310

JOURNAL OF LIGHTWAVE TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 23, NO. 1, JANUARY 2005

Analysis of Degenerate Four-Wave-Mixing Noise in Return-to-Zero Optical Transmission Systems Including Walk-Off
Shiva Kumar, Member, IEEE

AbstractA noise theory for four-wave-mixing (FWM) tone generated by nonlinear interaction of channels of a wavelength-division-multiplexed system is described. Analytical expressions for power spectral density and variance of FWM noise are derived without ignoring group-velocity walk-off between channels. The results show that the variance of FWM noise exhibits sharp minima and maxima as a function of channel separation which is due to the coherent interaction between channels. When the walk-off distance is large or comparable to effective ber length, FWM penalty can be reduced by introducing a suitable initial delay between interacting channels. Index TermsFour-wave mixing (FWM), nonlinear ber optics, optical communication.

I. INTRODUCTION

ONLINEAR coupling among channels in wavelength-division-multiplexed (WDM) optical transmission systems generates four-wave-mixing (FWM) tones that act as noise, leading to performance degradations [1][5]. In [6] and [7], an analytical nite-bandwidth stationary signal noise theory was introduced to calculate the penalty due to FWM in nonreturn-to- zero (NRZ) and return-to-zero (RZ) systems. The crosstalk due to FWM in RZ systems is estimated in [7] and [8] by ignoring the group-velocity walk-off between channels. In [7], the analytical expression for the FWM crosstalk is validated by experiments using dispersion-shifted bers for which group-velocity walk-off is nearly absent around 1550 nm. References [3] and [9] include group-velocity walk-off and provide an approximate expression for the FWM crosstalk by replacing the ber length by walk-off length in the expression for FWM efciency derived for the case of no walk-off. In the present paper, a nite-band noise theory is introduced for RZ systems without ignoring the group-velocity walk-off. Analytic expressions for power spectral density (PSD) and variance of FWM noise are obtained. When the group-velocity walk-off is ignored, the expression for the PSD can be split into spatial and temporal frequency parts [6]. However, in the presence of group-velocity walk-off, the expression for the PSD cannot be decomposed into spatial and temporal parts, which makes the analysis more complicated.

Manuscript received September 22, 2003; revised July 14, 2004. The author is with the Electrical and Computer Engineering, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON L8S 4K1, Canada (e-mail: kumars@mail.ece. mcmaster.ca). Digital Object Identier 10.1109/JLT.2004.835742

In the presence of walk-off, a given 1 bit of channel 1 interacts with several bits of channel 2 over the length 0 to . In this paper, it is shown that the interaction of these bits with channel 1 is partly coherent and the FWM elds generated by each of these bits add constructively or destructively and therefore the variance of FWM noise exhibits sharp minima and maxima as a function of channel separation. When the walk-off is absent and bits are aligned, a given 1 bit of channel 1 interacts with only a 1 bit of channel 2, and therefore, FWM power is a smooth function of channel separation. It is assumed that the bits in the channels that generate FWM tone have random phases with uniform distribution and the probability of having a bit 1 in any bit slot is 1/2. With these assumptions, an analytical expression was obtained for the PSD of FWM noise. The results show that the PSD can be decomposed into discrete and continuous parts. The discrete components are located at multiples of bit-rate frequency . Typically, the bandwidth of the electrical lters at the receiver is less than the bit rate , and therefore, the discrete part of the PSD does not contribute to noise variance except for that at zero frequency. The FWM noise spectrum becomes broader as the duty cycle decreases, and therefore, reduction in noise variance in the presence of electrical lters is more for the case of RZ systems than for NRZ systems. In [7] and [10], it is shown that by adjusting the delays between channels, FWM crosstalk can be reduced in the weak dispersion limit. For example, if the dispersion is zero, it is advantageous to delay the channel 2 by half the bit period with respect to channel 1 for a 50% duty-cycle RZ system so that pulse overlapping between the channels is zero, and consequently, FWM crosstalk will be zero. This prediction is experimentally veried in [7], where it is found that the variance of FWM noise is minimum when channel 2 is delayed by half the bit period with respect to channel 1. However, in the presence of walk-off, pulses undergo collision, and initial pulse separation is lost. Even in this case, the results reported here show that it is advantageous to delay channel 2 by half the bit period provided the walk-off length is large or comparable to the effective ber length. This is because initial interaction occurs at high power regime and initial pulse overlapping matters. The FWM crosstalk depends strongly on group-velocity dispersion and can impact in several ways. 1) When the dispersion is large, the phase matching between pumps and the probe becomes harder and FWM crosstalk reduces.

