JOURNAL OF LIGHTWAVE TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 26, NO.
14, JULY 15, 2008
Solving Soliton Perturbation Problems by Introducing
Rayleigh’s Dissipation Function
Samudra Roy and Shyamal K. Bhadra
Abstract—We solve soliton perturbation problem in nonlinear
optical system by introducing Rayleigh’s dissipation function
in the framework of variational approach. The adopted process
facilitates variational approach to be applied on dissipative system
where the Lagrangian and Hamiltonian are difficult to form.
Exploiting the idea, loss and filtering problems are evaluated with
convincing results. Considering other perturbing terms like two
soliton interactions, intrapulse Raman scattering, self-steepening,
and two-photon absorption in extended nonlinear Schrödinger
equation, Rayleigh’s dissipation function is configured intuitively
so that the generalized Euler–Lagrange equation converges to the
related governing equation of the pulse propagation. The process
evolves a set of differential equations exploiting the dynamics of
different pulse parameters under the influence of perturbations.
The obtained analytical results are verified with generalized
Kantorovich approach and compared with previous reported
results. Numerical simulations based on the split-step beam
propagation method are employed to calculate the pulse evolution
parameters and the derived results are found to be corroborated
well with the analytical predictions.
Index Terms—Filters and modulators, generalized Euler–-
Lagrange equation, intrapulse Raman scattering, optical soliton,
Rayleigh’s dissipation function, self-steepening, soliton interac-
tion, timing-jitter, two-photon absorption (TPA).
I. INTRODUCTION
HE characteristics of soliton propagation in a nonlinear
T guided medium have evoked immense interest when
subject to perturbation or to various forms of pulse degradation
evolving through nonconservative and conservative perturbing
processes. In real physical systems, two-photon absorption
(TPA), gain dispersion (GD), higher order group velocity
dispersion (HGVD), noise control filtering and modulation,
two-soliton interaction, higher order nonlinearity (HON),
intrapulse Raman scattering (IPRS), and self-steepening are
considered to be the prime perturbing effects on a propagating
optical pulse. The dissipative effects on the pulse are expected
due to the influence of TPA, GD, and filtering, whereas in case
of other perturbations, the pulse energy is likely to be conserved
mathematically. The presence of different higher order per-
turbing effects disrupts the fundamental soliton condition and
generates significant disorder on pulse parameters. It is useful
to study the nature of such perturbations in order to get an idea
about the pulse evolution in a real application. A number of
Manuscript received August 27, 2007; revised January 21, 2008. Published
August 29, 2008 (projected). The work of S. Roy was supported by the Council
of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR).
The authors are with the Fiber Optics Laboratory, Central Glass and Ceramic
Research Institute, Jadavpur, Kolkata-700032, India (e-mail: samudra@cgcri.
res.in; samudraroy@yahoo.co.in; skbhadra@cgcri.res.in).
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/JLT.2008.922305
0733-8724/$25.00 © IEEE
2301
approaches [1]–[10] based on a variational technique, soliton
perturbation theory, and the inverse scattering method, have
shown different ideas to solve such perturbing problems. The
idea of an auxiliary field is introduced in [1] and [2] to solve the
dissipative problem approximately. A useful analysis of radia-
tive perturbation was developed in [3], where a perturbed field
is introduced in order to estimate the first-order perturbation of
different parameters. Adopting the quantum soliton concept,
the evolution of different fluctuated quantum operators (namely
photon number, phase, position, and momentum) are quantified
analytically [4]. A further elaborate discussion on soliton per-
turbation theory may be found in [5] and [6]. The perturbation
theory based on the inverse scattering method is developed in
[7] to analyze perturbations like third-order dispersion, soliton
self frequency shift, periodic modulation, etc. Finally, in [8], the
generalized Kantorovitch method has been introduced in order
to solve the extended nonlinear Schrödinger equation (NLSE)
which describes the nonlinear loss and/or gain. Currently, the
concept of this technique is frequently being associated with
different perturbation problems [9], [10]. In all the described
techniques, the prime objective is to evaluate the differential
equations that predict the evolution dynamics of different pulse
parameters under various perturbations.
The perturbing effects which are associated with a nonlinear
pulse evolution have been solved mostly through variational for-
malism. In an attempt, we try to evaluate the perturbing effects
on soliton pulse parameters by introducing Rayleigh’s dissipa-
tion function (RDF) with a similarity to a mechanical system
where the frictional dissipative problems are solved by using
RDF [11]–[13]. The mechanical damped harmonic oscillation
problem, for example, can mathematically be simulated with
the help of RDF. However, the formalism may be extended in
nonmechanical systems like electrical circuit analysis. A brief
outline of the applicability of RDF in the stated systems may
facilitate the understanding of the reader. At this point, it may
be noted that the application of RDF should not be restricted
only for the velocity-dependent dissipation problems. The most
striking fact of RDF is that it may be useful to solve the elec-
trical circuit problem where the velocity is analogically replaced
by current. The use of RDF is also noticed in describing the dy-
namics of the damped magnetization field [14]. Interestingly,
a simple mathematical procedure projects the extended NLSE
as an equation of motion of a particle in an effective potential
well in presence of nonlinear frictional force which
is generated due to perturbation [15]. The frictional force van-
ishes in absence of any perturbation. The details are given in
Appendix I. This algebraic modification to project the extended
NLSE as a frictional problem suggests the idea to introduce the
RDF analogically in Euler–Lagrange (EL) equation in order to
2302
solve soliton perturbation problems. Interestingly, in a report
Kozlov et al. [16] just mentioned the possibility of application of
RDF in dissipative or filtered system. However, the foundation
of RDF was not discussed. The application of classical mechan-
ical concept in pulse propagation is restricted by reformulating
it as a variational problem for conservative systems only [17]. It
would be an interesting approach if the nonconservative pertur-
bation is suitably incorporated in the same mathematical frame-
work. In the course of our study, by solving different dissipa-
tive problems in the domain of variational calculus, we observed
that the use of generalized Euler–Lagrange (EL) equation [11]
would be a useful approach. It is interesting to note that the intro-
duction of RDF to solve the perturbing problems has the ability
to generate the equivalent results that could be obtained by using
perturbation theory, Kantorovitch approach, and projection op-
erator scheme. Exploiting RDF, the evolution of a propagating
pulse under the combined effect of TPA and gain dispersion has
already been studied [18]. The successful adaptation of RDF
in that dissipative problem inspires us to use it in more general
cases. In the present report, we try to introduce the perturbations
like loss, filtering, two-soliton interaction, IPRS, and self-steep-
ening individually in NLSE. The collective influence of TPA
with IPRS and self-steepening on propagating pulse is studied
too. To make the study more general, we include input chirp
in the propagating optical pulse and elaborately discuss its ef-
fect on propagation characteristic. The striking features of using
RDF in perturbing system are discussed with detailed deriva-
tions where most of the physical phenomena related to loss, fil-
tering, soliton interaction, IPRS, self-steepening, and TPA are
possible to explain quantitatively by adopting some simple an-
alytical procedures. The generalized EL equation in classical
form [11]–[13] is written as follows:
(1)
where , , , and are the Lagrangian, Rayleigh’s dissi-
pation function (RDF), th generalized coordinate, and its time
derivative, respectively. For different dissipative systems related
to optical pulse propagation, we construct the RDF intuitively
like configuring the Lagrangian density. RDF should be an ex-
plicit function of which is the derivative of slowly varying
pulse envelope ( ) with respect to propagation distance ( ) and
its complex conjugate ( ), this quantity is analogically equiv-
alent to velocity. Then, following the standard procedure, we
optimize them by integrating over time domain inserting a suit-
able ansatz. The construction of RDF should perform in such
a manner that the generalized Euler–Lagrange (EL) equation
must give the extended NLSE and its complex conjugate. The
prescription that we have adopted is stated as follows:
(2)
where Lagrangian density is the explicit function of , ,
and their complex conjugate.
Loss and filtering effects mainly influence the amplitude of
the propagating pulse. However, the frequency may directly be
perturbed by filtering process [19]. The overlap of two adjacent
solitons may introduce an attractive interaction depending on
JOURNAL OF LIGHTWAVE TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 26, NO. 14, JULY 15, 2008
their relative phase relationship. The process evolves some dis-
order in pulse evolution and restricts the bit rate of the com-
munication system [5], [6]. Among the various higher order ef-
fects, intrapulse Raman scattering (IPRS) is most significant on
the evolution of an ultrashort pulse where it experiences a con-
stant downshifting of the central frequency [20], [21]. Again, the
intensity dependence of group velocity results in another phe-
nomenon called self-steepening [21], [22]. In this paper, we in-
clude all these perturbations in extended NLSE separately and
solve it by adopting RDF formalism. We examine that a gener-
alized projection operator technique [23] would also evolve the
same mathematical expressions of pulse parameters perturbed
by IPRS and self-steepening. We do not include the detailed
calculations of the projection operator technique in the present
discussion. However, a brief mathematical description is given
in Appendix IV to compare it with RDF. Some of the analyt-
ically predicted results related to filtering, soliton interaction,
IPRS, self-steepening, and TPA problems are verified with de-
rived numerical data using split-step beam propagation method
[21]. In the present report, our main emphasis is to visualize the
perturbing problems in the framework of variational technique
and to elaborate the Lagrangian formalism in more general wave
propagation problems governed by extended NLSE.
Before going to the detailed study and use of RDF in optical
pulse propagation problems, it may be relevant to discuss the ap-
plicability of RDF in mechanical damping and electrical circuit
problems. Apparently, the two problems looked to be different,
but in principle they are similar in nature.
The Lagrangian ( ) and RDF ( ) of a mechanical one-di-
mensional oscillator are represented as
and (3a)
where is a positive constant (3b)
Using (1) and (3), a damped oscillatory equation can be obtained
as follows:
(4)
where and .
The system of an electrical circuit containing inductor and
capacitor may be defined with the following Lagrangian:
(5a)
where , , and are charge, self inductance, and capacitance,
respectively.
The system becomes nonconservative with the inclusion of
the dissipative effect of resistance. The corresponding RDF is
(5b)
where is the resistance of the electrical circuit.
ROY AND BHADRA: SOLVING SOLITON PERTURBATION PROBLEMS BY INTRODUCING RAYLEIGH’S DISSIPATION FUNCTION
Generalized EL equation as given in (1) may obtain a similar
type of dynamics that we derived in solving damped mechanical
problem:
(6)
where and .
The rate of energy dissipation can be quantified by using fol-
lowing relation:
where is the energy the (7)
Equation (7) states that in an electrical system the energy is dis-
sipated by well-known Joule heating.
II. APPLICATION OF RDF IN SIMPLE LOSSY SYSTEMS
We adopt the methodology to solve the pulse propagation
problem in most simple lossy medium considering the standard
exponential decay law of pulse energy by applying RDF. The
dynamics of an optical pulse in the lossy system can be ex-
plained in the following dimensionless form:
(8)
where and are the complex field distribution and loss co-
efficient, respectively. The nonlinear term is excluded for sim-
plicity. However, the process holds good even in the presence
of nonlinear term. For the given system (8), a Lagrangian and
RDF may be obtained with the following forms:
and (9)
(10)
where the suffixes represent corresponding derivatives and the
asterisks are for complex conjugate.
A simple ansatz function having the Gaussian distribution is
considered as
(11)
where , , and are complex amplitude, temporal pulse
width, and chirp, respectively. All the parameters are allowed
to vary with distance.
Inserting the ansatz in the expression of Lagrangian and RDF,
the corresponding reduced form may be obtain by integrating
over time as follows:
and (12)
(13)
It may be noted that the reduced Lagrangian and RDF are now
functions of different pulse parameters.
2303
Fig. 1. (a) The evolution of pulse energy is demonstrated with numerical ver-
ification. The dots depict numerical values obtained by the split-step algorithm
where the solid line represents the analytical expression. (b) The corresponding
numerical solution is represented.
Exploiting the generalized EL (1) and a simple algebra may
end up with the following standard expression:
(14)
when represents the energy of the
pulse.
The exponential decay of the energy may be viewed in Fig. 1,
and additionally it is verified with numerical simulation.
III. APPLICATION OF RDF IN NOISE CONTROL SYSTEMS
In a nonlinear transmission system, the ideal soliton commu-
nication becomes restricted due to several physical mechanisms.
Amplified spontaneous emission (ASE)-induced timing jitter is
one of the dominating factors among them. In practice, it is
necessary to introduce an amplification mechanism to compen-
sate for loss for long-distance transmission. However, coherent
amplification is always accompanied by the generation of ASE
noise. The generated noise added with soliton field results in
a random shift of soliton carrier frequency with corresponding
change in its velocity. Such random speed change produces a
shift in the temporal pulse position leading to Gordon–Haus
timing jitter [24]. Several techniques were developed during the
last decade for controlling the timing jitter [25]–[31]. The con-
trolling method may be classified into frequency and time do-
main. In frequency domain control, optical filters are used to
block the ASE noise, where as periodic amplitude and/or phase
modulation is applied in time domain control having the period
which is same as the bit period to the soliton pulse train. During
the filtering process, some soliton energy is always lost [32].
Apart from the energy, other different parameters like ampli-
tude, temporal position, frequency, and phase are also affected.
A. Frequency Domain Filter System
In this section, we are aiming to evaluate the perturbation
created due to the use of a filter exploiting the proposed RDF
technique.
The NLSE including the effect of filters may be expressed by
the following dynamics:
(15)
2304 JOURNAL OF LIGHTWAVE TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 26, NO. 14, JULY 15, 2008

