Abstract
Two common trial functions used in the variational method to solve the waveguiding modes of Ti:LiNbO 3 channel waveguides are compared in this paper. The first one has four parameters and the other has just two. The respective modal-field profiles described by them, as well as the respective fiber-to-waveguide coupling efficiencies estimated by these models, are rather different. We propose a self-consistent concept to examine the qualities of the trial fields and then show that the two-parameter model is better.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
