论文标题
模拟非高斯光束和衍射的方法比较精确干涉法
Method comparison for simulating non-Gaussian Beams and Diffraction for Precision Interferometry
论文作者
论文摘要
在模拟精度激光干涉仪的上下文中,我们通过几个示例进行比较两种波前分解方法:模式扩展方法(MEM)和高斯束分解(GBD)的精度和适用性。为了判断这些方法的性能,我们定义了不同类型的错误并研究其属性。我们指定如何将两种方法进行公平比较,并基于此方法,在几个示例中比较了MEM和GBD的质量。我们在这里测试可获得分析结果的情况,即,在近,远,远,远,远处和极端远场中,在空间 - 好处波波检测器中出现的近,远处和极端远场。此外,我们通过测试不同弯曲的镜子的反射来比较异常波前的方法以及与光学组件的相互作用。我们发现两种方法通常都可以用于分解非高斯束。但是,哪种方法更准确取决于光学系统和仿真设置。在给定的示例中,MEM更准确地描述了未切开的高斯梁,而用于夹紧的高斯梁和与表面的相互作用,GBD更精确。
In the context of simulating precision laser interferometers, we compare via several examples two wavefront decomposition methods: the Mode Expansion Method (MEM) and the Gaussian beam decomposition (GBD) for their precision and applicability. To judge the performance of these methods, we define different types of errors and study their properties. We specify how the two methods can be fairly compared and based on that, the quality of the MEM and GBD are compared in several examples. We test here cases for which analytic results are available, i.e., non-clipped circular and general astigmatic Gaussian beams, as well as clipped circular Gaussian beams, in the near-, far-, and extreme far-field of millions of kilometers occurring in space-gravitational wave detectors. Additionally, we compare the methods for aberrated wavefronts and the interaction with optical components by testing reflections from differently curved mirrors. We find that both methods can be generally used for decomposing non-Gaussian beams. However, which method is more accurate depends on the optical system and simulation settings. In the given examples, the MEM more accurately describes non-clipped Gaussian beams, while for clipped Gaussian beams and the interaction with surfaces, the GBD is more precise.