where , , and represents complex field distribution of the (23b)

soliton, normalized excess gain coefficient, and curvature of the
transmission peak of the filter per unit length, respectively.
Having the dynamics of the pulse envelope, the corre-
sponding Lagrangian and RDF may be constructed as
and (16)
(17)
Here, the suffixes represent corresponding derivatives.
The generalized EL equation can be written in the explicit
form as
(18)
where the subscript index runs from 1–2 representing
and respectively.
The construction of and are performed in such a way
that the governing equation (15) may be regenerated by using a
generalized EL equation.
Now we introduce the following ansatz [21] which is basi-
cally the solution of unperturbed NLSE
(19)
where , , , and represent amplitude, temporal
position, phase, and frequency, respectively, and all are allowed
to vary with propagation distance. Inserting the given ansatz in
the expression of and , we reduce them according to expres-
sion (12) and (13) and finally get
(23c)
(23d)
Examining the set of expressions (23), it can be seen that not
only the amplitude but the frequency is also controlled by a
filter. However, the filter does not influence the temporal posi-
tion directly. It may be noted that the soliton perturbation theory
[5], [6] predicts the same set of expressions in a different way.
In Section IX, we will discuss elaborately about the numerical
solution of the given set of coupled equations.
B. Time Domain Modulator System
Now we concentrate on the problem related to time domain
control. Soliton propagation under the effect of synchronous
amplitude modulators is normally modeled by
(24)
when represents modulation strength per unit distance.
The reduced Lagrangian of this system will have the same
mathematical form as represented in (20). However, RDF
should have a modified form and may be stated as follows:
(25)
Inserting the given ansatz (19) and reducing it accordingly, we
get

and (20)

(26)

(21) Exploiting the reduced EL equation as above we generate a set

of four coupled differential equations revealing the dynamics of
the different pulse parameters influenced by modulation:
The reduced Lagrangian and RDF are now explicit functions of
different pulse parameters and their derivatives. Next, exploiting
(27a)
the reduced EL equation, one can construct the four equations of
motion corresponding to the four pulse parameters as follows:
(27b)

(22) (27c)

where and (27d)

In time domain modulation, the frequency remains unaffected,

but the other three parameters, amplitude, position, and phase
are influenced directly. In contrast with frequency domain con-
trol, the temporal position is explicitly influenced in time do-
Using (22), the dynamics of four parameters may be developed
main modulation. Adopting the soliton perturbation theory, a
as
similar expression may be obtained that we have in (23) and
(27). A detail numerical solution is discussed in Section IX to
(23a)
unfold the physical aspects of these equations.
ROY AND BHADRA: SOLVING SOLITON PERTURBATION PROBLEMS BY INTRODUCING RAYLEIGH’S DISSIPATION FUNCTION 2305

