after propagation through3.0 cm of fused silica. For all plots, lines represent intensity; and points, phase. Theory
predicts symmetric pulse splitting while the experiment observes asymmetric splitting.

84
in the fused silica.
Measurements illustrating changes in the spatial profile of the beam, along withthe calculated beam diameter, are shown in Fig. 4.10. Here, the measured beam diameters (FWHM) at the exit face of a 3.0 cm fused silica sample for four different
input powers are presented. SHG FROG measurements of the temporal field are also
made at these same input powers, allowing the degree of temporal splitting to be monitored. The time domain results are similar to those presented in Fig. 4.4. The beam
diameters shown in Fig. 4.10 are obtained by imaging the exit face of the fused silica
sample onto a CCD camera with a magnification of +2.8. The FWHM of intensity ismeasured along x and y dimensions. The calculated beam diameters are obtained byintegrating over the temporal dimension of intensity plots similar to those presented inFig. 4.8. The two points at the lowest powers correspond to pulses that have broadened
temporally, but have not yet split. At the third point, the pulse is partially split, suchthat the intensity between the two pulses drops to half the peak value. At the highest
peak power, the pulse is completely split – similar to Fig. 4.4(c). Both the numericaland experimental results demonstrate that the spot size approaches a constant value at
powers where pulse splitting occurs. The measurements indicate that this regime occurs at lower powers than predicted by the theory. Although, as seen in Fig. 4.10, theerror in the measured power is on the order of 25% due to uncertainties in the measured
pulse energy and the temporal profile of the pulse. In addition, the measured spot size isnever as small as the calculated value. This discrepancy may arise from spatial profile
deviations of the actual beam from an ideal Gaussian.
The simple (3+1)-D NLSE fares even less well in comparison to the experiments
at 1200 nm. Because of the decreased amount of linear dispersion in this regime, one
would expect decreased pulse splitting activity. In fact, using Eq. 4.13 with a valueof k 00= 60 fs2/cm at 1200 nm, no splitting is predicted even for higher input powers.

These results, together with recent simulations by Trippenbach et al., indicate that third-

85

140

Spatial FWHM (µm)

120

100

80

60

40

20
1

2

3

4

5

Input Peak Power (MW)Figure 4.10: Measured spatial FWHM of beam size as a function of input peak power(points). The solid curve is the calculated beam size assuming a Gaussian spatial pulse
for the input beam. (From Ref. [98])86
order dispersion plays an important role in pulse splitting in this regime [118].
The differences in the experimental and calculated results point out that it isnecessary to modify the (3+1)-D NLSE to include additional terms. From comparisonswith the experiment at 800 nm, we find it necessary to include terms for space-time
focusing, nonlinear shock, and a Raman response of the fused silica. Comparisonswith experiments at 1200 nm indicate the need for inclusion of third-order dispersion.
In addition, self-focusing can result in spot sizes in the sample that are on the orderof or less than a few wavelengths of the light, invalidating the paraxial approximation.
For this reason, we also include a term for nonparaxiality. These terms are included bymodifying the (3+1)-dimensional NLSE as follows:i 2
2k r?E

ik0 @ 2 Ei @ 2 E ik00 @ 2 E (k2 )000 @ 3 E++ 12k @t3
k @z@t 2k @z 2 2 @t2
2+ inn2 k 1 + !i @t@ (1 ) jEj2 + R(t) E
00= @@zE : (4.14)

In order of their appearance, the terms in Eq. 4.14 include effects due to diffraction,
space-time focusing, nonparaxiality, second-order dispersion, third-order dispersion,
nonlinear shock, and a Kerr-type nonlinearity. The third-order Kerr-type nonlinearity
includes terms for both instantaneous and delayed (Raman) contributions. An in-depth
discussion of this equation can be found in a paper by Zozulya et al. [90] It should be
noted that all of the parameters used in this equation are taken directly from publishedor experimentally determined values, and none are used as fit parameters in the calculations. Only diffraction, second-order dispersion, and the instantaneous nonlinearity areincluded in Eq. 4.13 and have been shown to predict symmetric pulse splitting. Again,
the assumed input pulse is a Gaussian in both space and time and has characteristics
similar to those of the experimental input pulses. Numerical experiments isolating theeffects of each term individually during propagation through 3.0 cm of fused silica havebeen performed [90]. The effects of each additional term are described briefly in thefollowing few paragraphs.

87
Raman Nonlinearity
As in the one-dimensional case, the Raman nonlinearity is included by replacing
the instantaneous nonlinearity with a term that includes both an instantaneous and non-()instantaneous response. In Eq. 4.14, R t is the Raman nonlinearity given by
Z t

1f (t t0 ) jE (t0 )j dt0

where


1
+
(
!r r )2t
f (t) =
exp
sin(! t) :!r r2r

r(4.15)The principal change resulting from inclusion of the Raman effect is the asymmetry
between the leading and trailing pulses. After propagation through a 3.0 cm sample, theleading pulse has almost twice the intensity of the trailing pulse. The relative increase of
the leading pulse at the expense of the trailing pulse can be understood simply in termsof Raman gain. The response function given by Eq. 4.15 is simply the time-domain
representation of the more common frequency-domain picture of stimulated Raman
scattering. Stimulated Raman scattering can be described as the process in which aphoton is absorbed, leaving an atom in a virtual state which then decays to a level thatis higher or lower in energy than the initial state. Lower energy (Stokes) frequencies
are observed more often than their higher energy (Anti-Stokes) counterparts because theground state is more heavily populated than excited states. Therefore, Raman scattering
preferentially amplifies red-shifted frequency components of the pulse at the expense ofblue-shifted frequencies. Since, in this case, positive GVD moves the red components
ahead of the blue components, it follows that the leading pulse becomes larger due tothe Raman gain.

Shock terms
Both linear and nonlinear shock terms are included in Eq. 4.14. In the case of
nonlinear shock, the peak of the pulse experiences a nonlinear increase in index of re-88fraction and thus experiences a slower group velocity than the lower intensity regionsof the pulse. This results in shock formation at the trailing edge of the pulse. Simulations including only nonlinear shock indicate that, during the pulse splitting process,the trailing pulse starts off larger than the leading pulse. By the exit face of the sample, however, this asymmetry has reversed. The reason for this is that the shorter, more
intense trailing pulse diffracts faster than the longer leading pulse in the absence of continued compression after pulse splitting. With an input peak intensity of

85 GW=cm2,

pulses begin to split after about 2.0 cm of propagation and, by 3.0 cm of propagation,
the leading pulse has a higher peak axial intensity than the trailing pulse.
Linear shock occurs in the space-time focusing term. Space-time focusing accounts for the group delay due to a nonzero angle between a ray and the optic axis. Asa pulse passes through a nonlinear focus, some of the energy is shifted to later times
by this effect. As a result, this linear shock also leads to an amplification of the trailing pulse. And, as with nonlinear shock, the trailing pulse diffracts rapidly after pulse
splitting. For these experiments, contributions from linear shock are on the same orderas those from nonlinear shock. A combination of both linear and nonlinear shock leads
to more dramatic enhancement of the trailing pulse during the pulse splitting process.
The Raman nonlinearity, which preferentially intensifies the leading pulse, is notstrong enough to completely offset the effects of the shock terms, however, it does
serve to dampen them. With Raman included, the trailing pulse does not get as sharp
or as intense during the splitting process. Also, the Raman nonlinearity contributes toa larger leading pulse at the exit of the sample.

Third-order dispersion
In the normal dispersion regime of fused silica, third-order dispersion acts toincrease the GVD of blue components while decreasing the GVD of red components.
As a result, the trailing pulse spreads faster than the leading pulse. In this way, third-

89order dispersion results in a larger leading pulse. While contributions from third-orderdispersion should not be ignored, they are smaller than those from Raman and shock
effects.

Nonparaxiality
Nonparaxiality turns out to be a negligible effect in this regime. It may become
important, however, during propagation at even higher powers, where the process of
self-focusing results in smaller beam sizes before it is arrested by pulse splitting.

4.3.4

Results
Although the calculated examples here all point to split pulses with a larger lead-ing pulse, changing input pulse parameters or propagating through a shorter sample(e.g. Fig. 4.4) can result in split pulses with the opposite symmetry. A comparison of
the calculated field including the Raman nonlinearity, space-time focusing, nonlinear
shock, and third-order dispersion in addition to diffraction, second-order dispersion andan instantaneous nonlinearity with an experiment involving similar peak input powers
is shown in Fig. 4.11. The calculated field in this case is able to reproduce the asymmetry observed in the experiment. The overall downward curvature of the phase in bothcases is indicative of an upchirp across the entire field, meaning that the leading pulse
is red-shifted compared to the trailing pulse. Also, the rapid change in phase at thetrailing edge of the experimental pulse is well modeled by the inclusion of shock terms.
The calculated split pulses are narrower in time than the measured pulses. This may be
explained by deviations of the experimental beam from an ideal Gaussian in space andtime.
At higher peak input intensity, as in Fig. 4.4(d), the experiment observes the splitting of a pulse into multiple sub-pulses. Increasing peak input intensity in calculations
using the modified NLSE given by Eq. 4.14, however, does not lead to splitting into

90

Measured
5

-5
0.5
-15

Phase (rad)Axial Intensity

1.0

-25
0.0
-200

0
Delay (fs)200

Calculated
5
-5
-15

0.5

-25

Phase (rad)Axial Intensity

1.0

-35
0.0
-200

0

200

Delay (fs)Figure 4.11: (a) Measured and (b) calculated on-axis intensity (solid line) and phase(dashed line) after propagation through 3.0 cm of fused silica. The input pulses forboth the experiment and the calculation have a peak power of 4.9 MW. (Adapted from
Ref. [90])91
any more than two sub-pulses. The reason for this is that Eq. 4.14 calculates the fieldat the exit face of the sample. In the experiment, however, the pulse propagates for
75 cm before being measured with the SHG FROG. Another way of saying this is thatthe model calculates the near-field, while the experiment makes measurements in the
far-field. The on-axis far-field can be calculated by integrating over the near-field spatial cross section for each temporal slice of the pulse. In other words, we assume that aspatial point in the near-field diffracts as a point source to the corresponding temporalplane in the far-field. A maximum in the far-field intensity can arise from either a crosssection involving intense regions of the near-field pulse, or a cross section involving
lower intensity regions of the pulse, but constant phase. A more in-depth discussion ofthis type of calculation can be found in Ref. [119]. A consequence of this calculationis that a maximum in the far-field can arise from a region of the near-field where thetemporal intensity is near zero. The calculated spectrum does not extend quite as far to
short wavelengths as the measured spectrum. One possible explanation for this result
is the absence of multiphoton ionization in the model.
Figure 4.12 shows both the calculated near-field and far- field intensity profiles ofa pulse after propagation through 3.0 cm of fused silica at two different input powers,
along with the corresponding measured fields. The top row of Fig. 4.12 illustrates thatfull pulse splitting is observed in the far-field while only partial splitting has occurred in
the near-field. Again, the asymmetry of the calculated field is similar to that of the measured field. The second row illustrates the case of a pulse in the far-field occurring in aregion of the temporal axis that is a valley in the near-field. These calculations are now
able to predict the splitting of a pulse into two or more sub-pulses. For completeness,the calculated and measured spectra corresponding to the pulses shown in the second
row of Fig. 4.12 are plotted in Fig. 4.13. The spectra are broadened significantly after
propagation and are plotted on a log scale to illustrate the agreement even in the low
intensity spectral wings of the pulse. Figure 4.13(a) shows both the spectrum retrieved

Ppk=5.4MW=2.1Pcrit

0

1

0

-200
Delay (fs)

0

200

-200

Delay (fs)0200

Far-field Theory-200

Delay (fs)

0

200

-20

-10

0

-5

0

5

Far-field Experiment

Phase (rad)Figure 4.12: A comparison of near- and far-field theory with the far-field measurements at two different input peak powers as indicated in
the figure. Lines represent the intensity; and points, the phase. (Adapted from Ref. [119])

Axial Intensity
Axial Intensity

Ppk=4.6MW=1.8Pcrit1

Near-field Theory

Phase (rad)

92

93

1

(a)

0.1

Spectral Intensity

0.01

1E-3
1

(b)

0.1

0.01

1E-3
750

800

850

Wavelength (nm)Figure 4.13: Measured (a) and calculated (b) spectra corresponding to the data in thesecond row of Fig. 4.12. In (a) the solid line is the independently measured spectrum,
while the points represent the retrieved spectrum. (From Ref. [89])94from the SHG FROG measurement, and an independently measured spectrum. Figure 4.13(b) shows the calculated on-axis far-field spectrum. All major features, in boththe time and frequency domains, are reproduced by the calculation.
Previous theories concerning multiple pulse splitting often relied on one pulse
splitting into two pulses and each of these pulses undergoing secondary splitting. The
calculations presented here indicate that this does not have to be the case, and in mostsituations, multiple pulses in the far-field arise from constructive and destructive interference of components of the near-field pulse in the far-field. In addition, the calculations indicate that the position of maximum self-focusing, which occurs in themedium, and the position of pulse splitting are spatially separated along the propagation axis. The pulse first self-focuses and then, at some later propagation distance,
it splits. Moreover, the distance between the self-focusing event and the splitting isinversely proportional to the input power.
4.4

SummaryThis chapter demonstrates the ability of FROG to follow nonlinear propagation insystems where both instantaneous and noninstantaneous nonlinearities are present. Our
experiments have shown that SHG FROG is capable of high-dynamic range measurements of complicated pulses having over 100 nm of total spectral bandwidth. Experiments involving temporal pulse splitting exemplify the mutually beneficial relationshipthat is possible between experiment and theory. These experiments also demonstrate
the ability of FROG to lend insight into the nature of complex propagation problems.
In the plane wave regime, a (1+1)-D model based on the nonlinear Schrödinger
equation compares favorably with measurements. These experiments illustrate the importance of the interplay between GVD and SPM that leads to dramatic temporal broadening of a pulse.
At experimental conditions where the pulse undergoes self-focusing during prop-

95
agation, we observe the splitting of the pulse into two and more sub-pulses, each ofwhich has a shorter temporal duration than the initial pulse. The overall upchirp acrossthe split field indicates that the leading pulse is red-shifted compared to the trailing
pulse. The asymmetric nature of the measured split pulses indicates that a simple (3+1)D NLSE is not sufficient to describe the propagation. The asymmetry can be accounted
for numerically with the addition of a Raman nonlinearity, nonlinear shock, space-time
focusing, and third-order dispersion to a basic (3+1)-D NLSE.
We find that shock terms have the largest effect on the propagation, resulting inan enhancement of the trailing edge of the pulse in the time domain. This sharp trailing pulse diffracts faster than the leading pulse and appears less intense at the exit of a
3.0 cm sample. The Raman nonlinearity serves to partially offset the effects of shockand results in a red-shifting of pulse frequencies. In the presence of positive GVD, thisred-shift contributes to the larger leading pulse observed in some experiments. Contributions from third-order dispersion are much smaller, but they do affect the symmetryof the split field. In addition, this work demonstrates that, at high peak powers, a pulse
splits into more than two sub-pulses.
Extension of the calculation to include propagation to the far-field correctly predicts multiply-split pulses for the first time. In the following chapter, experiments carry
this research into even higher intensity regimes where continuum generation accompanies pulse propagation.

