REVIEW 1 cited by
Exceptional points of any order in a single, lossy, waveguide beamsplitter by photon-number-resolved detection
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Signed reviews
abstract
Exceptional points (EPs) are degeneracies of non-Hermitian operators where, in addition to the eigenvalues, corresponding eigenmodes become degenerate. Classical and quantum photonic systems with EPs have attracted tremendous attention due to their unusual properties, topological features, and an enhanced sensitivity that depends on the order of the EP, i.e. the number of degenerate eigenmodes. Yet, experimentally engineering higher-order EPs in classical or quantum domains remains an open challenge due to the stringent symmetry constraints that are required for the coalescence of multiple eigenmodes. Here we analytically show that the number-resolved dynamics of a single, lossy, waveguide beamsplitter, excited by $N$ indistinguishable photons and post-selected to the $N$-photon subspace, will exhibit an EP of order $N+1$. By using the well-established mapping between a beamsplitter Hamiltonian and the perfect state transfer model in the photon-number space, we analytically obtain the time evolution of a general $N$-photon state, and numerically simulate the system's evolution in the post-selected manifold. Our results pave the way towards realizing robust, arbitrary-order EPs on demand in a single device.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
$\mathcal{PT}$-symmetry from Lindblad dynamics in an optomechanical system
The strong-to-weak coupling transition in optomechanical state transfer is interpreted as a passive PT-symmetry breaking transition, with exact Lindblad/non-Hermitian agreement only in the single-excitation subspace.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.