IV. APPLICATION OF RDF IN SOLITON INTERACTION PROBLEM where and . To get the closed form
of reduced Lagrangian and RDF, we assume the amplitudes of
The inverse of the time interval between two neighboring
the two neighboring solitons are the same.
pulse determines the bit rate of the communication system. The
Next exploiting the generalized EL equation as given in (22)
presence of the neighboring pulse disturbs the soliton which
one can have the following dynamics of soliton 1:
changes its temporal position and ultimately restricts the bit
rate [33]–[37]. The disturbance of the neighboring soliton is
(35a)
caused due to the interaction forces between them which decays
exponentially with their distance of separation and vary peri-
odically with their relative phase. If the neighbor solitons are (35b)
in phase, the interaction is attractive and solitons move closer;
however, they repel each other when they are out of phase. The (35c)
coherent interaction is generated due to the overlap of soliton
tails. Hence, the interaction becomes insignificantly small if
the temporal separation between two solitons is comparatively
large. In this section, we try to visualize the perturbation on dif- (35d)
ferent pulse parameters caused due to the interaction. To deal The perturbation equations of second soliton may also be eval-
with the problem, we introduce RDF in similar fashion as we uated as
have discussed in the earlier cases.
Under the soliton interaction, the guiding equation of soliton (36a)
1 is described as
(36b)
(28)
(36c)
Here, and represent the fields of two neighboring solitons
1 and 2, respectively. We neglect the higher order terms of
considering small overlapping.
The related Lagrangian and RDF of this system may be rep- (36d)
resented as
The set of expressions (35) and (36) are consistent with [33] and
and (29) [36]. The coupled equations given in (35) and (36) are compli-
cated to solve analytically. However, to visualize the physical
(30) aspects of interaction, we solve the equations numerically. A
detailed numerical discussion is presented in Section IX, where
The form of the Lagrangian will remain unaltered where the we try to evaluate the individual parameters of the propagating
formation of RDF is changed according to the perturbation. soliton. The set of equations (35) and (36) suggest certain impor-
The soliton 1 can be represented as tant results. Under the interactive process, the sum of amplitudes
and frequencies of the two adjacent solitons remain conserved
with propagation distance. The dynamics of soliton center may
(31) also be deduced as

We assume that only the tails of soliton 2 interact with 1, hence

we approximate as (37)

where .
Equation (37) suggests that the relative separation between
(32) the solitons depends only on their mutual phase relationship.

Following (12) and (13), we can reduce the Lagrangian and RDF V. EFFECT OF INTRAPULSE RAMAN SCATTERING
in the following form: Soliton self frequency shift caused due to IPRS of an ultra-
short optical pulse has been studied widely in order to explain
(33) the physical significance [38]–[44] of frequency shifting. In
IPRS process, low-frequency spectral components of the pulse
are amplified by the high-frequency components of the same
pulse acting as a pump. The process continues along the guided
medium transferring energy from blue component to red part
of the spectrum. The frequency shift increases linearly with
(34) distance and enhances rapidly for short pulses. A shift in the
2306
carrier frequency of the soliton changes its group velocity
which is frequency dependent. The temporal position of the
propagating pulse is also affected by IPRS. In the following
steps, we try to explain these physical phenomena analytically
by adopting the proposed method.
Involving the IPRS term, the governing equation in the di-
mensionless form may be written as
(38)
where is a slowly varying envelope and corresponds the
IPRS term.
The corresponding Lagrangian density and Rayleigh dissi-
pation function for IPRS term can be constructed as
(39)
(40)
where the suffixes represent corresponding derivatives.
The Lagrangian of the unperturbed system is identical with
that of a controlling problem. However, RDF will change ac-
cording to the perturbation. The reduced form and is as
follows:
and (41)
(42)
Exploiting EL (22) four coupled differential equations are ob-
tained as shown below,
(43a)
(43b)
(43c)
(43d)
The combination of (43b) and (43c) shows the influence of the
Raman effect on frequency [6], [21], [45]–[47] as,
(43e)
The frequency shift caused by the Raman term can be mea-
sured by integrating (43e). Physically, the negative sign suggests
the reduction of carrier frequency in the lower frequency side,
generally called the red shift. We have extended the procedure
taking a more generalized ansatz as follows:
(44)
JOURNAL OF LIGHTWAVE TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 26, NO. 14, JULY 15, 2008
where the additional parameters energy and chirp
are taken into consideration.
Using the ansatz (44), the reduced Lagrangian and RDF are
obtained as
(45)
respectively (46)
Using (22) with , we get a set of six dif-
ferential equations which are
(47a)
(47b)
(47c)
(47d)
(47e)
(47f)
We have retrieved some standard expressions (43) related to
the Raman scattering problem as reported in various references
[45]–[48] by adopting RDF. Additionally, we have generalized
the ansatz by incorporating a chirp parameter and obtain another
set of six new differential equations (47) predicting the influence
of the IPRS term on pulse evolution. This set of six coupled dif-
ferential equations is solved numerically using the Runge–Kutta
method. A numerical simulation is carried out to solve the equa-
tions explicitly in Section IX.
VI. EFFECT OF SELF-STEEPENING
Self-steepening is a phenomenon generated due to the inten-
sity dependence group velocity of a pulse and produces tem-
poral distortion. As the pulse propagates through the medium,
it becomes asymmetric, with its peak shifting toward the trailing
edge. The asymmetry in temporal domain causes irregular spec-
tral broadening. The phenomenon is proposed to be explained
by adopting RDF in variational framework.
The pulse evolved under self-steepening is governed by the
equation
(48)
where represents the self-steepening coefficient.
The Lagrangian density, which deals with the conservative
part, will have the same form in all the cases as represented in
(16). Only the RDF is modified as
(49)
ROY AND BHADRA: SOLVING SOLITON PERTURBATION PROBLEMS BY INTRODUCING RAYLEIGH’S DISSIPATION FUNCTION
Using the given ansatz (19), the reduced RDF can be obtained
as
(50)
The reduced Lagrangian will remain unaltered as in (20). Ap-
plying the generalized Euler–Lagrange equation given in (22),
a set of four ordinary differential equations represent the dy-
namics of pulse parameters can be obtained as follows:
(51a)
(51b)
(51c)
(51d)
Combining (51a) and (51d) one can have
(51e)
The obtained expressions (51) are similar to that we have in [21],
where a perturbation theory is employed to deduce it. Equa-
tion (51d) has some physical significance; position shifting of
the pulse now explicitly depends on the self-steepening param-
eter which was detected earlier in [6], [21], [49], and [50]. The
overall phase part of the pulse also depends on self-steepening
through the position parameter, which means the spectrum of
the pulse may be affected in the presence of self-steepening.
The Kantorovitch technique also clarifies the similar observa-
tion. Moreover, adopting the generalized ansatz as represented
in (44), we obtain
(52)
The reduced Lagrangian density (45) will remain unaltered.
Using (22) with , one can have the fol-
lowing set of equations:
(53a)
(53b)
(53c)
(53d)
(53e)
(53f)
The influence of self-steepening on pulse is examined through
the set of equations (53). A numerical procedure is necessary
to solve the set of equations (53) in order to get the evolution
of each individual pulse parameters. In Section IX, we develop
2307
a computer simulation to solve (53) and demonstrate effects of
perturbation.
VII. KANTOROVITCH APPROACH
In this section, we try to derive some of the previous results
[6], [7] involving IPRS and self-steepening by exploiting
the Kantorovitch technique. Both in RDF and Kantorovitch
methods, based on the exact solution of NLSE, the fundamental
equations are derived that describe the dynamics of the pulse
parameters under the influence of various perturbations. How-
ever, in principle, the Kantorovitch approach is different from
the previous methodology to solve the nonlinear perturbing
problem based on variational calculus. In the Kantorovitch
method, the total Lagrangian of the system is constructed as a
sum of conservative and nonconservative parts. In a nonconser-
vative system, the total Lagrangian can be written as
(54)
where represents the slowly varying envelope of the
optical pulse as a function of propagation distance and time .
The subscripts of represent the corresponding derivatives, the
and represent the “conservative” and “nonconservative”
parts, respectively.
A function is constructed which takes into account all non-
conservative processes and can be represented according to the
Hamilton’s principle as
(55)
Here, the subscript runs from 1–2 represents and its complex
conjugate , respectively.
Now, the method assumes that the extremum of the varia-
tional integral of the Lagrangian function may be expressed as
(56)
where is a guessed function, and the ’s are unknown pa-
rameter functions which depend on the propagation distance
. Now, through the known function , the Lagrangian of the
system would be a function of dependent variables . The re-
duced Lagrangian of the conservative part is obtained by making
an integration of that over . This reduced Lagrangian would
now explicitly depend on , where subscript running from
represents the number of equations for number of
pulse parameters. Finally, the Euler–Lagrange equation can be
written as
(57)
where is the reduced Lagrangian.
If and are treated as linearly independent
variables, then the prescription given in (57) can be modified as
(58)
2308
Next, an ansatz is proposed as based on the feature that it
should be the solution of the governing equation in the absence
of any perturbing effects. With the help of the equation given
in (58), it is possible to determine the evolution of different pa-
rameters, with different representing the different perturbing
effects.
Involving the Raman time constant , may be defined in
the following way:
(59)
For the input ansatz, given in (19), a considerable amount of
algebra leads to the same set of four equations (43) with the
choice of and , respectively. The
elaborate calculations are given in Appendix II.
For the self-steepening problem, is again defined as
(60)
Utilizing the same recipe given by (58), the set of (51) is re-
generated for the four parameters. The detailed calculations are
given in Appendix III. Here, it should be remembered that apart
from IPRS and the self-steepening problem, the other perturba-
tions may also be solved by the Kantorovitch approach.
In the Kantorovitch technique, RDF is not needed to be
formed, and a completely different recipe is followed to extract
the dynamics of different pulse parameters. However, it is
expected that both the processes may yield a similar set of
equations for the choice of same ansatz function.
VIII. USE OF RDF IN THE COMBINED EFFECT OF TPA
WITH IPRS AND SELF-STEEPENING
In this section, TPA is introduced collectively along with
IPRS and self-steepening for the pulse propagation problem.
The higher order effects like IPRS and self-steepening become
significant with high-power pulses and for a high value of a
nonlinear refractive index. A large nonlinear index of refraction
usually accompanies the significant amount of TPA coefficient.
Hence, along with IPRS and self-steepening, it is important
to consider the effect of TPA on soliton propagation. In this
section, we examine how the dissipative nature of TPA influ-
ences different pulse parameters under Raman perturbation and
self-steepening.
The extended NLSE involving TPA and IPRS is given as
(61)
where TPA coefficient. is the free space
wave vector, and and are the usual intensity-dependent
absorption and refractive index coefficient, respectively.
The Lagrangian remains the same as given in (16). However,
the inclusion of the dissipative TPA part demands the modifica-
tion in the formation of RDF. The new can be obtained in the
following form:
(62)
JOURNAL OF LIGHTWAVE TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 26, NO. 14, JULY 15, 2008
For the ansatz given in (44), the reduced RDF can be constructed
along with Lagrangian. Then applying the usual process, we
conclude a set of slightly modified six equations as follows:
(63a)
(63b)
(63c)
(63d)
(63e)
(63f)
The set of equations (47) and (63) are identical except in the
evolution of energy and pulse amplitude. It may be noted that
the pulse energy is no more a conserved quantity due to the
incorporation of TPA, and the negative sign in the right-hand
side of (63a) confirms the fact that energy will gradually decay.
The pulse width is also effected due to TPA.
The effect of TPA on self steepening will produce another set
of coupled differential equations given as
(64a)
(64b)
(64c)
(64d)
(64e)
(64f)
To construct the set of equations (64), we modify the RDF given
in (49) as
(65)
The total energy and the amplitude are influenced by TPA in the
similar fashion like in the previous case and perhaps to the best
of our knowledge, these results are reported for the first time. In
the next section, all the obtained analytical results are resolved
numerically to verify the derived dynamics of different pulse
parameters.
IX. NUMERICAL SIMULATIONS
In this section, different numerical processes are adopted
to examine the pulse dynamics by solving the related coupled
equations. Mainly split-step Fourier [SSF] algorithm [21] is
exploited to evaluate the direct solutions of the extended NLSE
used in different sections. The Runge–Kutta algorithm is used
ROY AND BHADRA: SOLVING SOLITON PERTURBATION PROBLEMS BY INTRODUCING RAYLEIGH’S DISSIPATION FUNCTION 2309