Chapter 5
Continuum Generation

We have seen in the previous chapter that at powers high enough for self-focusing,interesting pulse propagation dynamics can result. Experiments above the critical power
for self-focusing can result in the splitting of pulses into two or more sub-pulses. Thispulse splitting arises in part because of the broad spectral bandwidths that are createdby self-phase modulation and then separated temporally by group velocity dispersion.
But, what happens at even higher input powers? Do the pulses continue to split intoeven more sub-pulses? And how broad does the spectrum get? It has been observed thatat powers above the critical power for self-focusing, propagation in solids, liquids, andgases can produce an extremely broadened spectrum. The range of wavelengths produced often spans the entire visible spectrum and extends into both the IR and the UV.
This phenomenon has been called spectral super-broadening or continuum generation.
The continuum spectrum produced has been used in optical parametric amplification[120, 47, 121, 122], time-resolved broadband absorption and excitation spectroscopy[123, 124], and the generation of short pulses [125]. The exact process responsible forthe generation of this continuum, however, is currently unknown.
Spectral super-broadening was first observed by Alfano and Shapiro in 1970
[126]. Their experiment involved propagating
an input power of from

530 nm picosecond pulses in glass with

1 GW=cm2. At the output, they observed a spectrum that spanned

400 to 700 nm. They also observed the formation of self-trapped filaments within

97
the glass. The first evidence of self-trapped filaments was reported in 1964 when extremely long, thin damage spots were observed in glass and other materials [127]. For
self-trapped filaments to form, a process must be involved that arrests the self-focusing
effect and allows the pulse to propagate without spreading. Self-trapped filaments havebeen explained in a variety of ways. Some of these explanations include a self-produced
dielectric waveguide [128], a self-guiding structure similar to a fiber consisting of a
Kerr cladding and a weakly ionized core [129], and as a moving focus [130]. Oneor more self-trapped filaments are often present with continuum generation. It has
been asserted that regardless of the medium in which the continuum is generated, two
requirements for continuum generation are self-trapped filaments and dielectric breakdown [131]. Although the validity of the first remains a question, the second has been
proved incorrect. Evidence that dielectric breakdown is not necessary for continuum
generation is found in the properties of the transmitted continuum beam. The spatial
properties are only slightly modified from that of the incident beam [132], and theemitted continuum is collimated, modulated, and polarized [133]. Dielectric breakdown should result in emission that is neither collimated nor polarized. The necessityof self-trapped filaments has been brought into question by an experiment involving

500 m) jet of ethylene glycol [43]. The length ofcontinuum generation in a thin (the sample is small enough that self-trapped filaments may not form. The role of selffocusing is also minimized in this experiment. It is commonly believed, however, that
self-focusing plays an important role in the continuum generation process. That selffocusing is important is evidenced by the fact that continuum generation only occurs
with input powers above the critical power for self-focusing [134].
The white light continuum appears as a central beam of white light surroundedby rings of color. These rings do not extend continuously from the central white light,
but occur as distinct rings of red, green, and blue light, often separated from the central white light beam — and from each other — by rings of darkness. The higher

98
frequency light appears in the outermost ring, and the lower frequency light forms thering nearest the white light continuum. This arrangement of frequency components isexactly opposite that which would be predicted by diffraction. An example of whitelight continuum generated in sapphire is shown in Fig. 5.1. The central white light
continuum is also observed to be both spatially [133, 41] and spectrally modulated[131, 132, 134, 41]. Super-broadened spectra have been observed in a variety of materials including glasses such as fused silica and BK-7 [133, 135]; crystals such as
calcite, quartz, sodium chloride and potassium bromide [133, 136]; semiconductors
such as gallium arsenide and zinc selenide [136]; gases such as neon, argon, krypton,
xenon, nitrogen and air [137, 132, 134, 138, 129]; and liquids such as water, methanol,
carbon tetrachloride, carbon diselenide, and benzene [131, 135]. Both picosecond andfemtosecond pulses have been used to generate continua, with incident pulses spectrally centered from around 248 nm [134] to around 9.3 m [136]. Continuum spectra
under all conditions share certain similarities including the central white light continuum surrounded by rings of color, an asymmetric pulse spectrum with the blue spectral
wing extending further than the red, a dependence on input power rather than intensity,and a polarization that is in the same direction as that of the input pulse. These striking
similarities indicate that the mechanism responsible for continuum generation is very
general, having little to do with the spectroscopic features of the material involved. The
width of the spectrum generated is, however, dependent on the medium in which it isgenerated [124], but it does not scale with the size of the nonlinear index of refraction as might be expected. In fact, in materials with high n2 , and therefore stronger
self-focusing and self-phase modulation, the spectrum is actually narrower than formaterials with low n2 [135].
Several approaches have been taken to explain the observed spectra. On first observing continuum generation in glass, Alfano and Shapiro attributed the broad spectrum to a stimulated, nondegenerate four wave mixing process [126]. This four wave

99

Figure 5.1: Far-field image of continuum generated in sapphire.

100
mixing paradigm was championed in many following papers by Penzkofer et al. [139,140, 141, 142]. Penzkofer’s work asserts that there are several processes that can be
involved in continuum generation. The primary process is the amplification of quantum noise by a stimulated, parametric four-photon interaction. In certain materials, andunder certain conditions, stimulated Raman scattering and a second parametric process
driven by the pump laser and stimulated Raman light come into play. These generated
frequencies can result in a cascaded frequency upconversion effect, generating a broad
spectrum. The asymmetry of the spectrum is explained as absorption of the red andinfrared components of the pulse [141]. Experiments by this same group indicate thatthe on-axis spectrum consists of a spectrally broadened central peak, with low intensity wings extending into the UV and IR. The four-wave mixing theory predicts broadwings, but it does not account for the significant broadening near the input wavelength.
To explain this effect, self-phase modulation is invoked as a special case of four-wave
mixing in which the amplified wavelengths are already present in the pulse and do notneed to arise from quantum noise. Although this four-wave mixing theory does predict
broad spectral wings, it predicts a peaked spectrum corresponding to Raman resonancesin the material. The experimentally observed spectra are often modulated, but the peaks
do not always occur at the predicted frequencies. In addition, this theory fails to account for self-focusing in the medium, and it fails to address the ring structure observed
surrounding the central white light continuum. Although it predicts a very broadened
spectrum for special cases where the resonant structure of the material is conducive tostrong Raman scattering, the theory does not appear to be as universal as experiments
indicate continuum generation is.
Several attempts have been made to model continuum generation by more rigorously solving the nonlinear wave equation for pulse propagation. The wave equation,accounting for self-phase modulation, four-wave mixing, and self-steepening and neglecting dispersion, predicts an asymmetric spectral broadening. The predicted broad-101
ening, however, is less than the observed broadening [143]. Another work, in which thesame basic equation is solved using a different method, is able to predict broader pulses[144]. In both cases, however, dispersion is assumed to be zero. This assumption isvalid when comparing to continua generated in gases, but it is invalid in experiments
involving most liquids and solids. That dispersion plays an important role in propagation has already been demonstrated in Chapter 4 of this thesis where it is shown that
dispersion leads to temporal pulse broadening and arrests the collapse of a self-focusing
pulse. In addition, self-phase modulation implies increased broadening with a higher
nonlinear index of refraction in contrast to experimental evidence.
It has been observed that self-trapped filaments are nearly always present duringcontinuum generation. These self-trapped filaments can only form if there is a process
occurring in the medium that stops the collapse of the pulse due to self-focusing. The
approach can then be taken that the processes involved in halting the collapse and allowing the formation of self-trapped filaments are most likely also responsible, at leastin part, for continuum generation [114]. It was proposed that plasma formation, and theassociated appearance of free electrons, was sufficient to stop the collapse and simultaneously enhance SPM such that a broad spectrum results [145]. Although this predictsa broad blue-shifted spectrum, the associated loss of energy is much higher than thatobserved [137]. Another twist on the influence of ionization was proposed [129] that
describes the self-trapped filament as a leaky anti-guiding structure with a Kerr typecladding and a slightly ionized core. The nonlinear index is high at the edge of thetrapped pulse but falls off toward the center due to the influence of free electrons. This
antiguide cannot support stable propagation modes because of the lack of total internal reflection and thus loses some energy through refraction. The theory proposes thatquasi-stable modes exist and that refraction losses are responsible for the off-axis ring
structure surrounding the white-light continuum in the far-field. Spectral broadening of
the guided light is attributed to SPM.

102
The most promising theory to date describes continuum generation in condensed
media and is again based on the generation of free electrons [135, 146]. In this theory,
Brodeur and Chin assert that it is not plasma formation that generates the free electrons,
but a multiphoton excitation (MPE) of electrons from the valence band to the conduction band. This MPE is a bandgap dependent process, and experiments in several liquids
and solids have shown a dependence of the self-focal diameter on the bandgap of thematerial [135, 146]. The basic premise of this theory is that as the pulse undergoes selffocusing, different temporal slices of the pulse reach a maximum intensity where MPE
occurs. MPE generates essentially free electrons, which serve to decrease the index ofrefraction and arrest the focusing. The sudden change in index of refraction results ina sudden drop in the phase. A change in phase with respect to time gives the instantaneous frequency. In this way, MPE generates a broad blue-shifted spectral wing. This
theory is based on a moving focus model of pulse self-focusing [130, 147, 114], whichis also applied to the continuum problem by Strickland and Corkum [41]. According
to the moving focus model, the pulse is divided into discrete temporal slices that undergo self-focusing independently. Because each slice has a different power, various
slices focus to different positions along the propagation axis. These slices in effectform temporally narrow transient sub-pulses. According to Strickland and Corkum,
these sub-pulses generate continua via an on-axis phase retardation. The observed continuum spectrum is the summation of the broadened spectra produced by each of thesetransient sub-pulses. The spatial and spectral modulation characteristic of the observed
continuum can be explained as far-field interference resulting from the multiple broadbandwidth sources. The more modern theory relies on MPE instead of an on-axis phaseshift and thereby inherently includes a dependence on the band gap of the medium.

103
5.1

On the Verge of Continuum Experiments
In an effort to better understand the continuum generation process, and in lightof the excellent agreement between the (3+1)-D theory and our FROG measurements
above the critical power for self-focusing presented in Chapter 4, our group pushed
FROG measurements into the region just above the continuum formation threshold[119]. During these measurements, blue light was clearly visible by eye. To ensurethat the phase matching bandwidth of the second harmonic generating crystal in the
FROG device was adequate, the100 m BBO crystal was replaced by a 50 m BBO

crystal. As in the pulse splitting measurements, the laser beam was spatially filtered andfocused to a FWHM spot size of

70 m at the entrance face of a 3:0 cm long fused silica

sample. SHG FROG measurements of the on-axis far-field were performed before andafter propagation through the sample. The input pulses were nearly transform-limitedwith an intensity duration of 

90 fs FWHM.

Figures 5.2 (a) and (b) show the measured on-axis intensity after propagation
for input peak powers of

6:8 and 7:4 MW, respectively. From the pulse splitting ex-

periments performed in Chapter 4 we might expect the pulse to split into many more
sub-pulses with these higher input powers. As the peak input power is increased, however, the sub-pulses begin to coalesce into a single broad pulse [119]. Calculations
using Eq. 4.14 without the nonparaxiality term are shown in Figs. 5.2 (c) and (d). The
input powers used in the calculation match those of the experiment to within 15%. In
both the experiment and the calculations, as input power is increased, the central peakbroadens and merges with the leading and trailing peaks.
Calculations at lower powers have shown that the splitting of the pulse into two
sub-pulses arises first in the far-field and progresses to the near-field with increasing
input power. Multiply-split pulses are observed in the far-field when the near-field isfully split into two sub-pulses. At higher input powers, however, multiply split pulses

104

1

(a)

(c)

0
-10

Phase (rad)Axial Intensity

10

0
1

(b)

(d)

0
-10

Phase (rad)Axial Intensity

10

0
-200

0
200
Delay (fs)

-200

0
200
Delay (fs)Figure 5.2: Measured axial intensities and phases for input powers of (a) 6.8 MW and(b) 7.4 MW. The corresponding calculated intensities and phases are shown in (c) and(d). (From Ref. [119])

105
do not appear in the near-field. Although the near-field is modulated, distinct multiple
splitting arises only from the build-up of phase in the far-field as described previously
and does not arise from the same physical processes responsible for the initial pulse
splitting.
Measured and calculated spectra corresponding to the temporal intensity profiles
displayed in Figs. 5.2 (b) and (d) are shown in Figs. 5.3 (a) and (b), respectively. The
spectra are plotted on a log scale to emphasize the long tail extending to both sidesof the central peak. By contrast, a bandwidth-limited, 100 fs Gaussian pulse centered
at 800 nm would have wings with an intensity three orders of magnitude lower thanthose shown here just 50 nm on either side of the peak. These tails are thus evidence of
weak continuum generation. The short wavelength tail of the calculated spectrum falls
off faster that that of the measured spectrum. As indicated by the theory of Chin andBrodeur [135, 146], inclusion of multiphoton excitation in the theory may account forthis difference.
5.2

