pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.25620 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-28 · 🪐 quant-ph

Robustness of fiber-optic attenuators to 1061-nm sub-nanosecond pulsed laser radiation in quantum key distribution systems

Daria Ruzhitskaya , Irina Zhluktova , Anastasiya Ponosova , Fedor Ushakov , Andrey Zverev , Galina Tertyshnikova , Tianyi Xing , Kirill Min'kov
show 5 more authors
Daniil Trefilov Anqi Huang Vladimir Kamynin Vladimir Tsvetkov Vadim Makarov
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-07 16:32 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords quantum key distributionlaser damage attacksfiber-optic attenuatorspulsed laser radiationside-channel attacksoptical damage thresholdQKD component security
0
0 comments X

The pith

Pulsed lasers at 1061 nm can permanently alter attenuation in some fiber-optic components used in quantum key distribution, creating possible undetected side-channels.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper examines how four common types of fiber-optic attenuators behave when hit with sub-picosecond pulses at 1061 nm and average powers up to 1 W. Mechanical attenuators that use physical blocking elements and fixed air-gap designs stay stable under this exposure. MEMS variable attenuators, however, show either temporary increases in loss or irreversible damage that leaves attenuation reduced by roughly 3.8 dB. Absorption-based fixed attenuators suffer a lowered damage threshold after the pulsed exposure, so that a later 1 W continuous-wave laser at 1550 nm can reduce their attenuation by as much as 7 dB. These changes would let an eavesdropper manipulate the signal strength in ways that existing continuous-wave laser protections do not address.

Core claim

Experiments on commercial attenuators demonstrate that 1061-nm sub-picosecond pulses leave mechanical blocking and air-gap devices unchanged, while MEMS devices suffer permanent attenuation drops near 3.8 dB and absorption devices become susceptible to subsequent 1550-nm continuous-wave damage at powers that would not harm them otherwise, reaching reductions up to 7 dB. The authors conclude that such pulsed irradiation can therefore open a hidden side-channel for eavesdropping that bypasses standard laser-damage countermeasures.

What carries the argument

The differing physical responses of mechanical blocking elements, air gaps, MEMS actuators, and absorption media inside fiber attenuators when subjected to 1061-nm pulsed irradiation, which in some cases permanently shifts optical transmission.

If this is right

  • QKD security analyses that assume only continuous-wave laser threats would miss the possibility of pulsed preconditioning that lowers later damage thresholds.
  • Systems relying on MEMS or absorption attenuators could experience sudden, permanent loss reductions that violate the calibrated loss assumptions used in key-rate calculations.
  • Only mechanical blocking and air-gap attenuators would remain safe against the described attack, implying a need to restrict component choices in high-security deployments.
  • Existing monitoring for power anomalies at the operating wavelength would not catch damage inflicted at 1061 nm.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Manufacturers could publish pulsed-laser damage thresholds for each attenuator model so that system integrators can avoid vulnerable designs.
  • Security proofs for QKD might need explicit inclusion of multi-wavelength pulsed attacks rather than treating laser damage as a single continuous-wave scenario.
  • Similar preconditioning effects could appear in other passive fiber components such as couplers or isolators if they contain absorbing materials.
  • Field trials could measure whether real environmental conditions change the observed damage thresholds compared with clean laboratory conditions.

Load-bearing premise

That the attenuation changes measured in laboratory tests on specific commercial models would occur undetected and usable for eavesdropping inside an operational quantum key distribution link.

