4.7 Article

Dual vortex retarder Mueller matrix ellipsometry

Journal

OPTICS AND LASERS IN ENGINEERING
Volume 166, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.optlaseng.2023.107564

Keywords

Polarization; Ellipsometry; Mueller matrix; Vortex retarder; Spatial modulation

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We propose a dual vortex retarder Mueller matrix ellipsometry (DVRMME) that can extract 16 Mueller matrix elements by analyzing a single intensity image. Two customized vortex quarter wave retarders (VQWRs) with different orders are employed to realize the spatial modulation in the polarization state generation (PSG) and polarization state analyzing (PSA) arms. The DVRMME has been constructed and demonstrated in experiment, with RMS errors of 16 Mueller matrix elements less than 0.0110, 0.0094, and 0.0180, and maximum absolute errors less than 0.0196, 0.0230, and 0.0352 for air, polarizer, and retarder respectively.
We propose a dual vortex retarder Mueller matrix ellipsometry (DVRMME) that can extract 16 Mueller matrix elements by analyzing a single intensity image. Two customized vortex quarter wave retarders (VQWRs) with different orders are employed to realize the spatial modulation in the polarization state generation (PSG) and polarization state analyzing (PSA) arms. Due to the spatial polarization modulation by VQWRs, a pattern with regularly varying intensity along the azimuth direction is formed, and the sample's Mueller matrix can be ob-tained by processing the modulated intensity image. The ellipsometry's working principle has been elaborated by the Stokes-Mueller formalism, and its main error sources are presented and analyzed, and then a modulation vector calibration method is proposed to reduce the measurement error. To verify the validity of the scheme, the DVRMME has been constructed and demonstrated in experiment. The Mueller matrices of air, polarizer and retarder were measured, and their RMS errors of 16 Mueller matrix elements were respectively less than 0.0110, 0.0094 and 0.0180, and their maximum absolute errors were respectively less than 0.0196, 0.0230 and 0.0352.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available