Full Continuum Experiments
To improve and test the theory, good experimental data with which to compare

is essential. Careful studies of continuum generation are difficult because of the broad
bandwidths involved. With spectra spanning several hundred nanometers, an accurate
intensity autocorrelation is difficult, if not impossible, because of the phase-matching
bandwidth required. Since FROG is an autocorrelation-based device, increasing the
input power above that used for Fig. 5.2 (b) quickly results in spectrally broad pulses forwhich the validity of SHG FROG comes into question. In addition, continuum pulses
diverge quickly after exiting the medium and result in very low on-axis intensities.
These intensities can be sufficiently low that a SHG FROG signal is difficult to obtain.
Near-field SHG FROG measurements could be performed by imaging the output faceof the sample onto the entrance aperture of the FROG apparatus. Such a measurement

106

1

(a)

(b)

Spectrum

0.1
0.01
1E-3
1E-4
700 750 800 850 900

700 750 800 850 900

Wavelength (nm)Wavelength (nm)Figure 5.3: (a) The measured axial spectrum for an input power of 7.4 MW, and (b) the
corresponding calculated spectrum. (From Ref. [119])

107
would suffer the same phase-matching bandwidth limitations, however, and near-field
SHG FROG measurements have not been tested in simpler propagation regimes. For
these reasons, temporal measurements of the field after propagation are not practical.
Therefore, careful measurements of the spectrum and other empirical parameters areused for comparisons with theory at this time.
All data presented to this point have concentrated on the on-axis field before andafter propagation. In an attempt to gain insight into the continuum generation process,we add a spatial dimension to the spectral measurements. Qualitative spatial-spectral,
far-field measurements have been available for years in the form of verbal and pictoral
descriptions of a white light beam surrounded by rings of color. The only previous
quantitative measurement, by Strickland et al. [41], recorded the spatial spectrum of
the far-field using a spectrometer and CCD. This chapter reports the first careful measurements of the near-field spatial spectrum of continuum pulses (Section 5.2.4). Detailed investigations of power loss and continuum behavior as a function of input power
and timelapse are also reported in Sections 5.2.2 and 5.2.3.
For these measurements, spatially filtered pulses are focused at the input of the
fused silica to a spot size of

33 m FWHM or a 26 m radius at 1=e2 of intensitywith a 10 cm focal length lens. The fused silica sample length is reduced to 0.318
cm. These changes are made to better facilitate comparisons with theory. Self-focusing
plays an important role in continuum generation, reducing pulse radii during their passage through the sample by an order of magnitude to approximately a few microns.
These dramatic changes in beam size require different stages of the propagation to be
calculated on different size grids. To minimize the associated difficulties, we focus to asmaller initial spot size to reduce the amount of spatial beam compression that occurs
during propagation. A shorter sample can thus be used since the propagation-limited
beam size is reached sooner.

108
5.2.1

Qualitative Observations
The generated continuum exits the sample and propagates 10 cm to a white card

where it is observed by eye. Observations are also made after the beam travels 35 cm
to a white card. These observations differ from those at 10 cm only in that the beam ismuch larger and therefore weaker by eye. Subtle changes in the continuum behavior are
more easily observed on the card placed 10 cm after the sample, so those observations
are reported here.
Continuum spectra are generated with input peak powers ranging from 2.7 to
12.6 MW. Self-trapped filaments are not visible by eye in the sample; the sample isshort enough, however, that they may be difficult to observe under these conditions. At
the lowest powers, the beam on the card looks like a small red spot. As input power
is increased, the red spot grows larger until white light begins to appear in the center,surrounded very closely by rings of blue and green. I should point out that in theseexperiments the continuum never goes through a stage where the central red spot issurrounded by a blue ring as was seen in the earlier experiments. This is most likely
a result of the smaller focusing geometry used here. It is probable that in selecting
input powers to sample, we took too large a step and missed the transition from a red
spot to red surrounded by blue before the central white light spot appears. At an input
power of 4.5 MW the green and blue rings are larger, and the white center takes ona yellow-orange hue. Following this, green frequencies begin adding into the central
beam and then it appears white again. At an input power of 5.8 MW, a red outer ringappears separated from the white/blue/green structure by a large black ring. As the
input power is increased further, the red and blue rings grow fatter. At an input powerof 7.4 MW, a thin yellow ring forms around the outer edge of the red ring. This yellow
ring is tenuous, and seems to appear and disappear many times per second. The whitecenter again turns a yellow-orange color at a peak input power of 9.9 MW. And at 10.8

109
MW rings of black separate each ring of color surrounding the again white center. At
this point, we see a strong white light central beam surrounded by a ring structure thatconsists, going outward from the center, of a thin black ring, a thicker blue ring, asecond thin black ring, a thin green ring, a thick black ring, and a thick red ring witha thin yellow lining at the outermost edge. Increasing the power to 12.6 MW results
in a similar far-field structure with the addition of a second outer red ring. Again, allcolor rings are separated by areas of darkness. The appearance of this ring structure isreminiscent of some kind of interference, but the mechanism that is actually channelinglight off axis is unknown. Also, the appearance of two distinct outer red rings begs thequestion of whether one ring may be the result of the continuum generation process
while the other is actually fundamental light being funneled off axis, or if both are
created via the same mechanism.
This data is presented as if one always observes a distinct set of concentric ringsin the far-field. In reality, though, one occasionally observes a pattern that resembles
a series of overlapping concentric ring sets, each with a different spatial center. Byslightly moving the sample, however, the far-field ring structure can be returned to thedesired concentric ring pattern. It is also interesting to note that the power throughput
is different in these two cases. Power measured after the sample is on the order of
10% higher when a single ring structure is observed. These patterns have been reported
once before and were attributed to fluctuations due to plasma buildup [131]. I believe,
however, that these differing patterns can be explained by considering the formationof self-trapped filaments. If a single ring structure results from continuum generation
along a single trapped filament, then these more complicated patterns probably arise
from the formation of multiple filaments. Continuum is generated along each filament
and the resulting concentric ring patterns overlap in the far-field. For all of the data
presented in this chapter, care was taken to ensure that only a single ring structure waspresent during the measurement.

110
It is interesting to note that although self-focusing and continuum generation are
power dependent effects, the power figures presented in this chapter seem to indicatethat continuum is occurring at the same powers at which we previously reported pulse
splitting. One possible explanation for this is that the experimental set-up for these experiments is different from the pulse splitting experiments in that a shorter sample anda smaller focal spot are used. The pulse enters the sample with a much higher initialintensity than in the pulse splitting experiments. In those experiments, the pulse is spectrally broadened and GVD acts to spread the pulse in time, initiating pulse splitting. By
the time the pulse reaches the same peak intensity used in the continuum experiments,
significant spectral broadening has already occurred. Therefore, we should expect the
propagation dynamics to be somewhat different in the two cases.

5.2.2

Power Throughput as a Function of Intensity
The power measurements presented here and in the next section were performed

using a large area photodiode detector based power meter. The continuum light generated during propagation diverges rapidly after exiting the sample. Therefore, the power
meter was placed as close as possible to the output face of the sample to collect all of
the emitted light, including both the central white light and the colored rings.
Figure 5.4 shows the percentage of power lost during propagation as a functionof input power. This percentage was determined by measuring the power with andwithout the sample present in the beam path. The two lowest power points in Fig. 5.4
correspond to situations where no central white light beam is observed. As the whitelight continuum appears, the losses jump to 15%. As power is increased, the overall

trend is for the losses to increase as well up to an input power of 8.0 MW. There arethree points, however, that do not follow this trend. At input powers of 4.5 and 10 MW,
denoted by circles in Fig. 5.4, the losses are much lower than expected. Interestingly,
it is at these powers that a yellow-orange color is observed in the central white-light

111

30

% Power Loss

25
20
15
10
5
2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Input Power (MW)Figure 5.4: The percentage of power lost during propagation as a function of input
power. The circles represent points at which the central far-field beam is yellow-orange
instead of white.

112
region of the beam. The very high loss observed at 6.8 MW does not seem to correlate
to any of the observed continuum behaviors.
Overall, it is evident that the processes involved in continuum generation involvea loss of overall power during propagation. This lends credence to the idea that multiphoton excitation or an absorption process may be involved. In fact, calculations basedon the (3+1)-D theory presented earlier and including four-photon absorption predict
accumulated losses of 12-14% for an input power of 12 MW [148].

5.2.3

Power Throughput as a Function of TimePower measurements are also performed as a function of time. For these mea-

surements, a post holder is attached to the optical table behind the sample, and a collar
is placed on the post of the power meter head to ensure that the power meter could be
removed and replaced to the same position. First the power without the sample present
is measured. Next the beam is blocked, the sample is added into the beam path, and thepower readings are recorded as soon as the beam is unblocked. The power meter is thenremoved from the beam path while the beam continues to propagate through the sample.
The power meter is replaced and power measurements are made at intervals of several
seconds to several minutes for approximately one half hour. The detector is sensitive tochanges in temperature, therefore the power meter is removed between measurements
to avoid unnecessary heating. After each set of measurements, the power is again measured without the sample present to check that the laser power has not drifted during
the measurement.
When the laser first traverses the sample, the power loss discussed in the previous
section is evident. At low input powers, after the beam is incident on the sample forseveral minutes, the output power begins to rise. After sufficient time, the power at theoutput is very nearly the same as the input power. At higher input powers, the output
begins to rise after a shorter time. For an input peak power of 13 MW the output power

113
matches the input power after only 15 seconds. During the time the output power isrising, the far-field continuum structure also changes. Initially, a typical ring structure
including the thin yellow lining around the outermost red ring is observed as describedin Section 5.2.1. As the output power increases with time, the outer yellow lining
disappears from around the red ring and simultaneously, the central white light region
takes on a yellow hue. The initial power loss followed by a return of the output power
to the value of the input is likely a result of a saturable absorption in the material. Thatthe output power rises sooner with higher input powers is consistent with a saturable
absorption.
After longer periods of time, the output power again begins to drop. Again, theamount of time that passes before this event occurs decreases with increasing input
power. With an input power of 3.7 MW, just above the power where a strong central
white light spot is observed, the output power drops by roughly 40% after 10 minutes.
After the power drops, the far-field has lost its white light characteristics and appears
as a red spot that is roughly the same diameter as the white light spot that preceded
it. When the sample is moved slightly such that the beam traverses a different spatial
path through it, the original white light continuum beam returns. These observations
suggest that even at the lowest powers for continuum generation damage is occurring in
the fused silica. Damage by short IR pulses in fused silica has been reported previously
and is associated with a rapid buildup of electrons in the conduction band [149]. Thisdamage thus provides further evidence that free electrons may be implicated in thecontinuum generation process. A different study on the formation of color centersin glasses asserts that continuum generation is actually responsible for the damage tothe glass [150]. The study finds that color centers are formed by one- or two-photon
absorption of the short wavelength continuum light generated by the propagation. Thissame study, however, finds no evidence of the formation of color centers in fused silica,
although they may have formed and not been observed.

114
5.2.4

Near-Field Spatial Spectrum
Measurements of the spatial spectrum are performed by imaging the exit face ofthe sample onto the entrance slits of a 0.25 meter imaging spectrometer with an f

= 10

cm lens and a magnification of 16. A radial slice of the beam is selected by the entrance
slit, dispersed, and imaged onto a 16 bit CCD camera. A mask in front of the slit allows the central, high intensity portion of the beam to be blocked when measuring theradial extremes so that more than four orders of magnitude of intensity variation can beacquired. A long pass filter is employed when measuring the high frequency side of thespectrum to ensure that only the first order diffracted light from the grating is collected.
Neutral density filters are placed in the beam path when necessary to prevent camera
saturation. The entire spectrum cannot be captured in a single measurement because
the grating is more dispersive than the CCD element is large. Therefore, a series of
10 to 14 spatial-spectral measurements corresponding to different wavelength regimes
are necessary to obtain the full spatial spectrum at each input power. A corresponding
background spectrum is subtracted from each individually measured spectrum to account for the differing exposure times and filtering used in each measurement. Eachspatial spectrum is normalized such that its spectral edge matches the edge of the one
obtained for the wavelength range adjoining it and the full spatial spectrum is pieced
together. When measuring spectra over such a broad range of wavelengths, it is also
important to consider the efficiencies of both the spectrometer grating and the CCD.
The grating efficiency is known from 300 to 1000 nm. While the camera efficiency is
only calibrated from 625 nm to 975 nm, the general shape of the efficiency curve isknown over a larger range. Since continuum spectra usually fall off quickly on the longwavelength side, the limitations for the red components are not severe. The short wavelength spectrum, however, often extends well below 625 nm. Fortunately, the grating
efficiency of the 300 groove/mm grating used here is increasing in the region of 300 to115
roughly 600 nm where it peaks. Over this same range, the camera efficiency is falling
off such that combined efficiency is relatively flat over this range. For this data a flat
efficiency with a value of the known efficiency at 625 nm is assumed over the range
400 nm to 625 nm.
Figure 5.5 shows the near-field spatial spectrum for an input peak power of 12
MW. Only one measurement of the radial position at each wavelength range is shownin this plot. During the measurement, the continuum character changed such that thedata from the low intensity wing was no longer related to the higher intensity spatial
data shown here. This is probably a result of the sample being damaged with time as
discussed in the previous section. Rings of color would be represented in this plot as
a particular wavelength showing up primarily at two distances, equidistant from thecentral peak. Since rings are observed to form with lower frequencies at the outermost
edge, these rings should appear as a v-shaped peak or set of peaks that opens toward
the distance axis in Fig. 5.5. It is evident from this data that the ring structure exists
only in the far-field. Spatial modulation of the near-field occurs near the on-axis portionof the beam. Although the far-field continuum spectrum appears to have strong radialsymmetry, the near-field spatial modulation does not reflect this symmetry. An inter-

580 nm. This peak is roughly six orders of magnitudeless intense than the peak near 800 nm. This peak is better illustrated by plotting theesting feature is the peak aroundon-axis spectrum as shown in Fig. 5.6. This spectrum also exhibits a strong spectral
asymmetry in the generation of continuum. The short wavelength side of the spectrum
extends much further than the long wavelength side.
Lineouts of a spatial spectrum obtained with a lower input peak power of 3.6 MW
are shown in Figs. 5.7 and 5.8.

Figure 5.9 shows the on-axis spectrum in this case.