What would settle it

A test in a running QKD system using the vulnerable attenuator types in which the observed attenuation shift either triggers an alarm or leaves the eavesdropper unable to extract key material without detection.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.25620 by Anastasiya Ponosova, Andrey Zverev, Anqi Huang, Daniil Trefilov, Daria Ruzhitskaya, Fedor Ushakov, Galina Tertyshnikova, Irina Zhluktova, Kirill Min'kov, Tianyi Xing, Vadim Makarov, Vladimir Kamynin, Vladimir Tsvetkov.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Experimental setup. DFB, 1550-nm distributed view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. The dependence of average output power and pulse view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Initial transmission spectra of the testing attenua view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Manual VOA with blocking element. (a) Simplified view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Variation of the MEMS attenuation coefficient (black view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Alteration in the attenuation of MEMS VOA follow view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Internal MEMS components after attack by (a) cw view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Fixed attenuator with gap-loss. (a) Simplified cross view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. Fixed attenuator with absorption element. (a) Sim view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The security of quantum key distribution (QKD) systems relies on the physical integrity of their components. While laser-damage attacks (LDAs) using high-power continuous-wave (cw) lasers have been well studied, the threat posed by pulsed lasers at alternative wavelengths remains underestimated. Here, we experimentally investigated the stability of four types of fiber-optic attenuators under exposure to sub-picosecond pulses at 1061 nm with average power reaching 1 W. Mechanical variable attenuators with blocking elements and fixed air-gap attenuators show resistance to this attack. MEMS-based variable attenuators exhibit increased attenuation or irreversible damage that causes a permanent reduction in attenuation of approximately 3.8 dB. For fixed attenuators with an absorption element, we demonstrate that initial pulsed irradiation significantly lowers the optical damage threshold of the components compared to direct cw attacks. The attenuation reduction achieved is up to 7 dB at a 1 W cw laser at 1550 nm. These results highlight the possibility of establishing a hidden side-channel for eavesdropping attacks and underscore the insufficiency of existing countermeasures against sophisticated LDA scenarios.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript experimentally investigates the robustness of four types of fiber-optic attenuators to sub-nanosecond pulsed laser radiation at 1061 nm with average powers up to 1 W. Mechanical variable attenuators with blocking elements and fixed air-gap attenuators remain resistant. MEMS-based variable attenuators exhibit increased attenuation or irreversible damage causing a permanent reduction in attenuation of approximately 3.8 dB. For fixed attenuators with an absorption element, initial pulsed irradiation lowers the optical damage threshold relative to direct cw attacks, enabling attenuation reductions of up to 7 dB under subsequent 1 W cw irradiation at 1550 nm. The authors conclude that these effects highlight the possibility of hidden side-channels for eavesdropping in QKD systems.

Significance. If the reported damage thresholds and preconditioning effects hold under more complete characterization, the work would usefully extend laser-damage-attack studies to pulsed sources at non-standard wavelengths and could inform component hardening or monitoring strategies in QKD. The component-level results are a necessary first step, but the absence of integrated-link data limits immediate implications for operational security.

major comments (3)
  1. Abstract: quantitative claims of 3.8 dB permanent reduction (MEMS) and up to 7 dB reduction (preconditioned fixed absorbers) are stated without error bars, number of trials, or statistical measures, preventing assessment of reproducibility and effect-size reliability.
  2. Results/Discussion: the central claim that the observed damage enables a 'hidden side-channel' rests on the untested assumption that such irradiation can be performed in a deployed fiber link without triggering power monitors, QBER alarms, or count-rate anomalies; no system-level data or threshold comparisons are provided.
  3. Experimental methods: full details on pulse duration, repetition rate, beam coupling, and how attenuators were mounted and monitored during exposure are not supplied, making independent verification of the reported thresholds impossible.
minor comments (2)
  1. The four attenuator types should be identified by manufacturer/model in the text and figures for reproducibility.
  2. Figures would benefit from inclusion of raw transmission traces or multiple overlaid runs to illustrate variability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and detailed comments, which have helped us identify areas for improvement in clarity and completeness. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript accordingly where possible to strengthen the presentation of our component-level experimental results.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: Abstract: quantitative claims of 3.8 dB permanent reduction (MEMS) and up to 7 dB reduction (preconditioned fixed absorbers) are stated without error bars, number of trials, or statistical measures, preventing assessment of reproducibility and effect-size reliability.

