4.7 Article

On the determination of χ(2) in thin films: a comparison of one-beam second-harmonic generation measurement methodologies

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 7, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/srep44581

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. FWO-Vlaanderen
  2. Vaisala Foundation
  3. Tampere University of Technology for Optics and Photonics Strategic Funding
  4. European Research Council
  5. Helmholtz Program Science and Technology of Nanosystems (STN)
  6. KIT Nanostructure Service Laboratory
  7. Alfried Krupp Prize for Young University Teachers - Alfried Krupp von Bohlen und Halbach Foundation
  8. Helmholtz International Research School for Teratronics (HIRST)
  9. Karlsruhe School of Optics & Photonics (KSOP)
  10. Karlsruhe Nano-Micro Facility (KNMF)
  11. European Research Council [280145]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The determination of the second-order susceptibility (chi((2))) of thin film samples can be a delicate matter since well-established chi((2)) measurement methodologies such as the Maker fringe technique are best suited for nonlinear materials with large thicknesses typically ranging from tens of microns to several millimeters. Here we compare two different second-harmonic generation setups and the corresponding measurement methodologies that are especially advantageous for thin film chi((2)) characteriza tion. This exercise allows for cross-checking the chi((2)) obtained for identical samples and identifying the main sources of error for the respective techniques. The development of photonic integrated circuits makes nonlinear thin films of particular interest, since they can be processed into long waveguides to create efficient nonlinear devices. The investigated samples are ABC-type nanolaminates, which were reported recently by two different research groups. However, the subsequent analysis can be useful for all researchers active in the field of thin film chi((2)) characterization.

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