As in the higher power case, the on-axis spectrum extends further to short wavelengths
than do the spectra at other radii. In this low power case, however, the peak at 580 nm
is nonexistent.

116

Figure 5.5: Spatial spectrum for an input power of 12 MW. Radial distance is plottedin mm and wavelength is plotted in nm.

117

Log(Intensity)

10

5

0

-5
400

600

800

1000

Wavelength (nm)Figure 5.6: On axis spectrum corresponding to Fig. 5.5.

Intensity (log scale)

118

10

5

10

2

0.17 mm

-1

10
5
10
10
10

0.72 mm

2

-1

10

5

10

2

1.03 mm

-1

10
5
10
10
10

1.37 mm

2

-1

500

600

700

800

900

Wavelength (nm)Figure 5.7: Lineouts of spectral intensity from a spatial-spectral measurement of continuum generated with an input power of 3.6 MW. The plot at 1.37 mm is the on-axis
spectrum.

Intensity (log scale)

119

10

5

10

2

1.37 mm

-1

10
5
10
10
10

1.58 mm

2

-1

10

5

10

2

1.85 mm

-1

10
5
10
10
10

2.21 mm

2

-1

500

600

700

800

900

Wavelength (nm)Figure 5.8: Lineouts of spectral intensity from a spatial-spectral measurement of continuum generated with an input power of 3.6 MW. The plot at 1.37 mm is the on-axis
spectrum.

120

Log(Intensity)

5

3

1

-1
450

600

750

Wavelength (nm)Figure 5.9: On-axis spectrum for an input power of 3.6 MW

900

121
5.2.5

Discussion
Preliminary on-axis calculations based on the (3+1)-D equation used to model

pulse splitting with the inclusion of four-photon absorption are capable of reproducing
some general features of the continuum [148]. For instance, the theory predicts asymmetric spectral broadening just as observed experimentally and predicts an extensively
broadened spectrum with spectral wings extending from 400 nm to 1.4 microns. This
theory also predicts a peak around 580 nm in the high input power case. The calculated
peak, however, is only three orders of magnitude less than the peak intensity, while themeasured peak is nearly six orders of magnitude less intense than the peak. As discussed previously, the inclusion of four photon absorption also predicts a loss of power
during propagation that is comparable to the power loss we observe.
The theory of Chin and Brodeur also generally reproduces experimental observations. It predicts an asymmetric, very broad spectrum and accounts for the far-fieldring structure as interference from continua generated from multiple broad-bandwidthsources. The theory is also based on multiphoton excitation which the power data presented here supports. Comparisons with experiment reveal, however, that although it
predicts sufficient broadening, it also predicts a blue wing that is an order of magnitude
more intense than that observed by experiment. In addition, the theory relies on a moving focus model of self-focusing that does not present a realistic representation of theself-trapped filaments. In fact, an experiment was performed in 1969 that demonstrates
that filaments are indeed trapped and not a result of a moving focus [151]. In this experiment, self-trapped filaments were sent through an aperture such that if filaments
actually existed, they would pass through unaffected. But if they were actually a resultof a moving focus, they would be destroyed by diffraction. The filaments persisted after propagation through the aperture. The reverse experiment was also performed. The
self-focused pulse was propagated through a glass film such that a filament would be de-122stroyed by diffraction, but the larger focusing beams would pass through and continue
to focus. In this case, filaments were selectively destroyed. For this reason, a moving
focus model is probably not the best representation to be used. Also, the moving focus
model predicts the formation of short temporal sub-structures during propagation. One
might argue that perhaps short temporal sub-structures are formed as a result of pulse
splitting. The (3+1)-D NLSE used to model our pulse splitting experiments, however,
never yields distinct multiple splittings in the near-field. Therefore, it is unlikely that thecontinuum is actually generated by short-duration sub-pulses. In addition, this theory
relies on one-dimensional calculations even though self-focusing is involved. Since thetransverse dimensions of the beam are being changed dramatically by the propagation,a three-dimensional calculation is clearly more appropriate.
The question remains: what are the necessary components of a reasonable theory for continuum generation? Because continuum generation occurs only above thecritical power for self-focusing, the theory should account for changes to the spatial
dimension of the beam during propagation. Based on the power measurements presented here, clearly a loss mechanism such as multiphoton absorption or excitation isimportant. The data here also emphasize that a damage mechanism should be considered. The work of Chin and Brodeur clearly indicates that multiphoton excitation
has a probable role in the propagation. Their work also points out the dependence on
bandgap that can be accounted for by MPE. Counter to the work of Chin and Brodeur,a successful theory should include, or at least not explicitly exclude, the formation ofself-trapped filaments. The formation of self-trapped filaments also offers an explanation of the ring structure associated with continuum in similar fashion to the moving
focus model. If continuum is generated all along the filament, the light generated at
different points in the medium will interfere to give a ring structure. The ring structure
may also be explained by including a saturable process in the theory. Ring formation
as a result of saturation has been predicted by Marburger [114]. Theory should com-123
pare not only to the on-axis spectrum, but to the entire spatial spectrum. Descriptionsof the far-field spatial spectrum are available both in the literature and in this chapter.
This chapter also provides the first measurement of the near-field spatial spectrum. In
addition, a successful theory should include the dispersion of the material. Continuum
spectra produced in gases have shown a modulation that was initially associated withall continuum spectra. Continuum spectra in glass that do not exhibit this modulation
have typically been explained as resulting from multiple shot experiments where thespectral modulation would be averaged out. I believe, however, that continuum spectra
in glass do not show a strong modulation because the various spectral components are
dispersed by GVD.
Although the processes involved in continuum generation cannot fully be explained at this time, some of the main issues involved have been elucidated. The observations presented here should provide a useful comparison for developing theories.
Understanding continuum generation remains an interesting and important unsolved
problem.

Chapter 6
One-Dimensional Propagation in Liquids

It is well known that the additional degrees of freedom of constituent molecules
in a liquid compared to molecules in a solid lead to more complicated interactions between the liquid and an electromagnetic field. Propagation of an intense beam througha liquid can result not only in the instantaneous optical Kerr effect, but in molecularreorientation, molecular redistribution, and Raman excitations of rotation and libration
as well [124, 152]. Molecular reorientation is a rotation of a molecule to reduce theenergy of the system in response to a field induced dipole moment of that molecule.
Molecular reorientation typically occurs on a timescale of

10 11 s [124]. Molecular

redistribution is also a response of the material to a field induced dipole moment andinvolves the local rearrangement of molecules in the field to minimize the energy of induced dipole-induced dipole interactions between molecules. This rearrangement has
a response time in the sub-picosecond range [124]. The response times for rotation andlibration are typically on the order of

100 fs. Electrostriction, which is an increase in thedensity of a material due to the presence of an applied field, typically has a responsetime of approximately 100 ns in liquids [124]. Most all of these processes involve a
response time that is longer than the duration of our 80-100 fs pulses. Rotation and libration respond on a timescale that is very close to the duration of our pulses. Becauseof these long response times, none of these processes should lead to an observable effect in our experiments. We expect, therefore, to observe the same processes involved

125
in propagation of short pulses in liquids as were observed in propagation through fusedsilica in one dimension, namely the electronic Kerr effect and group velocity dispersion.
Interestingly, however, Nibbering et al. have reported a non-instantaneous nonlinear response in methanol with a response time of 27 fs [94]. Their experiment involves propagation of

804 nm, 24 mJ, 150 fs pulses through a known reference material

and an unknown sample. The spectrum before and after each propagation is measured.
Spectral changes upon propagation through the reference material yield the initial pulse
intensity. The initial pulse intensity is then used with the second spectral measurement
to determine the nonlinear index of refraction of the unknown sample. Nibbering asserts that this measurement is evidence that the optical Kerr effect in methanol is dominated by a nuclear rather than a purely electronic term. Their work assumes that the
non-instantaneous response can be modeled by a single-sided exponential:n (t) =

n2 I (t0 )
exp
1 

Z t





t t0
dt0 :


This chapter investigates the propagation of 

(6.1)

80 120 fs pulses in two liquids:

methanol and water. Methanol is studied with the purpose of repeating Nibbering’s
measurement using a different technique and thereby confirming or disproving the reported non-instantaneous nonlinearity. Water is investigated for two reasons. Propagation issues involved in sending short pulses through water, particularly the nonlinear
index of refraction of liquid water, is of considerable interest in the biological sciences.
Short pulse lasers are finding application in research involving the human body, especially with regard to surgical techniques [153, 154, 155]. In addition, water is studied
because it is a hydrogen-bonded, polar liquid composed of relatively small molecules
and, as such, is suitable for testing for systematic errors in the measurement. To wit,
if both liquids show the same non-instantaneous response, the integrity of the measurement technique can be questioned. If the experiments in water reveal a purely
instantaneous response, however, while the experiments in methanol do not, then it is126
likely that the non-instantaneous nonlinearity is real and not merely an artifact of themeasurement technique.
6.1

Methanol Studies

6.1.1

Stationary Cell Measurements

Experiment
Pulses from the compressor stage of the laser system described in Chapter 3
propagate unfocused to the sample. The unfocused beam propagates approximately asa plane wave in the sample, with a diameter of 5 mm (FWHM). The energy per pulseof 227 J corresponds to a peak power of 2.6 GW. Because of the high energy of thepulses, the beam is not spatially filtered. Plane-wave propagation within the sample
is verified explicitly by measuring the beam size before and after propagation throughthe sample. To within the experimental error due to the pixel size of the CCD camera,
the beam size is unchanged. The spectroscopic grade methanol sample is placed in a
1 cm path length Starna spectrophotometer cuvette. Propagation through only the two
1-mm-thick cell walls of the empty cuvette is found to have negligible effect on thepulse at this intensity.
An interesting problem arises in attempting to perform FROG measurementswith this experimental set up. When methanol is added to the cuvette, the beam acquires a dynamic spatial modulation after propagation. If one observes the liquid sample with a flashlight in a dark room, one can see a convective-type current in the liquidand small dust-sized particles moving in a circular pattern. Repeated cleaning of the
cuvette makes no difference in this behavior. If the sample is allowed to sit undisturbedfor 

24 hours, however, the liquid becomes calm, and the beam passes through withno observable spatial modulation. All data presented in this chapter were acquired after

127
a minimum 24 hour wait period.

Data
Figure 6.1 shows the measured intensity and phase of a pulse prior to and after
propagation through the methanol sample. The input field is shown in (a) and the field
after propagation is shown in (b). In both graphs, the solid line represents the intensity,and the points represent the phase. The upward curvature of the phase in (a) is evidenceof an initially slightly downchirped input. After propagation through the methanol,
the pulse is noticeably upchirped as a result of the positive group velocity dispersion
and the positive nonlinear index of refraction n2 . In addition, the peak of the phasecurvature has been shifted slightly toward the trailing edge of the pulse.

Model and Results
Since conditions have been chosen such that the pulse propagates through thesample as a plane wave, the propagation can be modeled using a (1+1)-dimensional
nonlinear Schrödinger equation:@ E k00 @ 2 E+ i 2 @t2@zi2n2 jEj2E = 0:


(6.2)

The second term of this equation accounts for group velocity dispersion, and the third
term gives the instantaneous nonlinearity. The measured input field shown in Fig. 6.1(a)is used as an initial condition of this model, with k 00 = 290 fs2 /cm [156] and n2=

4  10 16 cm2/W. The propagated field is then calculated using a split-step technique[107, 129] and is shown in Fig. 6.2(a) along with the measured field for comparison.
The calculated intensity and phase are given by the dashed line and the crosses, respectively. The simulation was performed using a range of different n2 values aroundthose found in the literature [94, 157], and no significant difference in the fit was observed. As illustrated by this example, the simple model, including reasonable values
for the material parameters and an instantaneous response time for the nonlinearity,

128

0.4

(a)

0.5

0.0

0.0

-0.4

1.0

0.4

(b)

0.5

0.0

0.0

-0.4

-200

-100

0

100

Phase (rad)Axial Intensity

1.0

200

Delay (fs)Figure 6.1: Intensity (solid lines) and phase (points) of a pulse both (a) prior to and (b)after propagation through a 1-cm sample of methanol.

129
fails to match the experimentally measured phase, especially the shift in the phase tolater times.
This shortcoming in the model can be corrected by phenomenologically including a non-instantaneous response of the nonlinearity such that the term

n2 jEj2
in Eq. (2) is replaced by [114]t t0 0n2 jE (t0 )j2
exp(
)dt


1

Z t

(6.3)

where  is the exponential response time of the nonlinearity. Equation 6.3 is the same
representation of the non-instantaneous nonlinearity used by Nibbering et al [94].
Figure 6.2(b) shows the results of the model including the non-instantaneous response term of Eq. 6.3 with  = 10 fs. The measured input field of Fig. 6.1(a) was again
used as an initial condition of the model. Inclusion of the non-instantaneous response
correctly predicts the observed shifting of the peak of the phase toward the trailing edgeof the pulse. The calculated phase best matches the experimentally determined phasewhen values of n2= 4  10 16 cm2/W and  = 10 fs are used.

An interesting feature of the data in Fig. 6.2 is the extremely small value ofthe exponential response time  . As mentioned previously, response times for electrostriction, molecular reorientation, molecular redistribution, and molecular librations
are all too slow to explain the observed non-instantaneous nonlinearity. As seen in the
one-dimensional experiments with fused silica presented in Chapter 4, vibrational Raman does not come into play unless much higher intensities (and therefore larger pulse
bandwidths due to self-phase modulation) are used. Thermal effects occur on very
long timescales relative to the length of our pulses. Because a single FROG measurement requires approximately five minutes to acquire and the repetition rate of the laser
is 1 kHz, it is possible that thermal effects could appear in these stationary cell measurements. Nibbering’s work does not mention the sample conditions. To determine

130

(a)

0.4

0.5

0.0

0.0

-0.4

-200
1.0

-100

0

100

200
0.4

(b)

0.5

0.0

0.0

-0.4

-200

-100

0

100

Phase (rad)Axial Intensity

1.0

200

Delay (fs)Figure 6.2: Calculated field after propagation (a) assuming an instantaneous nonlinearity and (b) with inclusion of a non-instantaneous nonlinearity. The calculated intensity
is plotted as a dashed line and the calculated phase is plotted as crosses. The calculated
fields are shown along with the measured field (solid line and points) for comparison.