Fig. 2. Evolution of different pulse parameters are shown for filter control system with  = 0:05 and  = 0:05. The initial values of the parameters are taken in
the simulation as  = 1 = 05 =05
,q : , : , and  =0.

Fig. 3. The evolution of a sech pulse regarding the solution of (23) is shown in (a). (b) The related temporal position shift is depicted.

in some cases to solve the coupled differential equations under
suitable boundary conditions.
A. Noise Controlling Problem
The ASE-induced noise restricts the soliton performance in
optical communication. Filters and modulators are frequently
used to mitigate the problem. The perturbations developed due
to the use of filters and modulators are derived in the set of equa-
tions (23) and (27) which are consistent with the reported re-
sults. The analytical expressions suggest that, along with am-
plitude, the other parameters of the pulse such as, frequency,
temporal position, and phase are influenced by the controlling
mechanism. However, it is difficult to understand the individual
dynamics of the parameters until (23) and (27) are solved ex-
plicitly. Using the Runge–Kutta algorithm, we solve the set of
equations (23) and (27) numerically, and the results are depicted
in Figs. 2 and 4, respectively.
The simulation in Fig. 2 shows that the amplitude is in-
creasing with distance along with the temporal position shift.
The phase and frequency are also affected; frequency is grad-
ually decreasing with distance where the phase component is
increasing. The increment of amplitude caused due to the gain
2310 JOURNAL OF LIGHTWAVE TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 26, NO. 14, JULY 15, 2008

Fig. 4. Evolution of different pulse parameters are shown for modulator control system with  = 0:05 and  = 0:05. The initial values of the parameters are
taken in the simulation as  =1 =0 =01
,q , : , and  =0.

Fig. 5. The evolution of a sech pulse regarding the solution of equation (24) is shown in (a). In (b), the related temporal position shift is depicted.

term ( ) is present in the expression (23a); on the other hand,
the finite value of restricts the monotonous increment of the
amplitude. In Fig. 3, see the gradual increment of amplitude
and the position shifting of the propagating pulse.
The numerical solutions of (27) are represented in Fig. 4.
Apart from frequency, all the other parameters are influenced by
the amplitude modulation control mechanism. The increasing
amplitude is controlled in the presence of modulation. The ex-
plicit influence of modulation control on temporal position has
already been seen in the expression (27a). The modulators add a
restoring force directly on the timing fluctuations in order to re-
strict the temporal shifting of soliton center. The restoring force
on timing eventually pushes the soliton back to its original posi-
tion. In the given contour plot [Fig. 5(b)]), we may visualize the
effect of restoring force on soliton position which is one of the
main features of amplitude modulation. The evolution of prop-
agating pulse is shown in Fig. 5(a), the gradual increment of the
amplitude is observed in this representation.
B. Soliton Interaction Problem
The attractive and repulsive interactions between the two
neighboring solitons are generated due to their overlap condi-
ROY AND BHADRA: SOLVING SOLITON PERTURBATION PROBLEMS BY INTRODUCING RAYLEIGH’S DISSIPATION FUNCTION 2311

Fig. 6. The evolution of different pulse parameters are shown for two neighboring solitons under attractive interaction. It is intersecting to note that the positions
of two adjacent solitons are gradually shifted towards each other and meet at a point.