0733-8724/$20.00 2005 IEEE

KUMAR: DEGENERATE FWM IN RZ OPTICAL TRANSMISSION SYSTEMS

311

2) The inverse group speed is proportional to dispersion. When the dispersion is large, the pumps walk off rapidly, and the overlap between pumps would vary as a function of distance; hence, the generated FWM eld is quite different from the case of no walk-off. 3) Dispersion causes pulse broadening and could result in intersymbol interference between the bits. In the present analysis, phase mismatch and group-velocity walk-off due to dispersion are included, the pulse broadening caused by dispersion is ignored. Inclusion of pulse broadening makes the analysis cumbersome and intractable. Typically, dispersion-compensating bers are used in long-haul transmission systems, and therefore, pulse broadening is usually quite small. In Section II, an analytical expression is presented for degenerate FWM tone. In Section III, expressions for FWM noise current and its PSD are derived for the case of a continuous-wave (CW) probe. Variance of FWM noise is estimated, and example calculations with and without walk-off are provided. In Section IV, expressions for PSD and noise variance are derived for the case of the modulated probe. Probability density functions (pdfs) for the mark and space due to FWM noise are calculated in Section V. II. TIME-VARYING FWM FIELD Let us consider the FWM tone generated by the interaction of two channels. Let the channels be given by

We keep our reference frame xed to the probe. Let the group velocity of channel relative to probe be . The inverse group speed of channel 2 relative to channel 1 is given by (7) For simplicity, we assume throughout this paper, which corresponds to the case of dispersion being negative (or positive) and the carrier frequency of channel 2 higher (or lower) than channel 1. The slowly varying envelope of channels can be written as (8) (9) where (10) (11) where is the peak power of channel and if otherwise. (12)

(1) is the slowly varying envelope of the electric eld where of channel , is the carrier frequency, is the propagation constant, is the phase factor, and is the ber loss. The FWM can be written as tone generated at (2)

is the bit period, is duty cycle, and is the initial delay of channel 2 with respect to channel 1. Using these denitions, we obtain (13)

The evolution of the FWM tone is given by (3) where is the nonlinear coefcient. We ignore third-order disis given by persion for simplicity, and the phase mismatch where and . When , there is no group-velocity walk-off between channels, and becomes innite. Equation (3) can be easily solved to obtain the FWM eld at the distance as

(4) is dispersion, and is the channel separation bewhere tween channel 1 and channel 2 (5) and the phase constant is given by (6)

(14)

III. NOISE CURRENT DUE TO SIGNALFWM TONE BEATING WITH CW PROBE The number of electrons generated at the detector is related to the number of photons hitting it by (15)

312

JOURNAL OF LIGHTWAVE TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 23, NO. 1, JANUARY 2005

where is the electron current, is the optical power, and is the photodetector responsivity. Let the probe eld on which the FWM tone interferes be given by (16) where . The electron current is given by

where in the form

. Using (8) and (13),

can be written

if elsewhere (25) (26) (27) (17) in (17) is deterministic, and we ignore it The rst term for noise calculations. The second term in the square bracket represents the signal-FWM-tone beating, and the last term represents FWM-toneFWM-tone beating. It is of second order, and therefore we ignore it. The noise current due to signalFWM-tone beating is given by We dene the Fourier transform of as (28) with , with being an integer. Using (21), (28) can be rewritten in the form (29) (18) In this section, consider the case of the CW probe, i.e., , a constant. Using (14) in (18), we obtain where

