Rogue waves in optically injected lasers: Origin, predictability, and suppression

Physical Review A - Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics

Volumn 87, Issue 3, 2013, Pages

  Zamora Munt, Jordi ^a,b   Garbin, Bruno ^c   Barland, Stéphane ^c   Giudici, Massimo ^c   Leite, Jose R Rios ^d   Masoller, Cristina ^a   Tredicce, Jorge R ^c,e  

^a UNIVERSITAT POLITÈCNICA DE CATALUNYA   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSITAT DE LES ILLES BALEARS   (Spain)

^c UNIVERSITÉ CÔTE D'AZUR   (France)

^d FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF PERNAMBUCO   (Brazil)

^e UNIVERSITÉ DE LA NOUVELLE CALÉDONIE   (New Caledonia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CHAOTIC OUTPUTS; EXTREME EVENTS; NATURAL SYSTEMS; OPTICALLY INJECTED SEMICONDUCTOR LASER; PROBABILITY OF OCCURRENCE; ROGUE WAVES; ULTRA-HIGH;

MATHEMATICAL MODELS; PHYSICS;

SEMICONDUCTOR LASERS;

EID: 84874824873     PISSN: 10502947     EISSN: 10941622     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.87.035802     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. M. S. Longuet-Higgins, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London A PTRMAD 1364-503X 10.1098/rsta.1957.0002 249, 321 (1957).
2. A. N. Ganshin, V. B. Efimov, G. V. Kolmakov, L. P. Mezhov-Deglin, and P. V. E. McClintock, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.101. 065303 101, 065303 (2008).
3. V. B. Efimov, A. N. Ganshin, G. V. Kolmakov, P. V. E. McClintock, and L. P. Mezhov-Deglin, Eur. Phys. J. Sel. Top. 1951-6355 10.1140/epjst/e2010-01248-5 185, 181 (2010).
4. Z. Y. Yan, Commun. Theor. Phys. CTPHDI 0253-6102 10.1088/0253-6102/54/5/ 31 54, 947 (2010).
5. W. X. Wang, R. Yang, Y. C. Lai, V. Kovanis, and C. Grebogi, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.106.154101 106, 154101 (2011).
6. S. Aberg and G. Lindgren, Probab. Eng. Mech. PEMEEX 0266-8920 10.1016/j.probengmech.2007.08.006 23, 359 (2008).
7. A. Chabchoub, N. P. Hoffmann, and N. Akhmediev, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.106.204502 106, 204502 (2011).
8. M. Onorato, D. Proment, and A. Toffoli, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.107.184502 107, 184502 (2011).
9. A. Chabchoub, N. Hoffmann, M. Onorato, and N. Akhmediev, Phys. Rev. X 2160-3308 10.1103/PhysRevX.2.011015 2, 011015 (2012).
10. D. R. Solli, C. Ropers, P. Koonath, and B. Jalali, Nature (London) NATUAS 0028-0836 10.1038/nature06402 450, 1054 (2007). (Pubitemid 350273615)
11. J. M. Dudley, G. Genty, and B. J. Eggleton, Opt. Express OPEXFF 1094-4087 10.1364/OE.16.003644 16, 3644 (2008). (Pubitemid 351434335)
12. J. Kasparian, P. Bejot, J.-P. Wolf, and J. M. Dudley, Opt. Express OPEXFF 1094-4087 10.1364/OE.17.012070 17, 12070 (2009).
13. A. Mussot, A. Kudlinski, M. Kolobov, E. Louvergneaux, M. Douay, and M. Taki, Opt. Express OPEXFF 1094-4087 10.1364/OE.17.017010 17, 17010 (2009).
14. N. Akhmediev, J. M. Soto-Crespo, and A. Ankiewicz, Phys. Lett. A PYLAAG 0375-9601 10.1016/j.physleta.2009.04.023 373, 2137 (2009).
15. N. Akhmediev, Jose M. Soto-Crespo, A. Ankiewicz, and N. Devine, Phys. Lett. A PYLAAG 0375-9601 10.1016/j.physleta.2011.06.048 375, 2999 (2011).
16. U. Bandelow and N. Akhmediev, Phys. Lett. A PYLAAG 0375-9601 10.1016/j.physleta.2012.03.032 376, 1558 (2012).
17. F. T. Arecchi, U. Bortolozzo, A. Montina, and S. Residori, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.106.153901 106, 153901 (2011).
18. F. M. de Aguiar, Phys. Lett. A PYLAAG 0375-9601 10.1016/j.physleta.2010. 12.036 375, 265 (2011).
19. A. N. Pisarchik, R. Jaimes-Reategui, R. Sevilla-Escoboza, G. Huerta-Cuellar, and M. Taki, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.107.274101 107, 274101 (2011).
20. S. Randoux and P. Suret, Opt. Lett. OPLEDP 0146-9592 10.1364/OL.37.000500 37, 500 (2012).
21. M. Kovalsky, A. A. Hnilo, and J. R. Tredicce, Opt. Lett. OPLEDP 0146-9592 10.1364/OL.36.004449 36, 4449 (2011).
22. A. Zaviyalov, O. Egorov, R. Iliew, and F. Lederer, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.85.013828 85, 013828 (2012).
23. C. Lecaplain, Ph. Grelu, J. M. Soto-Crespo, and N. Akhmediev, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.233901 108, 233901 (2012).
24. C. Bonatto, M. Feyereisen, S. Barland, M. Giudici, C. Masoller, Jose R. Rios Leite, and J. R. Tredicce, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.107.053901 107, 053901 (2011).
25. F. Baronio, A. Degasperis, M. Conforti, and S. Wabnitz, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.109.044102 109, 044102, (2012).
26. J. M. Dudley, C. Finot, G. Millot, J. Garnier, G. Genty, D. Agafontsev, and F. Dias, Eur. Phys. J. Sel. Top. 1951-6355 10.1140/epjst/e2010-01243-x 185, 125 (2010).
27. R. Gilmore and M. Lefranc, The Topology of Chaos, Alice in Stretch and Squeezeland (John Wiley, New York, 2002).
28. C. Grebogi, E. Ott, and J. A. Yorke, Physica D PDNPDT 0167-2789 10.1016/0167-2789(83)90126-4 7, 181 (1983).
29. Both in the experimental and in the simulated intensity time traces, rogue wave events are considered as pulses whose amplitude is above a threshold that is defined as the average pulse height, 〈 H âŒo plus X times the standard deviation of the distribution of pulse heights, σ. As in Ref. we chose X = 8 except in Fig. where we use X = 4 to show the difference in the anticipation time of X = 8 and X = 4 rogue waves, and in Fig., where we use X = 6 to have enough statistics in a single time trace.
30. C. Nicolis and S. C. Nicolis, Eur. Phys. Lett. EULEEJ 0295-5075 10.1209/0295-5075/80/40003 80, 40003 (2007).
31. C. Nicolis and G. Nicolis, Phys. Rev. E PLEEE8 1539-3755 10.1103/PhysRevE.80.061119 80, 061119 (2009).
32. As compared to Ref., we are able to work at lower bias current thanks to an improved detection system.
33. S. C. Venkataramani, B. R. Hunt, E. Ott, D. J. Gauthier, and J. C. Bienfang, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.77.5361 77, 5361 (1996). (Pubitemid 40620101)