    Authors: We agree that including statistical context will improve the abstract. In the revised manuscript, we will update the abstract to report the number of independent trials performed for each attenuator type (multiple devices were tested per category) and include measures of variability, such as standard deviations or ranges, for the reported attenuation reductions. This will allow readers to better evaluate the reproducibility of the 3.8 dB and up to 7 dB effects. revision: yes

  2. Referee: Results/Discussion: the central claim that the observed damage enables a 'hidden side-channel' rests on the untested assumption that such irradiation can be performed in a deployed fiber link without triggering power monitors, QBER alarms, or count-rate anomalies; no system-level data or threshold comparisons are provided.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the study is confined to component-level characterization and does not provide integrated-link or system-level data on detectability. The manuscript presents the damage effects as highlighting a potential side-channel vulnerability rather than demonstrating an immediately exploitable attack in operational QKD systems. In the revised discussion, we will explicitly note this scope limitation, discuss possible detection by power monitors and QBER/count-rate anomalies, and frame the results as a first step that motivates further system-level security analyses, consistent with the referee's assessment of the work's significance. revision: partial

  3. Referee: Experimental methods: full details on pulse duration, repetition rate, beam coupling, and how attenuators were mounted and monitored during exposure are not supplied, making independent verification of the reported thresholds impossible.

    Authors: We appreciate this feedback and apologize for the initial omission of key parameters. The revised methods section will provide complete details, including the sub-nanosecond pulse duration, repetition rate, beam coupling efficiency and setup, attenuator mounting configuration, and real-time monitoring procedures (e.g., using inline power meters and optical spectrum analyzers). These additions will enable independent reproduction and verification of the damage thresholds. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: purely empirical experimental observations with no derivations or fitted models

full rationale

The paper reports laboratory measurements of attenuator behavior under 1061 nm pulsed and 1550 nm cw laser exposure. All central claims (resistance of mechanical and air-gap devices, ~3.8 dB permanent reduction in MEMS devices, preconditioning lowering damage threshold for fixed absorbers) are direct experimental outcomes. No equations, ansatzes, fitted parameters, uniqueness theorems, or self-citations are used to derive any result from prior results within the paper. The work is self-contained against external benchmarks and contains no load-bearing steps that reduce to their own inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

This is a direct experimental study of physical component behavior under laser exposure; no free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are introduced or required.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5559 in / 1166 out tokens · 84803 ms · 2026-05-07T16:32:19.318284+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

47 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    is attached to the test sample’s housing using ther- mally conductive silicone organic paste and aluminum tape. B. T est procedure We conduct a comprehensive characterization of the experimental setup before attenuator tests. This includes assessing the loss introduced by each element of the ex- perimental setup to varying PL power levels. This cali- brat...

  2. [2]

    Planes Complementarios de I+D+I con las Comunidades Autonomas

    0/2− −0−30 to +70 +58 MEMS VOA undisclosed a undiscloseda 1b/3−+−3.8, permanent−5 to +75 +73 Fixed type 1 undisclosed a undiscloseda 3/3 + +−7 c, temporary−40 to +85 +45 Fixed type 2 undisclosed a undiscloseda 1/1−+−0.8 c, temporary−40 to +85 +40 a Information withheld at the request of QKD manufacturer. b The effect may be caused by manufacturing variati...

    2000

  3. [3]

    C. H. Bennett and G. Brassard, Quantum cryptography: Public key distribution and coin tossing, inProc. Inter- national Conference on Computers, Systems, and Sig- nal Processing(IEEE Press, New York, Bangalore, India,

  4. [4]

    H.-K. Lo, M. Curty, and K. Tamaki, Secure quantum key distribution, Nat. Photonics8, 595 (2014)

    2014

  5. [5]

    P. W. Shor and J. Preskill, Simple proof of security of the BB84 quantum key distribution protocol, Phys. Rev. Lett.85, 441 (2000)

    2000

  6. [6]

    Koashi, Simple security proof of quantum key dis- tribution based on complementarity, New J

    M. Koashi, Simple security proof of quantum key dis- tribution based on complementarity, New J. Phys.11, 045018 (2009)

    2009

  7. [7]