(30) and (19) where (20) where be simplied to yield . Using (8) and (13), (19) can where (32) We compute the PSD using the standard denition PSD (21) where is the number of bit slots over which channel 1 and channel 2 remain completely or partially overlapped, and is the time coordinate of an observer xed to as the channel 1. It is useful to dene the walk-off distance distance over which a 1 bit of channel 2 overlaps partially or completely with a 1 bit of channel 1 and is given by (22) and are related by (23) where the symbol int denotes the nearest integer toward The channel overlap function, is given by . (33) (31)

where the angle brackets indicate that we average over random variables that appear in , namely random and . Typically, the phases of phase and bit sequences the elds in the interacting channels are uncorrelated and also vary randomly along the signal on the scale of the carrier laser coherence length. We assume that phase is a random variable with uniform distribution. in (33) using (29)(31), we obWhen we compute , which vanish after avertain terms proportional to and aging over the random phase factor . Retaining the terms pro, we obtain portional to (34)

(24) (35)

KUMAR: DEGENERATE FWM IN RZ OPTICAL TRANSMISSION SYSTEMS

313

Since (36) (37) (38) (39) where is the Kronecker delta function, (34) reduces to

A. Variance of FWM Noise The variance of FWM noise is given by PSD (46)

where is the transfer function of the electrical lter at the receiver. In the absence of electrical lter, using (45) in (46), we obtain (Appendix A) (47) where is FWM efciency and is given by (48) and the effective ber length is

(40) where (41) (42) (43)

(49) In (48), the rst term in the square bracket is due to the coherent interaction between different bits of channel 2 with a 1 bit of channel 1, and the second term represents the incoherent interaction. , a 1 bit of channel 1 In the case of no walk-off interacts with at most two 1 bits of channel 2. In this case, the left and right limits of the integral given by (26) and (27) for become independent of time and assuming , (48) reduces to (50)

Using the following identity where (44) (51) and substituting (40) in (33), we obtain PSD if otherwise

(52) (53)

(45) In (45), the rst term in the curly bracket represents the discrete component, and the other terms represent the continuous component of the PSD. The discrete components are located at multiples of bit-rate frequency . Typically, the bandwidth of the electrical lters at the receiver is less than the bit rate , and therefore, the discrete part of the PSD does not contribute to noise variance except for that at zero frequency.

, no walk-off, and , For a particular case of NRZ , which is in agreement with previously obwe have tained results [2], [9]. For RZ pulses, from (50), we see that it is advantageous to adjust the delay such that the noise variance is zero. This happens when the overlap between channel 1 and channel 2 is zero. The fact that initial alignment makes a signicant impact on the FWM penalty in nearly zero-dispersion bers is conrmed in the experiments of [7] and simulations of [10]. In a general case with an arbitrary number of collisions, FWM efciency can be written in the form (54) where and denote the contributions from partial colliand at the end , sions occuring at the beginning

314

JOURNAL OF LIGHTWAVE TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 23, NO. 1, JANUARY 2005

Fig. 1. FWM standard deviation versus channel separation f with  12.75 ps =km; delay  and with walk-off, respectively, for different duty cycles. (a) Duty cycle x of no walk-off L

( = 1)

=0

= 0. The dotted line and solid line correspond to the case = 1 (NRZ). (b) x = 0:9. (c) x = 0:25.

respectively; denotes that from full collisions; and represents the beating of partial and full-collision contributions. The is given by (Appendix B) analytical expression for

(55) where (56) and are given in ApThe analytical expressions for pendix B. The noise variance given by (47) corresponds to the variance averaged over a bit period. If the number of channels is large and if there is sufcient walk-off between channels, the FWM noise would be more or less uniform within a bit period. Under

these conditions, the average noise variance given by (47) would be a good measure of the FWM penalty. Equation (47) is also applicable when the receiver jitter window is of the order of the pulsewidth. However, if the number of channels is small with no walk-off between channels and/or the receiver jitter window is much smaller than the pulsewidth, it is appropriate to calculate the noise variance at the middle of the bit period with an extremely narrow jitter window. For this case, the noise variance is given by

(57) where is the time at which the ONOFF decision is made. In the absence of an electrical lter, using (36)(39) in (57) and proceeding as before (Appendix A), we obtain (58)

KUMAR: DEGENERATE FWM IN RZ OPTICAL TRANSMISSION SYSTEMS

315

Fig. 3. FWM standard deviation versus  . Channel separation 50 GHz. Initial delay  . The dotted and dasheddotted lines show the case of no electrical lter for NRZ and RZ with x : , respectively. The curves with solid and dashed lines are obtained by inserting an electrical lter with a bandwidth of 7.5 GHz for NRZ and RZ with x : , respectively.

