Abstract

The authors of an earlier paper [Opt. Lett. 32, 3558 (2007) ] reported two “ambiguities” in second-harmonic-generation frequency-resolved optical gating (FROG). One ambiguity is simply wrong—a miscalculation. The other is well known and easily avoided in simple well-known FROG variations. Finally, the authors’ main conclusion—that autocorrelation can be more sensitive to pulse variations than FROG—is also wrong.

© 2009 Optical Society of America

Full Article  |  PDF Article
OSA Recommended Articles
Simulations of frequency-resolved optical gating for measuring very complex pulses

Lina Xu, Erik Zeek, and Rick Trebino
J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 25(6) A70-A80 (2008)

Analysis of the measurement of polarization-shaped ultrashort laser pulses by tomographic ultrafast retrieval of transverse light E fields

Lina Xu, Philip Schlup, Omid Masihzadeh, Randy A. Bartels, and Rick Trebino
J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 26(12) 2363-2369 (2009)

Amplitude ambiguities in second-harmonic generation frequency-resolved optical gating

Balakishore Yellampalle, KiYong Kim, and Antoniette J. Taylor
Opt. Lett. 32(24) 3558-3560 (2007)

References

You do not have subscription access to this journal. Citation lists with outbound citation links are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an OSA member, or as an authorized user of your institution.

Contact your librarian or system administrator
or
Login to access OSA Member Subscription

Cited By

You do not have subscription access to this journal. Cited by links are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an OSA member, or as an authorized user of your institution.

Contact your librarian or system administrator
or
Login to access OSA Member Subscription

Metrics

You do not have subscription access to this journal. Article level metrics are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an OSA member, or as an authorized user of your institution.

Contact your librarian or system administrator
or
Login to access OSA Member Subscription