Inversion of a symmetric Gaussian overlap log-ratio recovers a radius ratio from two positive overlap-efficiency measurements made at known symmetric radius settings. It applies to the one-parameter model of symmetric beam-radius perturbation for overlap branch selection, with one shared response scale and fixed remaining mode properties.
Let , and , where . Since the symmetric log-overlap ratio satisfies , defineThenA finite positive radius ratio exists exactly when , equivalently . The strictly decreasing forward relation makes the solution unique inside this interval. Equality corresponds only to a limiting zero or infinite radius ratio; an out-of-range noisy measurement has no finite solution in this ideal model.
For an original example, and give and , hence . If the known first radius is , the inferred second radius is . The nuisance scale is unnecessary for that inversion. Once is obtained, one can reconstruct it as , but two fitted readings alone do not validate the Gaussian optical model.
The inverse sensitivity isFor small errors, relative radius uncertainty is approximately . At the worked point the derivative is ; stipulated gives about 1.13% relative radius uncertainty, before including uncertainty in the setting or the reference radius.
Near the allowed interval's edges, the inverse becomes highly sensitive. Boundary-sensitive Gaussian overlap inversion needs an uncertainty model that respects the nonlinear transformation; clipping an out-of-range value to a convenient radius does not supply the missing information. The GUM distinguishes local uncertainty propagation from cases requiring higher-order treatment.[ref]
The apparatus must implement a radius change without unintended displacement, polarization or wavefront changes. NIST's physical heterodyne receiver experiment used mode and polarization control and separate electrical corrections.[ref]
Frequency response metrology for high-speed optical receivers by Paul D. Hale and others. PDF pp. 1–2, Heterodyne measurements
Those controls motivate checks on the inversion assumptions; the paper is not a report of the particular symmetric-radius example derived here.