131
whether the observed response is indeed a result of the nonlinear index of refractionchanging during the measurement, we also performed measurements using a flowing
methanol apparatus.

6.1.2

Flowing Methanol Measurements

Experiment
For these experiments, a dye cell and pump from a dye laser were used to flow
the sample. A new dye cell was used to ensure that there was no contamination from an
optically active dye. The path length through the sample was 1.69 cm, and the thicknessof the cell walls was 2 mm. In addition, a vacuum spatial filter was inserted into thebeam path before the sample cell to improve the spatial quality of the beam. Peak input
powers ranged between 4.5 and 5.5 GW. Again, all experiments were performed in theplane wave regime. It is also important to note that all of the data in the remainderof this chapter were acquired under sub-optimal laboratory conditions. The building
temperature fluctuated over a range of seven degrees Celsius from day to night, greatly
affecting laser performance and stability. As a result, all FROG traces were acquired in
duplicate and only data from those traces that were repeatable are presented here. Careful observation of the beam with PG FROG was also used to monitor changes in laser
behavior. In this way, if the laser changed between the measurement of two repeatablereference traces and two repeatable sample traces, the data were also discarded.

Data
Figure 6.3 shows the intensity and phase of the input field and the field after
propagation through 1.69 cm of methanol. The input pulse has an intensity FWHM of
120 fs and has a nearly flat phase with a small component of upchirp. After propagation,
the pulse is broadened in time and is significantly upchirped as is evidenced by the

132

2

0

0.5

Phase (rad)Axial Intensity

1.0

0.0
-200

-100

0

100

-2
200

Delay (fs)Figure 6.3: Measured intensity and phase of the pulse before (dashed line and diamonds) and after (solid line and points) traversing 1.69 cm of methanol.

133
downward curvature of the phase. These features are a result of the interplay between
SPM with positive n2 and positive dispersion. A shift in the phase toward the trailingedge of the pulse is difficult to discern by eye.
The corresponding spectra before and after propagation through the methanol
sample are shown in Fig. 6.4. After propagation through the methanol, a red-shift ofenergy in the spectrum is observed. This spectral red-shifting is indicative of a noninstantaneous nonlinearity.
Propagation with a very upchirped input pulse was also investigated. For thisdata, the input power was increased such that the peak intensity was roughly the same
as for the shorter, flat-phase pulse. This experiment thus tests for any dependence ofthe non-instantaneous nonlinearity on the chirp or length of the pulse. The temporal duration of the very chirped input pulse differs from that of the nearly flat-phase
input pulse by 12 fs. The phase of the very chirped input pulse changes by approximately six radians from the center of the pulse to the point where the intensity has
dropped to 1/e2 of the peak intensity. The most obvious effect of the propagation is asignificant broadening of the pulse. Thirty-five femtoseconds more pulse broadening
is observed with this upchirped input than with the nearly flat-phase input of Fig 6.3.
This extra broadening is the result of an upchirped input pulse providing a head start
to the propagation-induced upchirp that results from SPM with positive n2 and positive
GVD.

Model and Results
The flowing methanol data are modeled using the same equations as the stationary cell data. The cell walls in this case are approximately twice as thick (2 mm) as
the walls of the stationary cell. Including propagation through the cell walls in the calculation has an observable effect on the calculated spectra. Therefore, all calculations
are performed assuming propagation first through 2 mm of fused silica with values of134

Axial Intensity

1.0

0.5

0.0
760

780

800

820

840

Wavelength (nm)Figure 6.4: Measured spectra before (dashed line) and after (solid line) propagation
through 1.69 cm of methanol.

135n2 = 2:5  10 16 cm2 /W and k00 = 360 fs2 /cm and assuming an instantaneous response. The field is then propagated numerically through the methanol sample using

k00 = 290 fs2 =cm, assuming a non-instantaneous nonlinearity as given by Eq. 6.3 andvarying the values of n2 and  . Finally, the field is propagated through the second 2
mm wall of fused silica.
Calculations using the measured input field from Fig. 6.3 are in best agreementwith the temporal broadening of the measured field after propagation when a value of

n2 = 4  10 16 cm2 /W is used. Figure 6.5 shows the measured intensity and phasealong with calculated results using this value of n2 and three different values of  .
If the nonlinearity is assumed to be purely instantaneous (= 0), the calculated

phase does not match well on the leading or trailing edges of the pulse. On the other
hand, when  is assumed to be 27 fs (the value determined by Nibbering et al.), thecalculated phase is shifted too far toward the trailing edge of the pulse. The best match
between the model and experiment is found when a value of  = 10 fs is used. To
further illustrate this point, the differences between the measured and calculated phases
for these three values of  are plotted in Fig. 6.6. The phase difference in the caseof  = 10 fs always falls between the phase differences in the other two cases, and ison average closer to zero. The small scale modulation in the measured phase is not
reproduced by the calculations and results in the modulations seen in all three of thephase difference curves. Performing calculations on a much finer grid might reproduce
these modulations. Currently, the largest number of points in the field array that themodel can handle is 512.
A comparison between the measured spectrum after propagation (shown in Fig. 6.4)
and the calculated spectrum corresponding to the case of  = 10 fs (Fig. 6.5) is shown in
Fig. 6.7. The measured and calculated spectra are in good agreement. The calculation
reproduces the observed shifting of energy to the red spectral components.
Calculations involving the very upchirped input pulse also show good agreement

136
1
1.0

0
0.5

Phase (rad)Axial Intensity

τ = 0 fs

-1
0.0
-100

0

100
1

1.0

0
0.5

Phase (rad)Axial Intensity

τ = 27 fs

-1
0.0
-100

0

100
1

1.0

0
0.5

Phase (rad)Axial Intensity

τ = 10 fs

-1
0.0
-100

0

100

Delay (fs)Figure 6.5: Measured intensity (solid line) and phase (points) along with calculated
intensity (dashed line) and phase (crosses) using the input field from Fig. 6.3 with n2 =
 16 cm2/W for three different values of  .

4 10

137

Phase Difference (rad)τ = 0 fs
τ = 27 fs

0.2

τ = 10 fs

0.0

-0.2
-70

-35

0

35

70

Delay (fs)Figure 6.6: The difference between measured and calculated phase for the three calcufs (dots and dashes), 
fs (solid line) andlations presented in Fig. 6.5: fs (line with crosses).

= 27

=0

= 10

138

1.0

8
0.5

4

0.0
760

Phase (rad)Axial Intensity

12

0
780

800

820

840

Wavelength (nm)Figure 6.7: Measured spectral intensity and phase (solid line and points) along withcalculated spectral intensity and phase (dashed line and crosses) for the case of n2 =
 16 cm2/W and 
fs.

4 10

= 10

139
with experiment when values of n2= 4  10 16 cm2/W and  = 10 fs are used in

the model. The phase in this case is so strongly curved, however, that the effects ofdiffering values of  are difficult to distinguish. Therefore, any dependence of the noninstantaneous nonlinearity on the chirp of the pulse is difficult to extract. Moreover, it
is best to use a flat-phase input pulse in experiments to determine the value n2 and  .
6.1.3

Discussion
The data presented in the previous two sections clearly indicate the presence ofa non-instantaneous nonlinearity in methanol. Experiments with a flowing methanol
configuration rule out the possibility that heating effects are contributing to the measured nonlinearity. In all cases, we observe values of n2 and  that are smaller thanthose reported by Nibbering et al. [94]. To demonstrate that our numbers are clearly
different from those measured by Nibbering, a plot of our data with a calculation using
Nibbering’s numbers is shown in Fig. 6.8. The calculated field is very different fromthe measured field in this case.
There are several questions that should be addressed. The first is the differencein the measured values reported in these two investigations. The model used to calculate the nonlinear response is the same in both cases. The two main differences in
the approaches are the experimental method used and the length of the input pulses.
Nibbering’s work involves propagating 150 fs pulses through the sample. Since thesepulses are longer, it is possible that they measure contributions to the nonlinear index
from libration and rotation (response time of 100 fs) that the shorter pulses used inour experiment do not detect. It is also possible that there is a systematic error in one
or both of the measurement techniques that results in the differing magnitudes of the
propagation parameters. Another possibile difference lies in the method of measuring
the input intensity. A small change in the input intensity results in a noticeable change
in the magnitude of the nonlinear index of refraction. Therefore an incorrectly cali-

140

1

0
0.5

Phase (rad)Axial Intensity

1.0

-1

0.0

-200

-100

0

100

200

Delay (fs)Figure 6.8: Measured intensity and phase (solid line and points) with calculated intensity and phase (dashed line and crosses) using Nibbering’s reported values: n2 =:  16 cm2 /W and fs.

6 7 10= 27

141brated power meter, or an inaccurate assessment of input pulse duration, could lead tothe differences in the measured values of n2 .
A second question that remains is the nature of the non-instantaneous nonlinearity. Most effects involving nuclear or molecular motion respond on timescales much
longer than 10 fs. If this effect is real, one may ask whether it is possible that the cause
is not actually something that occurs with a 10 fs response time, but simply results
in a phase profile that has similar characteristics. The model is one used to describe
any diffusive retardation in the medium and is not necessarily representative of the true
nature of the process or processes involved. The presence of one- or two-photon absorptions affecting the nonlinear index is ruled out by the UV-Vis absorption spectrumof methanol which is flat between 850 nm and 205 nm. In addition, two-photon absorption is typically accompanied by a flattening of the peak of the intensity profile after
propagation [158], a feature that is not observed in our data. Also, measurements ofpower throughput reveal losses due only to reflection.
A third question surrounding the observed effect is whether it could be an artifact of the measurement techniques used. To partially respond to this question, we
perform experiments in water using the same techniques. Water is chosen because likemethanol, it is a small, polar liquid that is hydrogen bonded and has a flat UV-Vis
absorption spectrum down to 190 nm.
6.2

Water Studies
Water measurements are performed using the flowing liquid apparatus describedin Section 6.1.2. Peak input powers are always near 5 GW, and the pulses propagate as plane waves through the sample. The stability criteria are again used to selectwhich data sets to analyze. Calculations are performed taking into account propagation
through the cell walls. Fisher HPLC-grade water is used as the sample.

142

n2 (10This work
16
2=# data sets

cm W)

1.8
3.0
4.5

2
1
3

Previous work2=
wavelength Ref.
694 nm[159]
532 nm[160]
532 nm[159]
804 nm[94]

n2 (10 16 cm
2.8
4.2
5.4
5.7

W)

Table 6.1: Measured and literature values of n2 for water.

6.2.1

Data and Results
Figure 6.9 shows the measured intensity and phase before and after propagation

through 1.69 cm of water. The input pulse has an initial upchirp that leads to enhanced
broadening of the pulse. After propagation, the pulse is more upchirped and shows noshifting of the phase toward the trailing edge of the pulse.
Calculations are performed using the measured input field and a value of k 00 = 247

fs2 =cm [156]. For all acquired data, the best fit is obtained when only an instantaneous
nonlinearity is included. A comparison of the calculated and measured fields after propagation for the data shown in Fig. 6.9 is plotted in Fig. 6.10. The calculated intensityand phase matches the measurement quite well. For this calculation, n2= 1:8  10 16

cm2 /W. The fact that no non-instantaneous nonlinearity is present in water indicatesthat the nonlinearity observed for methanol is not likely an artifact of the measurement
technique.
The value of n2 was determined for several data sets by using n2 as a fit parameterin calculating the measured field. Three different values were obtained, with an averagevalue of

3:4  0:4 cm2/W accounting for random error only. In all cases the agreement

between the measured and calculated fields were comparable to that shown in Fig. 6.10.
Table 6.1 shows our measured values along with some values from the literature. Besideeach measured value is the number of data sets that gave that result. Our measured
values are somewhat lower than the only other published value near 800 nm [94]. The

143

2
1.0

0

0.5

Phase (rad)Axial Intensity

1

-1

0.0
-400

-200

0

200

-2
400

Delay (fs)Figure 6.9: Measured intensity and phase prior to (dashed line and diamonds) and after(solid line and points) propagation through 1.69 cm of water.

144

2
1.0

0

0.5

Phase (rad)Axial Intensity

1

-1

0.0
-400

-200

0

200

-2
400

Delay (fs)Figure 6.10: Measured (solid line and points) and calculated (dashed line and crosses)
intensity and phase after propagation through 1.69 cm of water. The calculation assumes a purely instantaneous nonlinearity.

145
spread in the values of n2 given by different data sets is larger than we would ideallylike it to be. There are several possible explanations for this. One problem may involve
accurate measurement of the intensity. Measurement of the peak intensity is basedon accurate knowledge of the area of the input pulse (see Chapter 3). If the area of
the input pulse changes between measurement of the input pulse and measurement of
the pulse after propagation through the sample, the intensity, and hence n2 , will beincorrect. With the unstable room conditions present during these measurements, it isconceivable that small scale or very slow changes could have occurred without causing
the data to fail the stability requirements. Also, during these water measurements a
problem arose with the temperature servo on the baseplate of the regenerative amplifier.
The temperature of the baseplate fluctuated over several degrees Celsius during thecourse of an hour. Fluctuations in the temperature of the amplifier baseplate affectlaser performance and could contribute to the observed inconsistencies in the data. One
could also argue that the observed differences are an inherent limit of the measurement
technique. Previous FROG data presented in this thesis gives much more repeatable
results, however. It is more likely a problem of accurate measurement of the intensityof an unstable laser.
6.3

Summary
The experiments in this chapter corroborate the existence of a non-instantaneous

nonlinearity with a very short response time in methanol. The value of this responsetime is found to be 10 fs, roughly three times shorter than the previous measurement
reported [94]. Experiments conducted with a flowing methanol apparatus eliminate thepossibility that the observed nonlinearity is actually a heating effect. The shorter pulses
used in these experiments also cast doubt on the mechanism being driven by librational motion. Experiments in water, which show a purely instantaneous nonlinearity,
confirm that the measured non-instantaneous nonlinearity in methanol is probably real.

146
Measurements of power throughput, observations of the temporal intensity of the pulse
after propagation, and observations of the UV-Vis absorption spectrum of methanol all
indicate that there is no evidence for absorption occuring during propagation. The actual mechanism responsible for the observed non-instantaneous nonlinearity remains
undetermined.
Attempts to measure the nonlinear index of refraction of water using this technique gave results with low precision. The results, however, are in agreement with othervalues published in the literature. And, under more stable conditions, this would likely
be a reasonable method of measuring the nonlnear index of refraction.