    Sajeed, P

    S. Sajeed, P. Chaiwongkhot, A. Huang, H. Qin, V. Egorov, A. Kozubov, A. Gaidash, V. Chistiakov, A. Vasiliev, A. Gleim, and V. Makarov, An approach for security evaluation and certification of a complete quan- tum communication system, Sci. Rep.11, 5110 (2021)

    2021

  8. [8]

    Sun and A

    S. Sun and A. Huang, A review of security evaluation of practical quantum key distribution system, Entropy24, 260 (2022). 9

    2022

  9. [9]

    Makarov, A

    V. Makarov, A. Abrikosov, P. Chaiwongkhot, A. K. Fe- dorov, A. Huang, E. Kiktenko, M. Petrov, A. Ponosova, D. Ruzhitskaya, A. Tayduganov, D. Trefilov, and K. Za- itsev, Preparing a commercial quantum key distribu- tion system for certification against implementation loop- holes, Phys. Rev. Appl.22, 044076 (2024)

    2024

  10. [10]

    Marquardt, U

    C. Marquardt, U. Seyfarth, S. Bettendorf, M. Bohmann, A. Buchner, M. Curty, D. Elser, S. Eul, T. Gehring, N. Jain, T. Klocke, M. Reinecke, N. Sieber, R. Ursin, M. Wehling, and H. Weier, Implemen- tation attacks against QKD systems (2023), BSI technical report,https://www.bsi.bund.de/EN/ Service-Navi/Publikationen/Studien/QKD-Systems/ Implementation_Attack...

    2023

  11. [11]

    A. N. Bugge, S. Sauge, A. M. M. Ghazali, J. Skaar, L. Ly- dersen, and V. Makarov, Laser damage helps the eaves- dropper in quantum cryptography, Phys. Rev. Lett.112, 070503 (2014)

    2014

  12. [12]

    Makarov, J.-P

    V. Makarov, J.-P. Bourgoin, P. Chaiwongkhot, M. Gagn´ e, T. Jennewein, S. Kaiser, R. Kashyap, M. Legr´ e, C. Minshull, and S. Sajeed, Creation of back- doors in quantum communications via laser damage, Phys. Rev. A94, 030302 (2016)

    2016

  13. [13]

    Huang, R

    A. Huang, R. Li, V. Egorov, S. Tchouragoulov, K. Ku- mar, and V. Makarov, Laser-damage attack against opti- cal attenuators in quantum key distribution, Phys. Rev. Appl.13, 034017 (2020)

    2020

  14. [14]

    Ponosova, D

    A. Ponosova, D. Ruzhitskaya, P. Chaiwongkhot, V. Egorov, V. Makarov, and A. Huang, Protecting fiber- optic quantum key distribution sources against light- injection attacks, PRX Quantum3, 040307 (2022)

    2022

  15. [15]

    L. Han, Y. Li, H. Tan, W. Zhang, W. Cai, J. Yin, J. Ren, F. Xu, S. Liao, and C. Peng, Effect of light injection on the security of practical quantum key distribution, Phys. Rev. Appl.20, 044013 (2023)

    2023

  16. [16]

    Bugai, A

    K. Bugai, A. Zyzykin, D. Bulavkin, S. Bogdanov, I. Sushchev, and D. Dvoretskiy, Laser damage attack on a simple optical attenuator widely used in fiber-based QKD systems, inProc. 2022 International Conference Laser Optics (ICLO)(IEEE, 2022) p. 393

    2022

  17. [17]

    Pljonkin, K

    A. Pljonkin, K. Rumyantsev, and P. K. Singh, Synchro- nization in quantum key distribution systems, Cryptogr. 1, 18 (2017)

    2017

  18. [18]

    Kurochkin, M

    Y. Kurochkin, M. Papadovasilakis, A. Trushechkin, R. Piera, and J. A. Grieve, A practical transmitter de- vice for passive state BB84 quantum key distribution, arXiv:2405.08481 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv

  19. [19]