=0

j j = 05 =05

Fig. 2. FWM standard deviation as a function of initial time position of channel 2 when the walk-off distance is comparable to effective ber length. The dotted line and solid line correspond to the case of no walk-off and with walk-off, respectively.  6.5 ps =km; channel separation f 50 GHz. and : . (b) x : and : . (a) x

=1

0 75

=0 =05

0 25

1 =

0.217 dB/km; distance 50 km; and the ber loss wavelength of channel 1 1550 nm. The frequency separation between probe, channel 1, and channel 2 are equal, and frequency of the probe is less than that of channels 1 and 2. The is used throughout the receiver transfer function paper except for Fig. 3. The standard deviation is calculated using (47) for Figs. 13, which corresponds to the case of variance averaged over a bit period. Fig. 1 shows the standard deviation of FWM noise as a function of channel separation for different duty cycles. The dotted and solid lines show the case and with walk-off, respectively. To of no walk-off obtain no walk-off results, we have treated as an independent parameter and set it to innity without changing the value of . In the case dispersion in the expression for phase mismatch , the difference between the two cases is small, of NRZ but for RZ, the difference could be signicant. The new feature approximately is that there are distinct bands with lobes given by (60)

where (59) and . is an integer determined by the . Note that the efciency given by (59) condition has the same form as that of (48) except that overlap functions are integrated over time in (48), while they are evaluated at a particular time in (59) which could correspond to the middle of a bit slot. B. Example Calculations We have calculated the standard deviation of FWM noise, and the results are shown in Figs. 14. The following parameters are used throughout the paper: the the peak power of the probe peak power of channels 10 mW; the nonlinear coefcient 2.43 W km ; We have found that the number of lobes is nearly independent of dispersion. This result follows from (55) and (56). The , which is proargument of the cosine function is equal to and duty cycle portional to the ratio of channel separation and is independent of dispersion. From (48), we see that half of the contribution to FWM crosstalk is due to coherent interaction of channel 2 with a bit 1 of channel 1. For example, consider two consecutive bits of channel 2 interacting with a 1 bit of channel 1 over the length . Let the rst bit of channel 2 interact with the bit 1 of channel 1 initially and the FWM eld generated due to this interaction be . After the rst bit of channel 2 walks off, the second bit of channel 2 interacts with channel 1; then, let the generated FWM eld be . If the probe eld is always in phase with channel elds and the two bits of channel

316

JOURNAL OF LIGHTWAVE TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 23, NO. 1, JANUARY 2005

Fig. 4. FWM standard deviation versus duty cycle. Channel separation = 50 GHz; delay  = 0. The dotted and solid lines correspond to the case of no walk-off and with walk-off, respectively, and standard deviation is calculated in the middle of the bit slot using (58). The + and dashed line correspond to the case of no walk-off and with walk-off, respectively, and the standard deviation is calculated using (47). (a) Dispersion = 6.5 ps =km. (b) Dispersion = 16.58 ps =km.

2 under consideration are 1 bits, the total noise current is pro, which corresponds to the case of comportional to plete coherence. When there are phase uctuations and the bit pattern of the channels is random, the derivation yielding (48) shows that only half of the contribution is coherent. The FWM eld generated by different bits of channels 2 could add constructively or destructively due to the coherent interaction, and this explains the sharp minima and maxima in Fig. 1. When the walk-off is absent and bits are aligned, a given bit 1 of channel 1 interacts with only one bit of channel 2, and therefore, FWM power is a smooth function of channel separation. Fig. 2 shows the dependence of standard deviation of FWM noise on initial time position of channel 2 relative to channel 1. The dotted and solid lines show the case of no walk-off and with walk-off, respectively. Fiber dispersion and channel separation