Chapter 7
Summary

Understanding the propagation of short pulses in a variety of media is of great
importance to a number of applications spanning many fields of interest. By applying
a full-field measurement technique to the study of short pulse propagation in several
interesting materials and regimes, this work lends insight into the complicated combination of linear and nonlinear processes involved. This work also demonstrates thesecond-harmonic generation (SHG) form of frequency-resolved optical gating (FROG)
as a powerful technique for resolving complicated propagation issues in the field of
ultrafast science.
Experiments involving plane-wave propagation in fused silica reveal surprisingly large changes in temporal pulse width over relatively short propagation distances.
These experiments show a broadening that is nearly 20 times larger than that predictedby group velocity dispersion (GVD) alone. These experiments, along with calculations based on a one-dimensional nonlinear Schrödinger equation (NLSE), illustratethat the effects of GVD and self-phase modulation (SPM) are interrelated and should
not be treated separately as is commonly seen in the literature. This thesis presents thefirst full-field measurements detailing this interplay between GVD and SPM. The very
good agreement between the experiment and the model validates FROG as a valuable
technique for investigating short pulse propagation.
Propagation is also studied in a regime where conditions are such that the pulse

148
undergoes self-focusing. Self-focusing leads to much higher intensities and associatedhigher-order nonlinear effects that result in temporal pulse splitting. At lower input
powers, a pulse splits into two sub-pulses, each shorter in duration than the parent
pulse. With increasing input powers, multiple sub-pulses are observed. The overall
phase across the entire split field indicates upchirp, with the leading pulse shifted to
the red of the trailing pulse in frequency. The phase of the input pulse is also found
to affect the propagation. An upchirped input gives a head-start to the propagationinduced upchirp and results in split pulses that are broader in both the spectral andtemporal domains. A downchirped input pulse, on the other hand, tends to offset the
propagation induced upchirp and results in split pulses that are significantly narrower
in both the temporal and spectral domains.
In this three-dimensional propagation regime, transverse changes to the beam
can no longer be neglected, and the model must take into account propagation-induced
spatial changes to the beam. A simple three-dimensional model based on the NLSE,
however, is not sufficient to describe the observed pulse splitting. The observed splitting exhibits asymmetry in both intensity and phase that the simple model cannot reproduce. Observation of these asymmetries led to the development of a model including
the effects of a Raman nonlinearity, linear and nonlinear shock, and third-order dispersion. The Raman nonlinearity preferentially amplifies red-shifted frequencies within
the pulse and, with GVD, enhances the leading pulse of the split pair. Both linear
and nonlinear shock enhance the trailing pulse during the pulse-splitting process. Thevery short-temporal duration trailing pulse then diffracts faster than the leading pulse
and thus appears less intense at the exit face of the sample. The effects of the Raman
nonlinearity are not sufficient to completely offset the effects of shock in the material,
however it does temper them. Third-order dispersion also contributes to a larger leading pulse by increasing the dispersion of the blue components. It is, however, a smaller
magnitude effect and plays a lesser role in determining the symmetry of the split pulses

149
than either Raman or shock. The paraxial assumption is still valid with this level ofself-focusing.
This modified NLSE predicts asymmetric pulse splitting, however, it does notpredict the multiply-split pulses observed in the experiment. In order to explain themultiple splittings, we have found that we must take into account propagation to the farfield. In fact, we have found that multiple splittings like those observed in experiment
only occur in the far-field. These multiple pulses do not arise from subsequent splittingof the original split field, but rather result from a build-up of phase in the far-field. In
general, pulse splitting occurs first in the far-field and then proceeds to the near-field.
When fully split pulses are resolved in the near-field, the far-field is multiply-split. The
modified NLSE including propagation to the far-field is in excellent agreement with theexperiment at 800 nm for all of the peak input powers investigated.
We have also investigated propagation at higher powers where a continuum spectrum is generated. Continuum spectra have been used in parametric amplification, shortpulse generation, and time-resolved spectroscopy and show potential for use in many
evolving applications. Our studies near the power threshold for continuum generation
indicate that the split temporal field begins to coalesce with the production of more
spectral components. Above the threshold for continuum generation, full-field FROG
measurements are no longer practical. In this regime, we present observations of continuum behavior as a function of both input power and elapsed time. The overall lossof power during the continuum generation process is an indication that multi-photon
absorption occurs in the sample. The dependence of the continuum and power losseson the elapsed time indicates the presence of a saturable process and probable material
damage. This thesis also presents the first near-field spatial-spectral measurements ofthe continuum spectrum. Comparisons with the model used in the pulse splitting experiments, modified to include four-photon absorption, reveal spectral asymmetries andinitial power losses similar to those observed in the experiment. This theory, however,150
is still not adequate to describe all aspects of the experimental data. These results uncover several of the basic processes involved in the generation of spectral continua andshould provide a useful comparison for further theoretical development.
Propagation in liquid samples is also investigated in a one-dimensional propagation regime with the goal of providing a measurement of the nonlinear index ofrefraction. These measurements are of interest because an accurate determination of
the nonlinear index is of particular importance in forecasting propagation effects. Measurements were performed in both methanol, a common organic solvent, and water
which is of interest to medical and biological sciences. We find that full-field measurement techniques are ideally suited to these kinds of measurements, assuming one takes
into account group velocity dispersion and limits the propagation to the plane-wave
regime. Studies in methanol reveal contributions to the nonlinear index of refraction
by a non-instantaneous nonlinearity with a surprisingly short response time of 10 fs.
The exact mechanism responsible for this non-instantaneous nonlinearity is unknown.
Electrostriction, molecular reorientation, molecular redistribution, rotation and libration should all occur on timescales longer than 10 fs and are therefore not responsible
for the observed nonlinear response. The nonlinear index of refraction of water, on theother hand, results purely from the instantaneous electronic response. The nonlinear
index of refraction of water is found to be in good agreement with previous literature
values. Measurements in water thus validate both the observed non-instantaneous nonlinearity in methanol and the measurement technique.
The studies in this thesis elucidate important aspects of linear and nonlinear propagation under a variety of conditions. The science presented here is not only interestingfrom a fundamental standpoint, but it should also find applicability in a wide variety
of fields. This work emphasizes the advantages of using a full-field measurement technique for investigating short pulse propagation and demonstrates the suitability of the
SHG form of FROG for this purpose. These studies also exemplify the mutually ben-151
eficial relationship that is possible between experiment and theory. These studies lend
insight into several interesting and complicated short pulse propagation related issues
and should have a bearing on other endeavors involving short, high-intensity pulses.
Of course, the experiments presented here suggest many opportunities for future
investigations, some of which include measurements of the full spatial field of a propagating pulse, three-dimensional propagation in liquids, and studies of pulse splitting
in materials that do not produce continuum. As discussed in Chapter 4, the pulse splitting experiments involve the spatial aspects of the field during propagation. It would
thus be interesting to measure not only the on-axis field as we have done, but also toinclude a measure of spatial intensity and phase during propagation as well. A meansof accomplishing this measurement is the technique of spectral interferometry.
Spectral interferometry consists of interfering an unknown pulse with a knownreference pulse and recording the entire interferogram with a CCD [161, 40, 162]. A
few requirements in spectral interferometry are as follows; there must exist a coherent
phase relationship between the two pulses, the spectrum of the reference pulse must
be greater than that of the pulse to be measured, and the reference pulse must be fully
characterized. The reference pulse can be characterized using FROG. A single laser
beam can be split to give both of the pulses thus ensuring a coherent phase relationship.
The second pulse becomes “unknown” by traversing the sample of interest. In shortpulse propagation, however, one must be careful either to limit the effects of self phasemodulation in the sample or to spectrally broaden the reference pulse via SPM prior to
its interaction with the unknown pulse to ensure that the second requirement is satisfied.
The full field, including one spatial dimension, of the unknown pulse can be retrieved
from the spectral interferogram.
We have performed spectral interferometry in a linear propagation regime andhave accurately recovered the value of dispersion of BK-7 glass along the entire spatial
dimension of the beam. We have also performed one preliminary experiment involving

152
nonlinear propagation and were able to observe the expected spatially dependent nonlinear index of refraction. If one could accurately determine the full field of a continuum
reference pulse, spectral interferometry could be an invaluable tool for gathering muchneeded information about the spatial phase of a pulse during continuum generation.
It would also be interesting to study three-dimensional propagation in liquids.
We know empirically and from the literature that a continuum is generated in water.
But, do the extra degrees of freedom afforded a liquid affect the continuum generation
process? And if so, in what way? And, what effect does local boiling have on theobserved continuum?
Investigating the literature tells us that the band gap of the material plays a rolein determining the spectral broadening observed in continuum generation. There exist materials with a band gap that is too small for continuum to be generated [135].
It would be interesting to investigate pulse splitting in these materials at input peak
powers above that where multiple splitting is first observed. In the absence of spectral
superbroadening, it is improbable that the same pulse coalescence would be observed.
Another experiment would also be interesting to perform. In materials with the smallest possible band gap above the threshold for continuum generation, where continuum
would occur at lower input powers, a situation might arise where pulse-splitting neveroccurs. By investigating these extreme cases, one could potentially learn more about
the processes involved.
In any case, propagation of short pulses should continue to present many fascinating and challenging problems to scientists for years to come.

Bibliography[1] L. E. Hargrove, R. L. Fork, and M. A. Pollack, “Locking of He-Ne laser
modes induced by synchronous intracavity modulation,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 5, 4–5(1964).
[2] R. L. Fork, C. H. Brito Cruz, P. C. Becker, and C. V. Shank, “Compression of optical pulses to six femtoseconds by using cubic phase compensation,” Opt. Lett.
12, 483–485 (1987).
[3] J. Zhou, J. Peatross, M. M. Murnane, H. C. Kapteyn, and I. P. Christov, “Enhanced high-harmonic generation using 25 fs laser pulses,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 76,
752–755 (1996).
[4] J.-C. Diels, J. J. Fontaine, I. C. McMichael, and F. Simoni, “Control and measurement of ultrashort pulse shapes (in amplitude and phase) with femtosecond
accuracy,” Appl. Opt. 24, 1270–1282 (1985).
[5] P. W. Milonni and J. H. Eberly, Lasers (John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York,
1988).
[6] A. Yariv, Optical Electronics (Saunders College Publishing, Philadelphia, 1991).
[7] R. W. Boyd, Nonlinear Optics (Academic Press, San Diego, 1992).
[8] J. R. de Oliveira, M. A. de Moura, J. M. Hickmann, and A. S. L. Gomes, “Selfsteepening of optical pulses in dispersive media,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 9, 2025–
2027 (1992).
[9] D. J. Bradley and G. H. C. New, “Ultrashort pulse measurements,” Proc. IEEE62, 313–345 (1974).
[10] E. B. Treacy, “Measurement and interpretation of dynamic spectrograms of picosecond light pulses,” J. Appl. Phys. 42, 3848–3858 (1971).
[11] J. Jansky and G. Corradi, “Full intensity profile analysis of ultrashort laser pulses
using four-wave mixing or third harmonic generation,” Optics Commun. 60,
251–256 (1986).

154[12] N. G. Paulter, Jr. and A. K. Majumdar, “A new triple correlator design for themeasurement of ultrashort laser pulses,” Optics Commun. 81, 95–100 (1991).
[13] H.-S. Albrecht, P. Heist, J. Kleinschmidt, D. Van Lap, and T. Schröder,“Single-shot measurement of femtosecond pulses using the optical Kerr effect,”Meas. Sci. Technol. 4, 492–495 (1993).
[14] A. S. L. Gomes, V. L. da Silva, and J. R. Taylor, “Direct measurement of nonlinear frequency chirp of Raman radiation in single mode optical fibers using aspectral window method,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 5, 373–379 (1988).
[15] R. Trebino, C. C. Hayden, A. M. Johnson, W. M. Simpson, and A. M. Levine,“Chirp and self-phase modulation in induced-grating autocorrelation measurements of ultrashort pulses,” Opt. Lett. 15, 1079–1081 (1990).
[16] G. Szabó, A. Müller, and Z. Bor, “A single shot method to determine durationand chirp of ultrashort pulses with a streak camera,” Optics Commun. 82, 56–62(1991).
[17] T. F. Albrecht, K. Seibert, and H. Kurz, “Chirp measurement of large-bandwidth
femtosecond optical pulses using two-photon absorption,” Optics Commun. 84,
223–227 (1991).
[18] S. P. Le Blanc and R. Sauerbrey, “Ultrashort pulse characterization using plasmainduced cross-phase modulation,” Optics Commun. 111, 297–302 (1994).
[19] K. Naganuma, K. Mogi, and H. Yamada, “General method for ultrashort lightpulse chirp measurement,” IEEE J. Quantum Electron. 25, 1225–1233 (1989).
[20] K. Naganuma, K. Mogi, and H. Yamada, “Time direction determination of asymmetric ultrashort optical pulses from second-harmonic generation autocorrelation signals,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 54, 1201–1202 (1989).
[21] J. E. Rothenberg and D. Grischkowsky, “Measurement of optical phase with
subpicosecond resolution by time domain interferometry,” Opt. Lett. 12, 99–101(1987).
[22] C. Yan and J.-C. Diels, “Amplitude and phase recording of ultrashort pulses,”
J. Opt Soc. Am. B 8, 1259–1263 (1991).
[23] E. B. Treacy, “Direct demonstration of picosecond-pulse frequency sweep,”Appl. Phys. Lett. 17, 14–16 (1970).
[24] E. P. Ippen and C. V. Shank, “Dynamic spectroscopy and subpicosecond pulse
compression,” Appl. Phys. Lett 27, 488–490 (1975).
[25] E. B. Treacy, “Optical pulse compression with diffraction gratings,” IEEE
J. Quantum Electron. QE-5, 454–458 (1969).