Fig. 7. The three-dimensional evolution of two adjacent solitons under attractive interaction is shown in (a). The input amplitudes of the two solitons are assumed
to be unity. The related contour plot is presented in (b).

tions and relative phase relationship. The derived results given
in (35) and (36) suggest that the interaction influences different
pulse parameters quite significantly. Depending on the mutual
phase relationship between the adjacent solitons, the attractive
and repulsive interaction is generated. Under the attractive
interaction, soliton collision may be expected maintaining
certain conserved conditions. Analytical expressions predict
all these physical aspects qualitatively. However, a clear idea
can only be possible by solving those analytical equations with
certain input conditions. In view of this, numerical solutions
are presented to get idea about the evolution dynamics.
Fig. 6 unfolds some interesting facts regarding attractive in-
teraction. The simulation suggests that the sum of amplitude and
frequency of the adjacent soliton remain conserved under inter-
action. However, the phase evolves identically for both the soli-
tons. The symmetric position shift between the solitons is also
observed (Fig. 6). Fig. 7(a) shows the collision of two adjacent
solitons under the in-phase condition. Fig. 7(b) clearly demon-
2312 JOURNAL OF LIGHTWAVE TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 26, NO. 14, JULY 15, 2008

Fig. 8. The evolution of different pulse parameters are shown for two neighboring solitons under repulsive interaction. Due to the out of phase condition between
two solitons, they repeal each other.

Fig. 9. The three-dimensional evolution of two adjacent solitons under repulsive interaction is shown in (a). The input amplitudes of the two solitons are assumed
to be unity. The related contour plot is presented in (b).

strates the pulse trajectory under the attractive interaction. Next,
we depict the pulse evolution under repulsive condition.
Under the repulsive condition, the evolution of pulse pa-
rameters dramatically changes. Interestingly, from Fig. 8, we
can visualize one important fact that the sum of amplitudes
and frequencies of two adjacent solitons are still conserved
which were predicted earlier. In contrast with attractive in-
teraction, the adjacent pulses move away from each other
with increasing distance. The asymmetric repulsion may arise
due to the approximate choice of input (32). Fig. 9(a) shows
how the two adjacent solitons repel each other throughout the
propagation due to their out-of-phase relationship; in a contour
plot [Fig. 9(b)], we show the trajectory of the two repelling
solitons in the time domain.
C. IPRS Problem
The linear frequency shift is examined numerically under the
influence of IPRS. The frequency shift can be quantified by
ROY AND BHADRA: SOLVING SOLITON PERTURBATION PROBLEMS BY INTRODUCING RAYLEIGH’S DISSIPATION FUNCTION
Fig. 10. In plot (a), the gradual shifting (in the steps of  =2
input (=0 ). In plot (b), the shifting of frequencies (in arbitrary units) with distances are presented through dots which are numerically evaluated. The analytical
prediction is given by a straight line.
Fig. 11. Evolution of the temporal position is shown by a contour plot for  =
01
: . The initial pulse is assumed to be a fundamental soliton.
integrating (43e). A numerical simulation based on the split-
step beam propagation method is employed to calculate the fre-
quency shift. The value of the IPRS coefficient is taken rela-
tively high so that a significant frequency shift could be ob-
served. However, even for this large perturbation, the analytical
prediction fits quite well. For a fundamental soliton ( ), the
gradual shift of central frequency appears to be quite significant
and depicted in Fig. 10(a).
The split-step beam propagation algorithm is used to solve
(38) numerically and accordingly the value of frequency shift
is calculated. It is evident from Fig. 10(b) that numerical sim-
ulation has a close resemblance with analytically derived data.
In Fig. 11, we represent a contour plot showing the appreciable
temporal position shift of an optical soliton under the influence
of IPRS [48], [51].
2313
) of frequency of a fundamental soliton is shown for  = 01 : . The dashed curve represents
D. IPRS and TPA Problem
Fig. 12 represents the numerical solution of (63). Evolution
of different parameters is shown for and (dotted
curves). The energy of the system remains unperturbed in the
presence of IPRS, where as temporal position and frequency are
affected significantly due to TPA.
The dissipative nature of TPA can readily be observed
through the dotted lines in the curve. The gradual decaying of
energy is observed through nonvanishing TPA coefficient. The
effect of decreasing frequency reflects the red shifting phenom-
enon of the propagating pulse. Interestingly, the downshifting
of the frequency is restricted in presence of TPA. Physically,
TPA decries the pulse energy through its dissipative nature
which may weaken the dominating part of IPRS in the system.
A three-dimensional plot along with a contour map of pulse
propagation is represented as in Fig. 13 to visualize the pulse
dynamics.
E. Self-Steepening Problem
An interesting result is obtained in Section VI through (51d)
which gives an idea about the dependence of self-steepening on
temporal position shifting. The equation suggests that for a fun-
damental soliton with and , the soliton peak shifts
linearly [Fig. 14(b)] with propagation distance as
[21], [49], [50]. The strength of self-steepening can be quanti-
fied from the slope of the line [Fig. 14(b)]. The beam propaga-
tion split-step algorithm is used to solve (48) numerically, and
the value of position shifting is calculated.
As shown in Fig. 14(b), for fundamental soliton, the resem-
blance between the numerical data with analytical prediction is
quite satisfactory. However, for higher order soliton, the effect
of self-steepening on pulse propagation characteristics is dra-
matic. It removes the degeneracy caused due to the splitting of
the soliton. As a result, the generated solitons propagate at dif-
ferent speeds. Therefore, it is quite complicated to determine the
time delay in such a system. In Fig. 15, the contour plot depicts
2314 JOURNAL OF LIGHTWAVE TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 26, NO. 14, JULY 15, 2008

Fig. 12. Evolution of all the pulse parameters under IPRS for  = 0:1 and K = 0:2 (dotted lines). The initial pulse is assumed to have E = 1,  = 1 with
other parameters having 0 values.

Fig. 13. In (a), the pulse evolution under TPA and IPRS is shown. Unit amplitude “sech” type pulse is considered as input. In (b), the corresponding contour plot
is represented.

the temporal position shift of a fundamental soliton under the
effect of the self-steepening phenomenon.
F. Self-Steepening and TPA Problem
The collective influence of self-steepening and TPA has been
shown an interesting effect through the expressions (64) derived
by the RDF technique. It is evident from the calculations that the
process is complicated to solve analytically.
The equations in (64) are numerically solved, and the re-
lated parameters are plotted in Fig. 16. The results suggest that
without TPA, the influence of self-steepening does not make the
system nonconservative because the energy remains conserved
(solid line). However, the position of the pulse changes almost
linearly with distance. Therefore, it is evident from the results
that the derived analytical method involving RDF can well ex-
plain the evolution parameters of the perturbed optical soliton.
ROY AND BHADRA: SOLVING SOLITON PERTURBATION PROBLEMS BY INTRODUCING RAYLEIGH’S DISSIPATION FUNCTION
=2
Fig. 14. In plot (a), the gradual shifting (in step of  ) of a fundamental soliton in temporal domain is shown for the self-steepening effect with s =02 : . The
dashed curve represents input ( =0 ). In plot (b), the corresponding shifting of the soliton peak positions (in arbitrary unit) are depicted through dots which are
numerically evaluated where the analytical prediction is given by the straight line.
Fig. 15. Evolution of the temporal position is shown by a contour plot for s
02
: . The initial pulse is assumed to be a fundamental soliton.
Moreover, the influence of TPA is examined in the same plot
through the dotted curves. The prime influence of TPA is ob-
served on the pulse energy as expected. The gradual decay in
pulse energy makes the system dissipative. However, from the
numerical solution, the effect of TPA on other pulse parame-
ters are observed either. The three-dimensional evolution of the
pulse is shown in Fig. 17(a). The related contour plot repre-
sented in Fig. 17(b) suggests the position shifting of the input
soliton. The magnitude of the temporal position shifting explic-
itly depends on the self-steepening coefficient, and it is observed
that the shifting increases with increasing value of the self-steep-
ening coefficient.
Fig. 18(a) unfolds an important fact that the temporal shifting
of the pulse becomes stronger under the influence of self-steep-
2315
ening; however, both the pulses experience a decay of equal
amount of amplitude for the nonvanishing TPA coefficient. In
Fig. 18(b), we demonstrate the evolution of normalized energy
for the finite value of the TPA coefficient; the energy is decaying
due to the dissipative nature of TPA.
G. Effects of Chirping on Propagation Characteristics
In some of the previous reports [52]–[54], the chirped soli-
tary pulse had been studied in order to get the analytical solu-
tion of pulse propagation in an amplified nonlinear dissipative
system. Later on, a few works were reported [55]–[57] devel-
oping the idea of chirped solitary pulse under certain perturba-
tions. In this section, we mainly try to discuss the effect of input
chirp on overall pulse dynamics. Illustrative examples with nu-
merical verifications are presented to clarify the analytical pre-
dictions. Considering the most general ansatz as given in equa-
tion (44), we derive a set of six coupled differential equations
= (63) and (64) involving IPRS and self-steepening perturbation,
respectively. It is possible to solve the coupled differential equa-
tion numerically, and in Figs. 12 and 16, we represent the cor-
responding dynamics for chirp-free input pulses. However, the
general expressions given in (63) and (64) suggest that in pres-
ence of input chirp, the intensity of the propagating pulse would
be influenced significantly. We use those derived expressions to
evaluate the nature of the propagating pulse, and in Fig. 19 we
compare our analytical results with the numerical solution ob-
tained by the SSF algorithm considering the input pulse having
a chirp parameter of .
It may be noted that numerical and analytical predictions of
pulse evolution are almost identical in nature. Under chirped
conditions, the pulse intensity gradually increases up to a certain
distance and then falls sharply. We define the distance as critical
distance , at which the peak intensity reaches to its maxima.
The maxima of peak intensity and the critical distance are
likely to be the function of input chirp. We made an extensive
2316
Fig. 16. Evolution of all the pulse parameters under self-steepening for s
with other parameters having 0 values.
Fig. 17. In figure (a), the pulse evolution under combined effect of TPA and self-steepening is shown. In (b), the corresponding contour plot is represented.
study to unfold the actual effect of chirp and TPA coefficient on
peak intensity of a propagating pulse, and the obtained results
are shown in Fig. 20.
The gradual decay of normalized peak intensity [Fig. 20(b)]
is accelerated with increasing TPA coefficient. A good fit of ana-
lytical and numerical results justifies the validity of the obtained
expressions.
According to (64f), it may be predicted that the explicit pres-
ence of the self-steepening term in the evolution equation of
JOURNAL OF LIGHTWAVE TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 26, NO. 14, JULY 15, 2008
= 0:2 and K = 0:2 (dotted lines). The initial pulse is assumed to have E = 1,  = 1
chirp parameter may influence the intensity dynamics. We do
not get any modification in the evolution of the peak intensity
with the changing IPRS term for a fixed owing to the absence
of any IPRS term in the dynamic expression of intensity. How-
ever, in Fig. 21(a), we show the significant deviation in intensity
dynamics with different set of chirp and self-steepening terms.
Additionally the SSF simulated results are given in the same
plot. We extend our simulation for negative chirp and compare
it with the numerical results generated by the SSF algorithm. In
ROY AND BHADRA: SOLVING SOLITON PERTURBATION PROBLEMS BY INTRODUCING RAYLEIGH’S DISSIPATION FUNCTION 2317