is comparable to are chosen such that the walk-off distance . In the case of NRZ, the standard the effective ber length deviation is independent of initial delay of channel 2 relative to channel 1. This result holds true in the presence and absence of walk-off. In the case of RZ with a 0.5 duty cycle and no walk-off [Fig. 2(b)], it is advantageous to shift the channel 2 by half the bit period so that overlap between channels 1 and 2 is zero, and hence the standard deviation is also zero. When the ), it can walk-off is present, from Fig. 2(b) (solid line, be seen that minimum standard deviation occurs when the initial time position of channel 2 is about half the bit period. In this case, the standard deviation is not zero because two channels begin to overlap as they propagate. However, it is still benecial since the initial overlap at the to make the delay high-power region makes a signicant impact. In Fig. 2(a), for and no walk-off, the standard deviation appears to . However, decrease linearly with the delay for the actual dependence of the standard deviation on the delay in , which follows from (50). this case is given by Fig. 3 shows the dependence of standard deviation on dispersion with and without electrical lters. The dotted and dasheddotted lines show the case of no electrical lter for NRZ and RZ with , respectively. The curves with solid and dashed lines are obtained by introducing a rectangular electrical lter with a bandwidth of 7.5 GHz , respectively. As can be seen, for NRZ and RZ with reduction in standard deviation by inserting an electrical lter is quite small for NRZ, while it is huge for RZ. This is because the FWM noise spectrum given by (45) for RZ is broader than that for NRZ, and the electrical lter truncates the noise spectrum is 5 ps km, from Fig. 4, we see effectively for RZ. When that the reduction in standard deviation is about 2.7 dB for RZ systems. However, the RZ signal spectrum is also truncated by factor the electrical lter, and the net improvement in the may not be large. Fig. 4 shows the standard deviation as a function of duty cycle. Here, we compare two ways of measuring FWM penalty: 1) in the middle of the bit period and 2) variance averaged over the bit period. The dotted and solid lines show the case of no walk-off and with walk-off, respectively, and standard deviation is calculated in the middle of the bit slot using (58). The + and dashed line show the case of no walk-off and with walk-off, respectively, and the standard deviation is calculated by taking the time average of overlap functions over the bit period ((47)). When there is no walk-off, the averaged standard deviation scales as the square root of duty cycle (+ line), while the standard deviation calculated at the middle of a bit period (dotted line) is independent of duty cycle. The time-averaged standard deviation (+ line) increases with duty cycle because FWM noise could be present only over the pulse duration, which increases with duty cycle. Fig. 4(a) and (b) is the same except for dispersion, which is larger in Fig. 4(b). In the presence of walk-off, the standard deviation calculated in the middle of a bit period (solid line) shows and . Comparing Fig. 4(a) and sharp minima at (b), we see that the locations of the minima are independent of dispersion but depend on the channel separation. This can be explained by the coherent interaction between channels similar

KUMAR: DEGENERATE FWM IN RZ OPTICAL TRANSMISSION SYSTEMS

317

to the results of Fig. 1. In the absence of walk-off, the time-averaged variance is equal to the variance calculated in the middle of a bit period times the duty cycle.

IV. FWM NOISE CURRENT WITH MODULATED PROBE Let us assume that the probe is modulated with RZ data. Let the optical eld envelope of a bit 1 of the probe be (61) is the box car pulse given by (12), and is a where constant. Using (61) in (18), the noise current due to the FWM eld interacting with a bit 1 of the probe is

(62) Taking the Fourier transform of (62), we have (63) where denotes convolution (64) (65)

Fig. 5. FWM standard deviation versus duty cycle. The dotted and solid lines correspond to the case of the CW probe and the modulated probe, respectively. The standard deviation is calculated using (47) and (76). Channel separation = 50 GHz, delay  = 0, and dispersion = 13 ps =km.