155[26] W. H. Knox, R. L. Fork, M. C. Downer, R. H. Stolen, C. V. Shank, andJ. A. Valdmanis, “Optical pulse compression to 8 fs at a 5-kHz repetition rate,”Appl. Phys. Lett 46, 1120–1121 (1985).
[27] J. A. Chilla and O. E. Martinez, “Direct determination of the amplitude and thephase of femtosecond light pulses,” Opt. Lett. 16, 39–41 (1991).
[28] J. A. Chilla and O. E. Martinez, “Frequency domain phase measurement of ultrashort light pulses. Effect of noise,” Optics Commun. 89, 434–440 (1992).
[29] J.-P. Foing, J.-P. Likforman, M. Joffre, and A. Migus, “Femtosecond pulse phasemeasurement by spectrally resolved up-conversion: Application to continuum
compression,” IEEE J. Quantum Electron. 28, 2285–2290 (1992).
[30] J. Paye, “The chronocyclic representation of ultrashort light pulses,”IEEE J. Quantum Electron. 28, 2262–2273 (1992).
[31] D. J. Kane and R. Trebino, “Characterization of arbitrary femtosecond pulses
using frequency-resolved optical gating,” IEEE J. Quantum Electron. 29, 571–
579 (1993).
[32] K. C. Chu, J. P. Heritage, R. S. Grant, K. X. Liu, A. Dienes, W. E. White, and
A. Sullivan, “Direct measurement of the spectral phase of femtosecond pulses,”
Opt. Lett. 20, 904–906 (1995).
[33] A. M. Weiner, J. P. Heritage, and E. M. Kirschner, “High-resolution femtosecond
pulse shaping,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 5, 1563–1572 (1988).
[34] A. Sullivan, W. E. White, K. C. Chu, J. P. Heritage, K. W. Delong, and R. Trebino, “Quantitative investigation of optical phase-measuring techniques for ultrashort pulse lasers,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 13, 1965–1978 (1996).
[35] K. C. Chu, J. P. Heritage, R. S. Grant, and W. E. White, “Temporal interferometric measurement of femtosecond spectral phase,” Opt. Lett. 21, 1842–1844(1996).
[36] J.-K. Rhee, T. S. Sosnowski, A.-C. Tien, and T. B. Norris, “Real-time dispersion
analyzer of femtosecond laser pulses with use of a spectrally and temporally
resolved upconversion technique,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 13, 1780–1785 (1996).
[37] V. Wong and I. A. Walmsley, “Ultrashort-pulse characterization from dynamic
spectrograms by iterative phase retrieval,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 14, 944–948(1997).
[38] M. A. Bolshtyansky, N. V. Tabiryan, and B. Y. Zel’dovich, “BRIEFING: beamreconstruction by iteration of an electromagnetic field with an induced nonlinearity gauge,” Opt. Lett. 22, 22–24 (1997).

156[39] T. Feurer, S. Niedermeier, and R. Sauerbrey, “Measuring the temporal intensity of ultrashort laser pulses by triple correlation,” Appl. Phys. B 66, 163–168(1998).
[40] F. Reynaud, F. Salin, and A. Barthelemy, “Measurement of phase shifts introduced by nonlinear optical phenomena on subpicosecond pulses,” Opt. Lett. 14,
275–277 (1989).
[41] D. Strickland and P. B. Corkum, “Resistance of short pulses to self-focusing,”
J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 11, 492–497 (1994).
[42] J. K. Ranka, R. W. Schirmer, and A. L. Gaeta, “Observation of pulse splitting in
nonlinear dispersive media,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 3783–3786 (1996).
[43] R. L. Fork, C. V. Shank, C. Hirlimann, R. Yen, and W. J. Tomlinson, “Femtosecond white-light continuum pulses,” Opt. Lett. 8, 1–3 (1983).
[44] M. Sheik-Bahae, A. A. Said, T.-H. Wei, D. J. Hagan, and E. W. Van Stryland, “Sensitive measurement of optical nonlinearities using a single beam,”IEEE J. Quantum Electron. 26, 760–769 (1990).
[45] T. D. Krauss and F. W. Wise, “Femtosecond measurement of nonlinear absorption and refraction in solids,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 65, 1739–1741 (1994).
[46] Newport Catalog (Newport Corp., Irvine, 1994).
[47] V. V. Yakovlev, B. Kohler, and K. R. Wilson, “Broadly tunable 30-fs pulses
produced by optical parametric amplification,” Opt. Lett. 19, 2000–2002 (1994).
[48] R. Trebino and D. J. Kane, “Using phase retrieval to measure the intensity and phase of ultrashort pulses: frequency-resolved optical gating,”
J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 10, 1101–1111 (1993).
[49] D. J. Kane and R. Trebino, “Single-shot measurement of the intensity and phaseof an arbitrary ultrashort pulse by using frequency-resolved optical gating,”
Opt. Lett. 18, 823–825 (1993).
[50] K. W. DeLong, C. L. Ladera, R. Trebino, B. Kohler, and K. R. Wilson,“Ultrashort-pulse measurement using noninstantaneous nonlinearities: Raman
effects in frequency-resolved optical gating,” Opt. Lett. 20, 486–488 (1995).
[51] J. Paye, M. Ramaswamy, J. G. Fujimoto, and E. P. Ippen, “Measurement of theamplitude and phase of ultrashort light pulses from spectrally resolved autocorrelation,” Opt. Lett. 18, 1946–1948 (1993).
[52] K. W. DeLong, R. Trebino, J. Hunter, and W. E. White, “Frequency-resolved
optical gating with the use of second-harmonic generation,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. B
11, 2206–2215 (1994).

157[53] T. Tsang, M. A. Krumbügel, K. W. Delong, D. N. Fittinghoff, and R. Trebino,“Frequency-resolved optical-gating measurements of ultrashort pulses using surface third-harmonic generation,” Opt. Lett. 21, 1381–1383 (1996).
[54] J. N. Sweetser, D. N. Fittinghoff, and R. Trebino, “Transient-grating frequencyresolved optical gating,” Opt. Lett. 22, 519–521 (1997).
[55] R. Trebino, K. W. DeLong, D. N. Fittinghoff, J. N. Sweetser,
Marco A. Krumbügel, B. A. Richman, and D. J. Kane, “Measuring ultrashort laser pulses in the time-frequency domain using frequency-resolved
optical gating,” Rev. Sci. Inst. 68, 3277–3295 (1997).
[56] K. W. DeLong and R. Trebino, “Improved ultrashort pulse-retrieval algorithm forfrequency-resolved optical gating,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 11, 2429–2437 (1994).
[57] K. W. DeLong, D. N. Fittinghoff, R. Trebino, B. Kohler, and K. Wilson, “Pulse
retrieval in frequency-resolved optical gating based on the method of generalized
projections,” Opt. Lett. 19, 2152–2154 (1994).
[58] J. W. Nicholson, F. G. Omenetto, D. J. Funk, and A. J. Taylor, “Evolving
FROGS: phase retrieval from frequency-resolved optical gating measurements
by use of genetic algorithms,” Opt. Lett. 24, 490–492 (1999).
[59] D. N. Fittinghoff, K. W. DeLong, R. Trebino, and C. L. Ladera, “Noise sensitivity in frequency-resolved optical-gating measurements of ultrashort pulses,”
J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 12, 1955–1967 (1995).
[60] K. W. DeLong, D. N. Fittinghoff, and R. Trebino, “Practical issues inultrashort-laser-pulse measurement using frequency-resolved optical gating,”
IEEE J. Quantum Electron. 32, 1253–1264 (1996).
[61] K. W. DeLong, R. Trebino, and D. J. Kane, “Comparison of ultrashort-pulse
frequency-resolved-optical-gating traces for three common beam geometries,”
J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 11, 1595–1608 (1994).
[62] D. J. Kane, A. J. Taylor, R. Trebino, and K. W. DeLong, “Single-shot measurement of the intensity and phase of a femtosecond UV laser pulse with frequencyresolved optical gating,” Opt. Lett. 19, 1061–1063 (1994).
[63] T. S. Clement, A. J. Taylor, and D. J. Kane, “Single-shot measurement of theamplitude and phase of ultrashort laser pulses in the violet,” Opt. Lett. 20, 70–72(1995).
[64] D. N. Fittinghoff, J. L. Bowie, J. N. Sweetser, R. T. Jennings, M. A. Krumbügel,
K. W. DeLong, R. Trebino, and I. A. Walmsley, “Measurement of the intensityand phase of ultraweak, ultrashort laser pulses,” Opt. Lett. 21, 884–886 (1996).

158[65] D. J. Kane, “Real-time measurement of ultrashort laser pulses using principal
component generalized projections,” IEEE J. Select. Topics Quantum Electron.
4, 278–284 (1998).
[66] D. J. Kane, “Recent progress toward real-time measurement of ultrashort laser
pulses,” IEEE J. Quantum Electron. 35, 421–431 (1999).
[67] M. Munroe, D. H. Christensen, and R. Trebino, “Error bars in intensity andphase measurements of ultrashort laser pulses,” In Technical Digest. Summaryof papers presented at the Conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics, 6, 462–463(1998).
[68] K. W. DeLong, R. Trebino, and W. E. White, “Simultaneous recovery of two
ultrashort laser pulses from a single spectrogram,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 12, 2463–
2466 (1995).
[69] D. J. Kane, G. Rodriguez, A. J. Taylor, and T. S. Clement, “Simultaneous measurement of two ultrashort laser pulses from a single spectrogram in a single
shot,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 14, 935–943 (1997).
[70] C. W. Siders, A. J. Taylor, and M. C. Downer, “Multipulse interferometricfrequency-resolved optical gating: real-time phase-sensitive imaging of ultrafast
dynamics,” Opt. Lett. 22, 624–626 (1997).
[71] C. W. Siders, J. L. W. Siders, and A. J. Taylor, “Femtosecond coherent spectroscopy at 800 nm: measuring high-field ionization rates in gases with MI
FROG,” In Technical Digest. Summary of papers presented at the International
Quantum Electronics Conference, 7, 43–44 (1998).
[72] C. W. Siders, J. L. W. Siders, F. G. Omenetto, and A. J. Taylor, “Multiple interferometric frequency-resolved optical gating,” IEEE J. Quantum Electron. 35,
432–440 (1999).
[73] M. D. Thomson, J. M. Dudley, L. P. Barry, and J. D. Harvey, “Waveguideenhanced frequency-resolved optical gating at :  using the Kerr nonlinearity in optical fibre,” In ACOFT ’98 Proceedings. 23rd Australian Conference
on Optical Fibre Technology, pp. 57–60 (1998).

15 m[74] M. D. Thomson, J. M. Dudley, L. P. Barry, and J. D. Harvey, “Complete
pulse characterization at :  by cross-phase modulation in optical fibers,”
Opt. Lett. 23, 1582–1584 (1998).

15 m[75] L. Jusinski, A. Kwok, M. A. Krumbügel, J. N. Sweetser, and R. Trebino,“Frequency-resolved optical gating using cascaded second-order nonlinearities,”
In Technical Digest. Summary of papers presented at the Conference on Lasers
and Electro-Optics, 6, 464–465 (1998).

159[76] A. Kwok, L. Jusinski, M. A. Krunbügel, J. N. Sweetser, D. N. Fittinghoff, and R.
Trebino, “Frequency-resolved optical gating using cascaded second-order nonlinearities,” IEEE J. Select. Topics Quantum Electron. 4, 271–277 (1998).
[77] G. Taft, A. Rundquist, M. M. Murnane, H. C. Kapteyn, K. W. DeLong, R.
Trebino, and I. P. Christov, “Ultrashort optical waveform measurements using
frequency-resolved optical gating,” Opt. Lett. 20, 743–745 (1995).
[78] G. Taft, A. Rundquist, M. M. Murnane, I. P. Christov, H. C. Kapteyn, K. W.
DeLong, D. N. Fittinghoff, M. A. Krumbügel, J. N. Sweetser, and R. Trebino,“Measurement of 10-fs laser pulses,” IEEE J. Select. Topics Quant. Electron. 2,
575–584 (1996).
[79] A. Baltuska, M. S. Pshenichnikov, and D. A. Wiersma, “Amplitude and phasecharacterization of 4.5-fs pulses by frequency-resolved optical gating,” Opt. Lett.
23, 1474–1476 (1998).
[80] A. Baltuska, M. S. Pshenichnikov, and D. A. Wiersma, “SHG FROG characterization of < -fs pulses,” In Technical Digest. Summary of papers presented at
the Conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics, 6, 461–462 (1998).

5[81] J. M. Dudley, L. P. Barry, J. D. Harvey, M. D. Thomson, B. C. Thomsen,
P. G. Bollond, and R. Leonhardt, “Complete characterization of ultrashort pulse
sources at 1550 nm,” IEEE J. Quantum Electron. 35, 441–450 (1999).
[82] A. J. Taylor, G. Rodriguez, and T. S. Clement, “Determination of n2 by direct
measurement of the optical phase,” Opt. Lett. 21, 1812–1814 (1996).
[83] P. J. Delfyett, S. Hong, S. Gee, I. Nitta, J. C. Connolly, and G. A. Alphonse,“Joint time-frequency measurements of modelocked semiconductor diode lasers
and dynamics using frequency-resolved optical gating,” IEEE J. Quantum Electron. 35, 487–500 (1999).
[84] W. Theobald, R. Hassner, S. Niedermeier, K. Michelmann, T. Feurer, H.
Schillinger, R. Sauerbrey, and G. Schafer, “Relativistic accelerations in femtosecond laser produced plasmas,” In Technical Digest. Summary of papers
presented at the International Quantum Electronics Conference, 7, 75 (1998).
[85] S. P. Nikitin, Y. Li, T. M. Antonsen, and H. M. Milchberg, “Ionization-induced
pulse shortening and retardation of high intensity femtosecond laser pulses,” Optics Commun. 157, 139–144 (1998).
[86] K. Furusawa, H. Yabe, and M. Obara, “Automatic ultrafast pulse compresor
in chirped pulse amplification by FROG using fuzzy control technique,” In
Conference Proceedings. LEOS ’98, 1, 138–139 (1998).
[87] T. Brixner, M. Strehle, and G. Gerber, “Feedback-controlled optimization of amplified femtosecond laser pulses,” Appl. Phys. B. B68, 281–284 (1999).