Fig. 18. In figure (a), the input–output plot is shown. The pulses labeled by “a” and “b” represent the output of a sech-type pulse under IPRS and self-steepening,
respectively. In both the cases, the TPA parameter K = 0:2 . In figure (b), normalized energy evolution is depicted. The dots represent the values simulated directly
from the pulse evolution when the solid line is generated on the basis of the solution of coupled equation using the Runge–Kutta method.

Fig. 19. Comparison between the split-step algorithm [plot (a)] and the analytical prediction [plot (b)] are shown by representing a three-dimensional chirped
pulse evolution. The input pulse is considered as sech type having unit amplitude and width with the initial chirp value =2
.

Fig. 20. Evolution of intensity of the pulses having initial chirp = 1; 2 3

and . The analytically predicted expressions are shown by solid curves and the squares,
the open circles and the stars represent the results obtained by the split-step algorithm. Evolution of the intensity of the pulse under TPA is shown in plot (b). The
solid lines represents the analytical results for different TPA coefficients, whereas the open circles depict the numerical results which are obtained exploiting the
split-step algorithm.

Fig. 21(b), we represent the related comparison by taking posi- It may be observed in Fig. 20(a) that, with increasing chirp
tive and negative input chirp values. values, the maxima of the peak intensity increases, and the cor-
2318
Fig. 21. Evolution of intensity for different set of chirp and the self-steepening parameter is shown in plot (a). Open circles represent the numerical results for
the s =0 condition. In plot (b), the peak intensity evolution is shown for positive and negative chirp. The solid circles represent the numerical values obtained by
using the SSF algorithm.
Fig. 22. Variation of peak intensity (solid line) and critical distance (dashed
line) with respect to increasing positive chirp parameter. The input intensity of
the pulse is considered to be unity.
responding critical distance ( ) decreases. We precisely ex-
amine those effects, and to visualize the process, we demon-
strate the variation of peak intensity and with the variation
of input chirp parameters as shown in Fig. 22 which indicates
that the peak value of the pulse intensity during the propaga-
tion increases linearly with increasing input chirp, whereas the
critical distance decreases. As investigated, the variation of
input intensity does not influence the critical distance; however,
the peak intensity is increased with increasing input intensity. It
is shown [Fig. 21(b)] that under negative chirp, the peak ampli-
tude of the pulse monotonically decreases from the beginning.
The derived coupled equations (63) and (64) in the present
report lead to explore the nature of evolution of the chirp
parameter with respect to propagation distance. It is observed
that with different input chirp values the evolution nature
changes significantly. It is also examined that the nonlinear
JOURNAL OF LIGHTWAVE TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 26, NO. 14, JULY 15, 2008
absorption coefficient influences the evolution characteristic. In
Fig. 23(a) and (b), we try to represent such observations.
X. CONCLUSION
We have presented a simple technique by introducing RDF in
the framework of variational calculus that appears to be conve-
nient to solve nonlinear pulse dynamics in a perturbing optical
system. With classical analogy, Rayleigh’s dissipation function
is configured along with Lagrangian density to solve perturbing
problems. We have chosen the generalized Euler–Lagrange
equation involving Rayleigh’s dissipation function in order
to describe a wide range of perturbing problems. Using the
methodology, we obtained different dynamic equations of
associated pulse parameters which are influenced by perturba-
tions originated due to filtering, soliton interaction, intrapulse
Raman scattering, and self-steepening phenomena. Some of
the results are regenerated through another method known as
the Kantorovitch approach which deals with such perturbing
problems analytically. All the derived expressions converge
to some of the well-known reported results with certain mod-
ifications related to soliton pulse dynamics. In addition, we
have extended our formalism in a more complicated system
involving TPA along with IPRS and self-steepening which
provides some new physical insight not reported earlier. In-
serting an input chirp parameter in the propagating pulse, some
interesting effects are observed, and they are suitably explained
using analytical derivations. A set of numerical verifications
have been presented to show the compatibility of the analytical
results with real problems. The applicability of a generalized
Euler–Lagrange equation in a perturbing system for soliton
propagation is quite astonishing, and the resemblance of the ob-
tained expressions with the numerically derived results justifies
the effectiveness of the method. It is expected that using this
process, most of the perturbing problems can be solved with
certain approximation by configuring suitable RDF. Perhaps,
we report for the first time that RDF may be applied in order
ROY AND BHADRA: SOLVING SOLITON PERTURBATION PROBLEMS BY INTRODUCING RAYLEIGH’S DISSIPATION FUNCTION 2319

0
Fig. 23. In plot (a), evolution nature of the chirp parameter with propagation distance is shown for input values of  ranging 2 to V with the condition of zero
TPA and the IPRS coefficient. The influence of the TPA coefficient on the evolution of the chirp parameter is depicted in plot (b). In both cases, the initial pulse is
considered to be unit amplitude and width.

to explain propagation characteristics of a soliton-like pulse nonlinear frictional force which is proportional to ( ,
under a wide range of perturbing effects such as, loss, filtering, for self-steepening). For filtering and interaction problems, fric-
soliton interaction, intrapulse Raman scattering, two-photon tional force directly depends on the perturbations. Hence, a fric-
absorption, and self-steepening or combination of them. tional force is originated due to the perturbing effects and van-
ishes if the perturbations are removed.
APPENDIX I
APPENDIX II
Involving the perturbation due to IPRS, the extended NLSE
is The governing equation in presence of IPRS

(A1)
(B1)
The solution is assumed in the following form:
The input ansatz
(A2)

Substituting (A2) into (A1), the function satisfies the

equation
(B2)
(A3) The prescription adopted in Kantorovitch method is

and it can rewritten in the following compact form: (B3)

(A4) For the given input ansatz

where and .
For the self-steepening problem, .
For the filter controlling problem, (B4)
.
For the amplitude modulation controlling problem, 1) For
.
For the two-soliton interaction problem, (B5)
.
Equation (A4) is equivalent to the dynamics of a particle Now applying the recipe given in (B3), (43a) can be
moving in an effective potential well in presence of a regenerated:
2320 JOURNAL OF LIGHTWAVE TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 26, NO. 14, JULY 15, 2008

2) For 3) For ,

(B6) (C5)

The combination of (C5) and (B3), gives (51c).