(72)

(73) (66) and (67) To calculate the PSD, we need to nd given by , which is

(74)

(75) In the absence of an electrical lter, using (69) in (46), the noise variance is calculated as (76) where is FWM efciency and is given by (77) and is an integer determined where . The main difference between by the condition the CW probe and the modulated probe case is that limits of to (48), while integration for the CW probe extends from for the modulated probe it is limited to the probe pulsewidth (77). From (69), it can be shown that the noise variance at the middle of the bit period for the case of the modulated probe and no electrical lter is still given by (58) and (59), which was calculated for the case of the CW probe. The noise variance at the middle of the bit period is unaffected by probe modulation because FWM noise depends only on the probe power at the decision time. Fig. 5 shows the plot of the standard deviation of 1 calculated using (76) as a function of duty cycle. The probe is assumed to be modulated with RZ data. Solid and dashed lines

(68) Using (36)(39) and proceeding as before, the PSD is calculated as PSD where (69)

(70)

(71)

318

JOURNAL OF LIGHTWAVE TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 23, NO. 1, JANUARY 2005

show the case of the modulated probe and the CW probe, respectively. As can be seen, the standard deviation corresponding to the modulated probe is less than that of the CW probe for RZ . This is because overlap functions are intesignals with grated over the probe pulsewidth ((77)) in the case of the modto in the ulated probe, while they are integrated from case of the CW probe ((48)). In Fig. 5, for the case of the modu. This lated probe, we see that noise variance is zero for is because the relative group speeds of channels are such that overlap between the pumps is zero over the duration for which the probe is turned on. V. PROBABILITY DENSITY FUNCTIONS AND BIT-ERROR RATIO In this section, we briey discuss how the bit-error ratio (BER) is related to the variance of the FWM noise calculated in Sections III and IV. To calculate the pdf for 1 and 0 bits, we follow the approach of [2] which was developed for the case of no walk-off. The signal current from the detector can be written as ((17)) (78) where is the phase difference between the probe and the FWM eld. First, we calculate the pdf for the mark. The probe eld . Equation (78) can be amplitude for the mark is rewritten in the form

where

is the zeroth-order modied Bessel function and (85)

In the presence of the other noise sources such as amplied stimulated emission (ASE) and cross-phase modulation (XPM), total pdf is the convolution of the pdf given by (84) with that due to other noise sources. Next, we consider the case of the FWM eld on the space. The signal current in this case is

(86) where (87) (88) and is the phase of the FWM eld. As before, we have . The pdf for can be written as [2] (89) where (90)

(79) where is the signal current for the mark

The BER can be calculated by integrating the pdfs given by (84) and (89), i.e., (91)

(80) (81) is related to the noise current by (82) Since the phase , and is randomly varying, (92) (83) VI. CONCLUSION where is the variance of signalFWM eld beating derived in Section III ((47) or (58)). When there are more than two pump channels, contributions from all the degenerate FWM [2]. tones should be added to obtain is given by [2] The pdf for the signal current In this paper, analytical expressions for PSD and variance of degenerate FWM noise were developed without ignoring the group-velocity walk-off for RZ transmission systems. The result is in agreement with previously obtained results if the walk-off is ignored. Unlike the case of no walk-off, several bits of channel 2 interact with a given bit of channel 1, and this interaction is partly coherent. The FWM elds generated by the interaction of different 1 bits of channel 2 with a 1 bit of channel 1 add constructively or destructively, and as a result the variance of described in Section III where is the decision level. From (84) and (89), we note that the FWM noise current is not Gaussian. Yet, it is sometimes convenient to treat the noise as Gaussian and add its variance to that due to other noise sources. In this case, the variance of noise current developed in Sections III and IV can be used in the expression for the factor, which is related to BER by

(84)

KUMAR: DEGENERATE FWM IN RZ OPTICAL TRANSMISSION SYSTEMS

319

FWM noise exhibits sharp minima and maxima as a function of channel separation. The results show that it is advantageous to shift channel 2 with respect to channel 1 at the transmitter for RZ systems if the walk-off distance is large or comparable to effective ber length. APPENDIX A Consider the rst term in (45)

, can be calculated in the Alternatively, when time domain using the Parsevals relations

(101) can be calculated Using (21) and (36)(39) in (101), without going to the frequency domain. When the noise variance is calculated in the middle of a bit period, (101) should be replaced with (93) (102) where is the time at which the ONOFF decision is made. The ensemble average in (102) can be calculated using (36)(39). (94) APPENDIX B