    Kerckhoffs, La cryptographie militaire, J

    A. Kerckhoffs, La cryptographie militaire, J. des Sciences MilitairesIX, 5 (1883)

  20. [20]

    R. M. Wood,Laser-Induced Damage of Optical Materials, 1st ed. (CRC Press, 2003)

    2003

  21. [21]

    X. Kang, P. Ye, S. Wang, G.-W. Zhang, Z. Wang, J.- L.Chen, Z. Yin, D.-Y. He, W. Chen, G.-Y. Fan-Yuan, G.-C. Guo, and Z.-F. Han, Effect of femtosecond-pulse- injection silicon photonic modulators on the security of quantum key distribution, Phys. Rev. Appl.23, 021014 (2025)

    2025

  22. [22]

    Manenkov, Fundamental mechanisms of laser-induced damage in optical materials: today’s state of understand- ing and problems, Opt

    A. Manenkov, Fundamental mechanisms of laser-induced damage in optical materials: today’s state of understand- ing and problems, Opt. Eng.53, 010901 (2014)

    2014

  23. [23]

    B. C. Stuart, M. D. Feit, A. M. Rubenchik, B. W. Shore, and M. D. Perry, Laser-induced damage in dielectrics with nanosecond to subpicosecond pulses, Phys. Rev. Lett.74, 2248 (1995)

    1995

  24. [24]

    Q. Peng, B. Gao, K. Zaitsev, D. Wang, J. Ding, Y. Liu, Q. Liao, Y. Guo, A. Huang, and J. Wu, Security bound- aries of an optical-power limiter for protecting quantum- key-distribution systems, Phys. Rev. Appl.21, 014026 (2024)

    2024

  25. [25]

    C. W. Carr, H. B. Radousky, and S. G. Demos, Wave- length dependence of laser-induced damage: Determin- ing the damage initiation mechanisms, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 127402 (2003)

    2003

  26. [26]

    Chambonneau, J.-L

    M. Chambonneau, J.-L. Rullier, P. Grua, and L. Lamaign` ere, Wavelength dependence of the mech- anisms governing the formation of nanosecond laser- induced damage in fused silica, Opt. Express.26, 21819 (2018)

    2018

  27. [27]

    Lucamarini, I

    M. Lucamarini, I. Choi, M. B. Ward, J. F. Dynes, Z. L. Yuan, and A. J. Shields, Practical security bounds against the Trojan-horse attack in quantum key distri- bution, Phys. Rev. X5, 031030 (2015)

    2015

  28. [28]

    D. D. Ruzhitskaya, I. V. Zhluktova, M. A. Petrov, K. A. Zaitsev, P. P. Acheva, N. A. Zunikov, A. V. Shilko, D. Akta, F. Johlinger, D. O. Trefilov, A. A. Ponosova, V. A. Kamynin, and V. V. Makarov, Vulnerabilities in the quantum key distribution system induced under a pulsed laser attack, Sci. Tech. J. Inf. Technol. Mech. Opt. 21, 837 (2021), in Russian

    2021

  29. [29]

    Ponosova, I

    A. Ponosova, I. Zhluktova, D. Ruzhitskaya, D. Tre- filov, A. Huang, A. Wolf, V. Kamynin, V. Tsvetkov, and V. Makarov, Pulsed laser attack at 1061 nm po- tentially compromises quantum key distribution, Appl. Phys. Lett.127, 194002 (2025)

    2025

  30. [30]

    H. Tan, M. Petrov, W. Zhang, L. Han, S.-K. Liao, V. Makarov, F. Xu, and J.-W. Pan, Wide-spectrum se- curity of quantum key distribution, PRX Quantum6, 040331 (2025)

    2025

  31. [31]

    A. I. Trikshev, V. A. Kamynin, V. B. Tsvetkov, and O. N. Egorova, High-power pulsed ytterbium fibre laser with 10µJ pulse energy, Opt. Eng.12, 1085 (2016)

    2016

  32. [32]