From (B6) and (B3), (43b) can be generated.
4) For
3) For

(B7)

From (B7) and (B3), (43c) can be derived. (C6)

4) For
Equation (51d) can be derived using (C6) and (B3).
(B8)
APPENDIX IV
Now the combination of (B8) and (B3) will give (43d).
In the generalized projection operator scheme, the projec-
tion operator may be defined as , where is the
APPENDIX III given ansatz, are different pulse parameters, and is the arbi-
The governing equation under self-steepening can be de- trary phase constant. The suffix represents the corresponding
picted as derivatives. For the choice of or , the projection oper-
ator scheme is equivalent with variational proposition. Inserting
the projection operator formalism in (38), we may have
(C1)

The input ansatz (B2) and the recipe (B3) will remain same, only
the will change:

(D1)
(C2)
1) For For the ansatz given in (19) and . Hence, it is
obvious that (D1) actually represents four different equations
according to . The related expressions are given in the closed
form as follows:

(D2a)
(D2b)
(C3) (D2c)
(D2d)
Equation (51a) can be obtained from (B3) and (C3).
2) For

(D2e)

(D2f)
(C4)
A considerable amount of algebra can lead to the set of equa-
Inserting (C4) into the recipe (B3), (51b) can be generated. tions (43), with and exploiting (D1) and (D2).
ROY AND BHADRA: SOLVING SOLITON PERTURBATION PROBLEMS BY INTRODUCING RAYLEIGH’S DISSIPATION FUNCTION
Exactly in the similar fashion involving the self-steepening
part, one can develop (51). In this problem, the prescription will
be modified as
(D3)
With this brief outline, we obtain the key steps to evolve the ordi-
nary differential equations of pulse parameters under the projec-
tion operator scheme. This is one of the elegant methods to solve
the extended NLSE partially. In the RDF approach, it is neces-
sary to construct the system Lagrangian and RDF intuitively. In
contrast, the projection operator scheme does not require any
predefined functions.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would to thank Dr. H. S. Maiti, Director of
CGCRI, for his continuous encouragement, guidance, and
support in this work. They would also like to thank Prof.
G. P. Agrawal, Institute of Optics, Rochester University, for
valuable discussions and suggestions. They also would like
to thank the staff members of the Fiber Optic Laboratory at
CGCRI for their unstinted cooperation and help.
REFERENCES
[1] D. J. Kaup, “Perturbation theory for solitons in optical fibers,” Phy.
Rev. A, vol. 42, no. 9, pp. 5689–5694, Nov. 1990.
[2] D. J. Kaup and B. A. Malomed, “The variational principle for nonlinear
waves in dissipative systems,” Phys. D, vol. 87, no. 1–4, pp. 155–159,
Oct. 1995.
[3] J. P. Gordon, “Dissipative perturbations of solitons of the nonlinear
Schrödinger equation,” J. Opt. Soc. Amer. B, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 91–97,
Jan. 1992.
[4] H. Haus and Y. Lai, “Quantum theory of soliton squeezing: A lin-
earized approach,” J. Opt. Soc. Amer. B, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 386–392,
Mar. 1990.
[5] E. Iannone et al., Nonlinear Optical Communication Networks. New
York: Wiley, 1998, ch. 5.
[6] A. Hasegawa and M. Matsumoto, Optical Solitons in Fibers, Third
ed. New York: Springer, 2003, ch. 7.
[7] J. N. Elgin, “Perturbation of optical solitons,” Phy. Rev. A, vol. 47, no.
5, pp. 4331–4341, May 1993.
[8] S. C. Cerda, S. B. Cavalcanti, and J. M. Hickmann, “A variational ap-
proach of nonlinear dissipative pulse propagation,” Eur. Phys. J. D, vol.
1, no. 3, pp. 313–316, Mar. 1998.
[9] V. Skarka and N. B. Aleksić, “Stability criteria for dissipative
soliton solutions of the one-,two-,and three-dimensional complex
cubic-quintic Ginzburg-Landau equations,” Phy. Rev. Lett., vol. 96,
Jan. 2006, 013903.
[10] C. Jirauschek and F. Kärtner, “Gaussian pulse dynamics in gain media
with Kerr nonlinearity,” J. Opt. Soc. Amer. B, vol. 23, no. 9, pp.
1776–1784, Apr. 2006.
[11] H. Goldstein, Classical Mechanic, 2nd ed. New Delhi, India: Narosa,
2001, ch. 1,2,12.
[12] N. A. Lemos, “Remark on Rayleigh’s dissipation function,” Amer. J.
Phys., vol. 59, no. 7, pp. 660–661, Jul. 1991.
[13] F. Riewe, “Nonconservative Lagrangian and Hamiltonian mechanics,”
Phys. Rev. E, vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 1890–1899, Feb. 1996.
[14] T. L. Gilbert, “A phenomenological theory of damping in ferromag-
netic materials,” IEEE Trans. Magn., vol. 40, no. 6, pp. 3443–3449,
Nov. 2004.
[15] Y. S. Kivsher and B. A. Malomed, “Raman-induced optical shocks in
nonlinear fibers,” Opt. Lett., vol. 18, no. 7, pp. 485–487, Apr. 1993.
2321
[16] M. V. Kozlov, C. J. McKinstrie, and C. Xie, “Moment equations for
optical pulses in dispersive and dissipative systems,” Opt. Commun.,
vol. 251, no. 1–3, pp. 194–208, Jul. 2005.
[17] D. Anderson, “Variational approach to nonlinear pulse propagation in
optical fibers,” Phys. Rev. A, vol. 27, no. 6, pp. 3135–3145, Jun. 1983.
[18] S. Roy and S. Bhadra, “Study of nonlinear dissipative pulse propaga-
tion under the combined effect of two-photon absorption and gain dis-
persion: A variational approach involving Rayleigh’s dissipation func-
tion,” Phys. D, vol. 232, no. 2, pp. 103–107.
[19] G. P. Agrawal, Applications of Nonlinear Fiber Optic. New York:
Academic, 2001, ch. 8.
[20] J. P. Gordon, “Theory of self frequency shift,” Opt. Lett., vol. 11, no.
10, pp. 662–664, Oct. 1986.
[21] G. P. Agrawal, Nonlinear Fiber Optic, Third ed. New York: Aca-
demic, 2001, ch. 2, 4, 5.
[22] N. Tzoar and M. Jain, “Self-phase modulation in long-geometry optical
waveguides,” Phys. Rev A, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 1266–1270, Mar. 1981.
[23] K. Nakkeeran and P. K. A. Wai, “Generalized projection operator
method to derive the pulse parameters equations for the nonlinear
Schrödinger equation,” Opt. Commun., vol. 244, no. 1–6, pp. 377–382,
Jan. 2005.
[24] J. P. Gordon and H. A. Haus, “Random walk of coherently amplified
solitons in optical filter transmission,” Opt. Lett., vol. 11, no. 10, pp.
665–667, Oct. 1986.
[25] A. Mecozzi, J. D. Moores, H. A. Haus, and Y. Lai, “Soliton transmis-
sion control,” Opt. Lett., vol. 16, no. 23, pp. 1841–1843, Dec. 1991.
[26] Y. Kodama and A. Hasegawa, “Generation of asymptotically stable
optical solitons and suppression of the Gordon–Haus effect,” Opt. Lett.,
vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 31–33, Jan. 1992.
[27] L. F. Mollenauer, J. P. Gordon, and S. G. Evangelides, “The sliding-
frequency guiding filter: An improved form of soliton jitter control,”
Opt. Lett., vol. 17, no. 22, pp. 575–1577, Nov. 1992.