Let the inverse transform of

be

, i.e.,

Let us construct a function

The FWM efciency can be written in the form (103) (95) where

Taking the Fourier transform of (95), we see that (96) Using Parsevals relation, we have

(104) (105)

(97) (106) Using (97) and (96), we obtain (107) Here, we consider the case such that there is at least one full collision and . When , it is easier to compute the integrals in (48) numerically. The overlap function due to the partial collision of a pulse in the zeroth bit slot of channel 2 with channel 1 is described by

(98)

To calculate the contributions from the second term of (45) to the noise variance, take the inverse Fourier transform of (41) (99) Using the Parsevals relation, we obtain

if elsewhere Using (108) in (104), we obtain (108)

(100)

Contributions of the third and last terms in (45) to the noise variance can be similarly calculated using the Parsevals relations.

(109)

320

JOURNAL OF LIGHTWAVE TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 23, NO. 1, JANUARY 2005

where (110) (111) To calculate the contributions from the full collisions, we note that where

if elsewhere (119)

(120) Using (119) in (104), we obtain

if elsewhere where (113) (114) The geometric progression in (112) can be simplied using the identity (115) to give (112) where (122) The analytical expression for is lengthy. Instead, it is easier to do the integration in (106) numerically using the as given in (116). analytical expression for ACKNOWLEDGMENT The author would like to thank Dr. S. Burtsev and Dr. G. Luther for several discussions and the reviewers for valuable suggestions. REFERENCES if elsewhere Using (116), we have (116)
[1] F. Forghieri, R. W. Tkach, and A. R. Chraplyvy, Optical Fiber Telecommunications IIIA, 1997, ch. 8. [2] K. Inoue, K. Nakanishi, K. Oda, and H. Toba, Crosstalk and power penalty due to ber four wave mixing in multichannel transmissions, J. Lightw. Technol., vol. 12, no. 8, pp. 14231439, Aug. 1994. [3] R. W. Tkach, A. R. Charplyvy, F. Forghieri, A. H. Gnauck, and R. M. Derosier, Four-photon mixing and high speed WDM systems, J. Lightw. Technol., vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 841849, May 1995. [4] K. Inoue, Experimental study on channel crosstalk due to ber four wave mixing around the zero dispersion wavelength, J. Lightw. Technol., vol. 12, no. 6, pp. 10231028, Jun. 1994. [5] , Fiber four wave mixing in multi-amplier systems with nonuniform chromatic dispersion, J. Lightw. Technol., vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 8893, Jan. 1995. [6] S. P. Burtsev, J. K. Rhee, J. E. Hurley, and S. Y. Ten, Four-wave mixing as a nite bandwidth noise: Theory & experimental verication, presented at the 25th Eur. Conf. Optical Communications (ECOC 1999), Nice, France, Sep. 2630, 1999. [7] S. Kumar, G. G. Luther, and J. Hurley, Finite-band noise theory and experiment for four-wave mixing in RZ transmission systems, presented at the Optical Fiber Communications Conf. 2001, Anaheim, CA, Mar. 1217, 2000. [8] K. Inoue, Inuence of four wave mixing in multichannel return to zero signal transmissions, IEEE Photon. Technol. Lett., vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 293295, Feb. 1996. [9] F. Forghieri, P. R. Prucnal, R. W. Tkach, and A. R. Charplyvy, RZ versus NRZ in nonlinear WDM systems, IEEE Photon. Technol. Lett., vol. 9, no. 7, pp. 10351037, Jul. 1997. [10] F. Matera, M. Settembre, M. Tamburrini, M. Zitelli, and S. Turitsyn, Reduction of the four wave mixing in optically amplied links by reducing pulse overlapping, Opt. Comm., vol. 181, pp. 407411, 2000.

(121)

(117) After doing a similar calculation for the second term in (105), we obtain

(118) Combining (117) and (118), we obtain (55). The partial collision of the bit slot of channel 2 with channel 1 is given by

Shiva Kumar (M04), photograph and biography not available at the time of publication.