160[88] V. D. Kleiman, S. M. Arrivo, J. S. Melinger, and E. J. Heilweil, “Controlling condensed-phase vibrational excitation with tailored infrared pulses,”
Chem. Phys. 233, 207–216 (1998).
[89] H. K. Eaton, T. S. Clement, A. A. Zozulya, and S. A. Diddams, “Investigating
nonlinear femtosecond pulse propagation with frequency-resolved optical gating,” IEEE J. Quantum Electron. 35, 451–457 (1999).
[90] A. A. Zozulya, S. A. Diddams, and T. S. Clement, “Investigations of nonlinear
femtosecond pulse propagation with the inclusion of Raman, shock, and thirdorder phase effects,” Phys. Rev. A 58, 3303–3310 (1998).
[91] S. A. Diddams, H. K. Eaton, A. A. Zozulya, and T. S. Clement, “Amplitude
and phase measurements of femtosecond pulse splitting in nonlinear dispersive
media,” Opt. Lett. 23, 379–381 (1998).
[92] A. M. Weiner, “Effect of group velocity mismatch on the measurement of ultrashort optical pulses via second harmonic generation,” IEEE J. Quantum Electron.
QE-19, 1276–1283 (1983).
[93] Y. Ishida, K. Naganuma, and T. Yajima, “Self-phase modulation in hybridly
mode-locked cw dye lasers,” IEEE J. Quantum Electron. QE-21, 69–77 (1985).
[94] E. T. J. Nibbering, M. A. Franco, B. S. Prade, G. Grillon, C. L. Blanc, and A.
Mysyrowicz, “Measurement of the nonlinear refractive index of transparent materials by spectral analysis after nonlinear propagation,” Optics Commun. 119,
479–484 (1995).
[95] E. T. J. Nibbering, G. Grillon, M. A. Franco, B. S. Prade, and A. Mysyrowicz,“Determination of the inertial contribution to the nonlinear refractive index ofair, 2 , and 2 by use of unfocused high-intensity femtosecond laser pulses,”
J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 14, 650–660 (1997).

NO[96] J. M. Dudley, L. P. Barry, P. G. Bollond, J. D. Harvey, R. Leonhardt, and P. D.
Drummond, “Direct measurement of pulse distortion near the zero-dispersion
wavelength in an optical fiber by frequency-resolved optical gating,” Opt. Lett.
22, 457–459 (1997).
[97] A. Siegman, Lasers (University Science Books, Mill Valley, CA, 1986).
[98] S. A. Diddams, H. K. Eaton, A. A. Zozulya, and T. S. Clement, “Characterizing
the nonlinear propagation of femtosecond pulses in bulk media,” IEEE J. Select. Topics Quant. Electr. 4, 306–316 (1998).
[99] R. Hellwarth, J. Cherlow, and T.-T. Yang, “Origin and frequency dependence of
nonlinear optical susceptiblities in glass,” Phys. Rev. B 11, 964–967 (1975).

161[100] R. H. Stolen, J. P. Gordon, W. J. Tomlinson, and H. A. Haus, “Raman response
function of silica core fibers,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 6, 1159–1166 (1989).
[101] R. H. Stolen and W. J. Tomlinson, “Effect of the Raman part of the nonlinear refractive index on propagation of ultrashort optical pulses in fibers,”
J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 9, 565–573 (1992).
[102] C. Radzewicz, J. S. Krasinski, Y. B. Band, and M. Trippenbach, “Femtosecond light wavepackets,”, Presented at LASE ’99, Photonics West, San José, CA,
1999.
[103] N. A. Zharova, A. G. Litvak, T. A. Petrova, A. M. Sergeev, and A. D. Yanukoviskii, “Multiple fractionation of wave structures in a nonlinear medium,”
JETP Lett. 44, 13–17 (1986).
[104] P. Chernev and V. Petrov, “Self-focusing of light pulses in the presence of normalgroup-velocity dispersion,” Opt. Lett. 17, 172–174 (1992).
[105] J. E. Rothenberg, “Pulse splitting during self-focusing in normally dispersive
media,” Opt. Lett. 17, 583–585 (1992).
[106] J. T. Manassah and B. Gross, “Self-focusing of (3+1)-D femtosecond pulses innonlinear Kerr media,” Laser Physics 6, 563–578 (1996).
[107] G. P. Agrawal, Nonlinear Fiber Optics (Academic Press, San Diego, 1995).
[108] D. Strickland and P. B. Corkum, “Short pulse self-focusing,” In Short-Pulse
High-Intensity Lasers and Applications, H. A. Baldis, ed.,1413, 54–58 (1991).
[109] J. K. Ranka and A. L. Gaeta, “Breakdown of the slowly-varying envelope approximation in the self-focusing of ultrashort pulses,” Opt. Lett. 23, 534–536(1998).
[110] J. H. Marburger, “Self-focusing as a pulse sharpening mechanism,” IEEE J.
Quantum Electron. QE-3, 415 (1967).
[111] Y. Silberberg, “Collapse of optical pulses,” Opt. Lett. 15, 1282–1284 (1990).
[112] R. McLeod, K. Wagner, and S. Blair, “(3+1)-dimensional optical soliton dragging logic,” Phys. Rev. A 52, 3254–3278 (1995).
[113] D. E. Edmundson and R. H. Enns, “Robust bistable light bullets,” Opt. Lett. 17,
586–588 (1992).
[114] J. H. Marburger, “Self-Focusing: Theory,” Prog. Quant. Electr. 4, 35–110 (1975).
[115] G. G. Luther, J. V. Moloney, A. C. Newell, and E. M. Wright, “Self-focusing
threshold in normally dispersive media,” Opt. Lett.. 19, 862–864 (1994).

162[116] G. L. McAllister, J. H. Marburger, and L. G. DeShazer, “Observation of optical pulse shaping by the self-focusing effects,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 21, 1648–1649(1968).
[117] J. K. Ranka and A. L. Gaeta, “Nonlinear dynamics of the self-focusing of ultrashort pulses,”, presented at Ultrafast Optics 1997, Monterrey, CA, paper MB-3.
[118] M. Trippenbach and Y. B. Band, “Dynamics of short-pulse splitting in dispersive
nolinear media,” Phys. Rev. A 56, 4242–4253 (1997).
[119] A. A. Zozulya, S. A. Diddams, A. G. Van Engen, and T. S. Clement, “Propagation dynamics of intense femtosecond pulses: Multiple splittings, coalescence,and continuum generation,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 1430–1433 (1999).
[120] I. Ledoux, J. Zyss, A. Migus, J. Etchepare, G. Grillon, and A. Antonelli, “Generation of high peak power subpicosecond pulses in the 1.0-1.6  range byparametric amplification in an organic crystal,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 48, 1564–1566(1986).

m[121] S. R. Greenfield and M. R. Wasielewski, “Optical parametric amplification of
femtosecond pulses tunable from the blue to the infrared with microjoule energies,” Appl. Opt. 34, 2688–2691 (1995).
[122] T. S. Sosnowski, P. B. Stephens, and T. B. Norris, “Production of 30-fs pulses
tunable throughout the visible spectral region by a new technique in optical parametric amplification,” Opt. Lett. 21, 140–142 (1996).
[123] T. M. Jedju and L. Rothberg, “Tunable femtosecond radiation in the mid-infrared
for time-resolved absorption in semiconductors,” Appl. Opt. 27, 615–618 (1988).
[124] The Supercontinuum Laser Source, R. R. Alfano, ed., (Springer-Verlag,
New York, 1989).
[125] M. Nisoli, S. De Silvestri, and O. Svelto, “Generation of high energy 10 fs pulses
by a new pulse compression technique,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 68, 2793–2795 (1996).
[126] R. R. Alfano and S. L. Shapiro, “Emission in the region 4000 to 7000 Åvia fourphoton coupling in glass,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 24, 584–587 (1970).
[127] M. Hercher, “Laser-induced damage in transparent media,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. 54,563 (1964).
[128] R. Y. Chiao, E. Garmire, and C. H. Townes, “Self-trapping of optical beams,”
Phys. Rev. Lett. 13, 479–482 (1964).
[129] E. T. J. Nibbering, P. F. Curley, G. Grillon, B. S. Prade, M. A. Franco, F. Salin,and A. Mysyrowicz, “Conical emission from self-guided femtosecond pulses inair,” Opt. Lett. 21, 62–64 (1996).

163[130] M. M. Loy and Y. R. Shen, “Study of self-focusing and small-scale filaments oflight in nonlinear media,” IEEE J. Quantum Electron. QE-9, 409–422 (1973).

H O and D O[131] W. L. Smith, P. Liu, and N. Bloembergen, “Superbroadening in 2
2 byself-focused picosecond pulses from a YAlG:Nd laser,” Phys. Rev. A 15, 2396–
2403 (1977).
[132] P. B. Corkum and C. Rolland, “Femtosecond continua produced in gases,”IEEE J. Quantum Electron. 25, 2634–2639 (1989).
[133] R. R. Alfano and S. L. Shapiro, “Observation of self-phase modulation andsmall-scale filaments in crystals and glasses,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 24, 592–594(1970).
[134] T. R. Gosnell, A. J. Taylor, and D. P. Greene, “Supercontinuum generation at
248 nm using high-pressure gases,” Opt. Lett. 15, 591–593 (1990).
[135] A. Brodeur and S. L. Chin, “Band-gap dependence of the ultrafast white-light
continuum,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 4406–4409 (1998).
[136] P. B. Corkum, P. P. Ho, R. R. Alfano, and J. T. Manassah, “Generation of infrared
supercontinuum covering 3-14 m in dielectrics and semiconductors,” Opt. Lett.
10, 584–586 (1985).
[137] P. B. Corkum, C. Rolland, and T. Srinivasan-Rao, “Supercontinuum generationin gases,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 57, 2268–2271 (1986).
[138] H. Nishioka, W. Odajima, K.-I. Ueda, and H. Takuma, “Ultrabroadband flat
continuum generation in multichannel propagation of terrawatt Ti:sapphire laser
pulses,” Opt. Lett. 20, 2505–2507 (1995).
[139] A. Penzkofer, A. Laubereau, and W. Kaiser, “Stimulated short-wave radiation
due to single-frequency resonances of (3) ,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 31, 863–866 (1973).
[140] A. Penzkofer, “Parametrically generated spectra and optical breakdown inand NaCl,” Optics Commun. 11, 265–269 (1974).

H2 O[141] A. Penzkofer, A. Seilmeier, and W. Kaiser, “Parametric four-photon generationof picosecond light at high conversion efficiency,” Optics Commun. 14, 363–367(1975).
[142] M. Wittmann and A. Penzkofer, “Spectral superbroadening of femtosecond laser
pulses,” Optics Commun. 126, 308–317 (1996).
[143] G. Yang and Y. R. Shen, “Spectral broadening of ultrashort pulses in a nonlinear
medium,” Opt. Lett. 9, 510–512 (1984).

164[144] J. T. Manassah, M. A. Mustafa, R. R. Alfano, and P. P. Ho, “Spectral extent
and pulse shape of the supercontinuum for ultrashort laser pulse,” IEEE J. Quantum Electron. QE-22, 197–204 (1970).
[145] N. Bloembergen, “The influence of electron plasma formation on superbroadening in light filaments,” Optics Commun. 8, 285–288 (1973).
[146] A. Brodeur and S. L. Chin, “Ultrafast white-light continuum generation andself-focusing in transparant condensed media,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 16, 637–650(1999).
[147] Y. R. Shen, “Self-focusing: Experimental,” Prog. Quant. Electr. 4, 1–34 (1975).
[148] A. A. Zozulya, 1999, department of Physics, Worcester Polytechnic Institute,private communication.
[149] A.-C. Tien, S. Backus, H. Kapteyn, M. Murnane, and G. Mourou, “Shortpulse laser damage in transparant materials as a function of pulse duration,”
Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 3883–3886 (1999).
[150] O. M. Efimov, K. Gabel, S. V. Garnov, L. B. Glebov, S. Grantham, M. Richardson, and M. J. Soileau, “Color-center generation in silicate glasses exposed toinfrared femtosecond pulses,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 15, 193–199 (1998).
[151] M. M. Denariez-Roberge and J.-P. E. Taran, “Experimental confirmation ofself-trapping from the dependence of self-modulation on propagation distance,”
Appl. Phys. Lett. 14, 205–207 (1969).
[152] I. L. Fabellinski, in Molecular Scattering of Light (Plenum, New York, 1967),
Chap. VIII.
[153] R. F. Bonner, “Laser capture microdissection (LCM) and the future of molecularpathology,” In Conference Proceedings. LEOS 98, 2, 226–228 (1998).
[154] J. S. Nelson, “Recent advances in laser treatment of human skin,” In Conference
Proceedings. LEOS 98, 2, 335–336 (1998).
[155] L. B. Da Silva, B.-M. Kim, M. D. Feit, and A. M. Rubenchik, “Use of ultrashortpulse lasers in medicine,” In Conference Proceedings. LEOS 98, 2, 443–444(1998).
[156] A. G. Van Engen, JILA, University of Colorado, private communication, 1998.
[157] P. P. Ho and R. R. Alfano, “Optical Kerr effect in liquids,” Phys. Rev. A 20,
2170–2187 (1979).
[158] P. T. Guerreiro, S. G. Lee, A. S. Rodrigues, Y. Z. Hu, E. M. Wright, S. I. Najafi,
J. Mackenzie, and N. Peyghambarian, “Femtosecond pulse propagation near a
two-photon transistion in a semiconductor quantum-dot waveguide,” Opt. Lett.
21, 659–661 (1996).

165[159] in CRC Handbook of Laser Science and Technology, M. J. Webster, ed., (CRC
Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1986), Vol. III, p. 270.
[160] B. A. Rockwell, W. P. Roach, M. E. Rogers, W. M. Mayo, C. A. Toth, C. P.
Cain, and G. D. Noojin, “Nonlinear refraction in vitreous humor,” Opt. Lett. 18,
1792–1794 (1993).
[161] J. Piasecki, B. Colombeau, M. Vampouille, C. Froehly, and J. A. Arnaud, “Nouvelle méthode de mesure de la réponse impulsionnelle des fibres optiques,”
Appl. Opt. 19, 3749–3755 (1980).
[162] L. Lepetit, G. Chériaux, and M. Joffre, “Linear techniques of phase measurement by femtosecond spectral interferometry for applications in spectroscopy,”
J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 12, 2467–2474 (1995).