    I. V. Zhluktova, S. A. Filatova, A. I. Trikshev, V. A. Kamynin, and V. B. Tsvetkov, All-fiber 1125 nm spec- trally selected subnanosecond source, Appl. Opt.59, 9081 (2020)

    2020

  33. [33]

    Sajeed, I

    S. Sajeed, I. Radchenko, S. Kaiser, J.-P. Bourgoin, A. Pappa, L. Monat, M. Legr´ e, and V. Makarov, Attacks exploiting deviation of mean photon number in quan- tum key distribution and coin tossing, Phys. Rev. A91, 032326 (2015)

    2015

  34. [34]

    Huang, ´A

    A. Huang, ´A. Navarrete, S.-H. Sun, P. Chaiwongkhot, M. Curty, and V. Makarov, Laser-seeding attack in quantum key distribution, Phys. Rev. Appl.12, 064043 (2019)

    2019

  35. [35]

    Zheng, P

    Y. Zheng, P. Huang, A. Huang, J. Peng, and G. Zeng, Practical security of continuous-variable quantum key distribution with reduced optical attenuation, Phys. Rev. A100, 012313 (2019)

    2019

  36. [36]

    Jouguet, S

    P. Jouguet, S. Kunz-Jacques, A. Leverrier, P. Grangier, and E. Diamanti, Experimental demonstration of long- distance continuous-variable quantum key distribution, Nat. Photonics7, 378 (2013)

    2013

  37. [37]

    A. V. Smith and B. T. Do, Bulk and surface laser damage of silica by picosecond and nanosecond pulses at 1064 nm, Appl. Opt.47, 812 (2008)

    2008

  38. [38]

    Amina, L. Ji, T. Yan, Y. Wang, and L. Li, Characteristics 10 of 1064 nm picosecond laser induced filamentary tracks and damages in sapphire, Opt. Laser Technol.116, 232 (2019)

    2019

  39. [39]

    Azadeh,Fiber Optics Engineering, 2009th ed

    M. Azadeh,Fiber Optics Engineering, 2009th ed. (Springer, 2009)

    2009

  40. [40]

    D. L. Kallepalli, A. T. Godfrey, J. Walia, F. Variola, A. Staudte, C. Zhang, Z. J. Jakubek, and P. Corkum, Multiphoton laser-induced confined chemical changes in polymer films, Opt. Express28, 11267 (2005)

    2005

  41. [41]

    Bityurin, B

    N. Bityurin, B. S. Luk’yanchuk, M. H. Hong, and T. C. Chong, Models for laser ablation of polymers, Chem. Rev 103, 519 (2003)

    2003

  42. [42]

    Urech and T

    L. Urech and T. Lippert,Photochemistry and Photo- physics of Polymer Materials(John Wiley & Sons, Ltd,

  43. [43]

    Chap. 14, pp. 541–568

  44. [44]

    Qingliang, W

    S. Qingliang, W. Tiyuan, S. Qiang, Y. Fang, L. Hejun, and M. Fu, Unraveling of the laser drilling of car- bon/carbon composites: Ablation mechanisms, shape evolution, and damage evaluation, Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf.184, 103978 (2023)

    2023

  45. [45]

    Scarani, A

    V. Scarani, A. Ac´ ın, G. Ribordy, and N. Gisin, Quantum cryptography protocols robust against photon number splitting attacks for weak laser pulse implementations, Phys. Rev. Lett.92, 057901 (2004)

    2004

  46. [46]

    L. C. Comandar, M. Lucamarini, B. Fr¨ ohlich, J. F. Dynes, A. W. Sharpe, S. W.-B. Tam, Z. L. Yuan, R. V. Penty, and A. J. Shields, Quantum key distribution with- out detector vulnerabilities using optically seeded lasers, Nat. Photonics10, 312 (2020)

    2020

  47. [47]

    McGarry, K

    C. McGarry, K. Harrington, A. O. C. Davis, P. J. Mosley, and K. R. Rusimova, Microstructured optical fibers for quantum applications: perspective, APL quantum.1, 2835 (2024)

    2024