|
Intensity Autocorrelation Tutorial In order to measure an event in time, you need a
shorter one.
where tau is the delay. This field has an intensity that's proportional to the product of the intensities of the two input pulses:
Detectors are too slow to resolve this beam in time, so they'll measure:
This is the intensity autocorrelation. The superscript (2) implies that it's a second-order autocorrelation; third-order autocorrelations are possible, too.
Fig. 1. Experimental layout for an
intensity autocorrelator using second-harmonic generation. A pulse
is split into two, one is variably delayed with respect to the other,
and the two pulses are overlapped in an SHG crystal. The SHG pulse
energy is measured vs. delay, yielding the autocorrelation trace.
Other nonlinear-optical effects, such as two-photon fluorescence and
two-photon absorption can also yield the autocorrelation, using similar
beam geometries.
Figure 2 shows some pulses and their intensity autocorrelations.
Fig. 2. Examples of theoretical pulse
intensities and their intensity autocorrelations. Left: Intensities
vs. time. Right: The intensity autocorrelation corresponding to the
pulse intensity to its left. Top row: A 10-fs Gaussian intensity.
Middle row: A 7-fs sech2 intensity. Bottom row: A pulse
whose intensity results from 3rd-order spectral phase, a very common
occurrence in ultrafast optics labs. Note that the autocorrelation
loses details of the pulse, and, as a result, all of these pulses
have similar autocorrelations.
Notice that the autocorrelation doesn't
reveal the satellite pulses in the pulse in the bottom row. Indeed, it
is easy to show that the autocorrelation doesn't yield the pulse intensity
because many different intensities can have the same autocorrelation (and,
of course, it says nothing about the pulse phase). It can be shown that the problem of retrieving the pulse intensity from the intensity autocorrelation is equivalent to a mathematical problem called the one-dimensional phase-retrieval problem, which is the attempt to retrieve the Fourier-transform phase for a function when only the Fourier-transform magnitude is available. This problem is unsolvable because typically many solutions ("ambiguities") exist, and it isn't possible to determine which is the correct one. The autocorrelation's tendency to wash out structure in the intensity is well known. But this shortcoming is most evident in the measurement of complicated pulses. In fact, for complex pulses, it can be shown that, as the intensity increases in complexity, the autocorrelation actually becomes simpler and approaches a simple shape of a narrow spike on a pedestal, independent of the intensity structure. For a discussion of this remarkable fact,
see Frequency-Resolved Optical Gating:
The Measurement of Ultrashort Laser Pulses by Rick Trebino. Here
we'll illustrate it with a few plots (See Fig. 3).
Fig. 3. Complicated intensities with
Gaussian slowly varying envelopes with increasing amounts of intensity
structure (left) and their autocorrelations (right). As the pulse
increases in complexity (from top to bottom), the autocorrelation
approaches the simple narrow-spike-on-a-pedestal shape, independent
of the pulse intensity structure. Note that the spike narrows along
with the structure, while the pedestal always reveals the approximate
width of the envelope of the intensity and approaches a perfect Gaussian
(the autocorrelation of a Gaussian is a Gaussian) as the structure
increases in complexity.
Interestingly, this autocorrelation trace simultaneously yields rough measures of both the pulse spectrum and intensity autocorrelation. Unfortunately, that's all it yields. It says nothing of the actual spectrum or the intensity structure. The "interferometric autocorrelation," which involves placing an SHG crystal at the output of a Michelson interferometer, is better, yielding some information about the pulse phase. But no one has ever found a way to extract the full pulse intensity and phase from it, and, worse, very different pulses (even pulses with very different pulse lengths) can have very similar interferometric autocorrelations. Thus, a pulse intensity shape and phase must typically be assumed when using any type of autocorrelation. And the resulting pulse length will depend sensitively on the shape chosen. Worse, in view of these issues, it generally isn't possible to sense from an autocorrelation when other pulse distortions (such as spatio-temporal distortions like spatial chirp or pulse-front tilt) or systematic error are present. As a result, autocorrelation is no longer an acceptable measure of most ultrashort pulses. |
![]() |
Download the Tutorial
Download the Adobe PDF version of this tutorial.
|
||||||
| Copyright © 2003-2009 Swamp Optics, LLC. All Rights Reserved. | |||||||||