[28] V. S. Grigoryan, A. Hasegawa, and A. Maruta, “Control of optical soli-
tons by light waves,” Opt. Lett., vol. 20, no. 8, pp. 857–859, Apr. 1995.
[29] A. Mecozzi, “Soliton transmission control by Butterworth filters,” Opt.
Lett., vol. 20, no. 18, pp. 1859–1861, Sep. 1995.
[30] S. Kawai and K. Iwatsuki, “System design of filter-guided soliton
transmission considering amplitude noise and timing jitte,” J. Lightw.
Technol., vol. 16, no. 12, pp. 2347–2354, Dec. 1998.
[31] E. Poutrina and G. P. Agrawal, “Timing jitter in dispersion-managed
soliton systems with distributed, lumped, and hybrid amplification,” J.
Lightw. Technol., vol. 20, no. 5, pp. 762–769, May 2002.
[32] H. Haus, “Quantum noise in a soliton like repeater system,” J. Opt. Soc.
Amer. B, vol. 8, no. 5, pp. 1122–1126, May 1991.
[33] V. I. Karpman and V. V. Solov’ev, “A perturbation approach to the two
soliton systems,” Phys. D, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 487–502, Aug. 1981.
[34] J. P. Gordon, “Interaction forces among solitons in optical fibers,” Opt.
Lett., vol. 8, no. 11, pp. 596–598, Nov. 1983.
[35] D. Andersion and M. Lisak, “Bandwidth limits due to incoherent
soliton interaction in optical- fiber communication systems,” Phy Rev.
A, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 2270–2274, Oct. 1985.
[36] D. Andersion and M. Lisak, “Bandwidth limits due to mutual pulse
interaction in optical soliton communication systems,” Opt. Lett., vol.
11, no. 3, pp. 174–176, Mar. 1986.
[37] A. N. Pinto, G. P. Agrawal, and J. F. Rocha, “Effect of soliton inter-
action on timing jitter in communication system,” J. Lightw. Technol.,
vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 515–519, Apr. 1998.
[38] K. Tai, A. Hasegawa, and N. Bekki, “Fission of optical solitons induced
by stimulated Raman effect,” Opt. Lett., vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 392–394,
May 1988.
[39] R. H. Stolen, J. P. Gordon, W. J. Tomlinson, and H. A. Haus, “Raman
response function of silica-core fibers,” J. Opt. Soc. Amer. B, vol. 6, no.
6, pp. 1159–1166, Jun. 1989.
[40] G. P. Agrawal, “Effect of intrapulse stimulated Raman scattering on
soliton-effect pulse compression in optical fiber,” Opt. Lett., vol. 15,
no. 4, pp. 224–226, Feb. 1990.
[41] P. V. Mamyshev and S. V. Chernikov, “Ultrashort-pulse propagation
in optical fibers,” Opt. Lett., vol. 15, no. 19, pp. 1076–1078, Oct. 1990.
[42] B. J. Hong and C. C. Yang, “Ultrashort-soliton interactions in optical
fibers,” Opt. Lett., vol. 15, no. 19, pp. 1061–1063, Oct. 1990.
[43] K. C. Chan and H. F. Liu, “Effects of Raman scattering and frequency
chirping on soliton-effect pulse compression,” Opt. Lett., vol. 18, no.
14, pp. 1150–1152, Jul. 1993.
[44] C. Headley and G. P. Agrawal, “Unified description of ultrafast stimu-
lated Raman scattering in optical fibers,” J. Opt. Soc. Amer. B, vol. 13,
no. 10, pp. 2170–2177, Oct. 1996.
[45] Y. Kodama and A. Hasegawa, “Nonlinear pulse propagation in a
monomode dielectric guide,” IEEE J. Quantum Electron., vol. QE-23,
no. 5, pp. 510–524, May 1987.
2322
[46] Y. Kodama and K. Nozaki, “Soliton interaction in optical fibers,” Opt.
Lett., vol. 12, no. 12, pp. 1038–1040, Dec. 1987.
[47] C. R. Menyuk, “Soliton robustness in optical fiber,” J. Opt. Soc. Amer.
B, vol. 10, no. 9, pp. 1585–1591, Sep. 1993.
[48] S. C. V. Latas and M. F. S. Ferreira, “Soliton propagation in the
presence of intrapulse Raman scattering and nonlinear gain,” Opt.
Commun., vol. 251, no. 4–6, pp. 415–422, Jul. 2005.
[49] K. Ohkuma, Y. H. Ichikawa, and Y. Abe, “Soliton propagation along
optical fiber,” Opt. Lett., vol. 12, no. 7, pp. 516–518, Jul. 1987.
[50] J. R. de Oliveira, M. A. de Moura, J. M. Hickmann, and A. S. L. Gomes,
“Self-steepening of optical pulses in dispersive medium,” J. Opt. Soc.
Amer. B, vol. 9, no. 11, pp. 2025–2027, Nov. 1992.
[51] V. A. Vysloukh and E. Martí-Panameño, “Resonant Raman perturba-
tions of the femtosecond soliton parameters,” Opt. Commun., vol. 198,
no. 1–3, pp. 171–176, Oct. 2001.
[52] N. R. Pereira and L. Stenflo, “Nonlinear Schrödinger equation in-
cluding growth and damping,” Phys. Fluids, vol. 20, no. 10, pp.
1733–1734, Mar. 1977.
[53] P. A. Bélanger, L. Gagnon, and C. Paré, “Solitary pulse in an amplified
nonlinear dissipative medium,” Opt. Lett., vol. 14, no. 17, pp. 943–945,
Sep. 1989.
[54] L. F. Mollenauer, J. P. Gordon, and S. G. Evangelides, “The sliding-
frequency guiding filter: An improved form of soliton jitter control,”
Opt. Lett., vol. 17, no. 22, pp. 1575–1575, Nov. 1992.
[55] F. K. Abdullaev, A. A. Abdumalikov, and B. B. Baizakov, “Propagation
of chirped optical solitons in fibers with randomly varying parameters,”
Opt. Commun., vol. 138, no. 1–3, pp. 49–54, May 1997.
[56] M. Desaix, L. Helezynski, D. Anderson, and M. Lisak, “Propagation
properties of chirped soliton pulses in optical nonlinear Kerr media,”
Phy. Rev. E, vol. 65, Apr. 2002, 056602.
[57] M. Manousakis, S. Droulias, P. Papagiannis, and K. Hizanidis, “Propa-
gation of chirped solitary pulses in optical transmission lines: Perturbed
variational approach,” Opt. Commun., vol. 213, no. 4–6, pp. 293–299,
Dec. 2002.
JOURNAL OF LIGHTWAVE TECHNOLOGY, VOL. 26, NO. 14, JULY 15, 2008
Samudra Roy received the B.Sc and M.Sc degrees
in physics from Calcutta University, Kolkata, India,
in 2001 and 2003, respectively. He is currently pur-
suing the Ph.D. degrees from the Central Glass and
Ceramic Research Institute (CGCRI), Kolkata
In 2003, he joined CGCRI, as a CSIR Golden
Jubilee Project Intern and subsequently qualified in
CSIR-NET fellowship as a Junior Research Fellow
(JRF).
Shyamal K. Bhadra received the B.Sc. degree (with
honors) in 1974 and the M.Sc. degree in 1977, respec-
tively, and the Ph.D. degree in science from Jadavpur
University, Kolkata, India, in 1998.
He is a Senior Scientist with the Central Glass
and Ceramic Research Institute (CGCRI), Kolkata,
India, and is currently working in the advanced areas
of fibre optics and coordinating various national
and international research projects. He participated
in an international course on vacuum science and
technology, jointly organized by the Bhabha Atomic
Research Centre and the University of Bombay, under the sponsorship from
UNESCO in 1979. After serving for a brief period in the analytical and
planetary optics division of Carl Zeiss Instruments, he joined CGCRI in 1984
in the fibre optics program of the Institute. He has published a number of papers
in national and international journals and has four national and international
patents in the last couple of years.
Dr. Bhadra became a Member of the Executive Council of the Optical Society
of India in 2006.