Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 47 references

Quantum hydrodynamics of a single particle

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A single photon from a quantum dot becomes a propagating polariton whose scattering from a defect maps its own interference pattern in two dimensions.

desk verdict First 2D mapping of single-polariton self-interference from a QD source; one missing g2 measurement on the output, but the core result holds up. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.03472 v2 pith:JOBPPTDL submitted 2019-08-09 cond-mat.quant-gas cond-mat.mes-hallphysics.app-phphysics.opticsquant-ph

D. G. Suárez-Forero , V. Ardizzone , S. F. Covre da Silva , M. Reindl , A. Fieramosca , L. Polimeno , M. de Giorgi , L. Dominici
show 6 more authors
L. N. Pfeiffer G. Gigli D. Ballarini F. Laussy A. Rastelli D. Sanvitto
This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.quant-gascond-mat.mes-hallphysics.app-phphysics.opticsquant-ph
keywords singlepolaritonsquantumdotsingle-photonsourcemicrocavitywave-particledualityantibunchingself-interferencereal-spaceimaginghydrodynamics
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper reports an experiment in which single photons emitted by a semiconductor quantum dot are injected resonantly into a planar microcavity and become individual propagating exciton–polaritons. By imaging the light emitted along the propagation path in both reflection and transmission, the authors map the polariton field in real space over distances up to roughly $400\,\mu\mathrm{m}$. When a structural defect scatters the incoming polariton, the image shows interference fringes that the authors reproduce with a model of one polariton's plane-wave component interfering with its own scattered circular wave. Together with a source antibunching measurement of $g^{(2)}(0)=0.16\pm0.05$, they claim this is the first spatial mapping of the self-interference of a single quantum particle hitting an obstacle. If correct, the result demonstrates wave–particle duality for a single propagating solid-state quasiparticle and opens a route toward single-polariton quantum devices.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is resonant injection of a single photon into the lower polariton branch of a planar microcavity. A GaAs quantum dot with a strongly antibunched emission line is tuned so that one exciton transition matches the lower polariton branch at a chosen in-plane momentum; the photon is then converted into a single exciton-polariton, a hybrid light-matter quasiparticle, which propagates with a known group velocity until it decays and emits. The scattering pattern is modeled by a simple superposition: an incoming plane wave representing the propagating polariton plus a circular wave radiated by a point-like structural defect whose radius is much smaller than the in-plane wavelength. This two-wave model is what connects the observed fringes to the self-interference of one particle's wavefunction; the defect-size simulations show that a finite obstacle would imprint higher-order fringes absent from the data.

What would settle it

Measure the second-order correlation function $g^{(2)}(0)$ of the light emitted by the polaritons in the transmission configuration; if the emitted light is not antibunched, or if a weak coherent laser field at the same repetition rate produces the identical fringe pattern, the claim that the fringes are single-polariton self-interference would lose its experimental support.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a single photon can be converted into a single propagating polariton, and that the polariton's own wavefunction produces the observed interference. The experiment uses a GaAs quantum dot with $g^{(2)}(0)=0.16\pm0.05$ to resonantly pump the lower polariton branch; from the exponential decay of the real-space intensity profile and the group velocity deduced from the dispersion, the polariton lifetime is estimated at about $25\,\mathrm{ps}$. In the presence of a defect whose size is much smaller than the in-plane wavelength $\lambda_\parallel \approx 20\,\mu\mathrm{m}$, the measured fringes, including fringes ahead of the obstacle, are matched by a superposition of the incoming plane wave and a circular wave scattered from a point-like defect. Because the pulse period exceeds the polariton lifetime by more than $285{,}000$ times, only one polariton is in the cavity at any instant, so the authors argue that no interference between different photons can explain the pattern; the fringes must come from the self-interference of a single particle's wavefunction.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the field propagating inside the microcavity really is a single polariton: the input source is antibunched and the pulses are sparse, but the light emitted by the polaritons after propagation is not itself tested for antibunching, so the single-particle interpretation rests on the source statistics and on the assumption that linear resonant injection preserves them.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Single polaritons can be created on demand by resonant single-photon injection, providing a building block for integrated polaritonic quantum circuits.
  • Because polariton emission is exponential in time, each injected particle maps its own propagation across the full two-dimensional plane rather than only at a detection screen.
  • The shared GaAs/AlGaAs materials basis of the quantum dot and the microcavity points toward fully integrated single-polariton devices on one chip.
  • Extending the same imaging to multiple polaritons could bring nonlocal and few-particle quantum effects into real-space view.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Editorial inference: the spatial fringe pattern alone would also be produced by a weak coherent field, so a verification of antibunching on the polariton-emitted light would make the single-particle interpretation self-contained rather than inherited from the source.
  • Editorial inference: the same point-defect model could be turned around and used as a real-space probe of microcavity disorder, since defects of finite size would imprint higher-order interferences with phase discontinuities.
  • Editorial inference: inserting a controllable phase or path marker after the defect could turn this geometry into a delayed-choice test, because the full field ahead of the obstacle remains visible while the decision is made.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper reports an experiment in which photons from a single GaAs quantum dot, with a measured g(2)(0) = 0.16 ± 0.05, are resonantly injected into a planar microcavity polariton system in both reflection and transmission geometries. The authors image the real-space propagation of the resulting polaritons over distances up to about 400 µm, estimate a polariton lifetime of about 25 ps and group velocities from the dispersion, and observe, in the presence of a structural defect, an interference pattern that they model as the superposition of an incoming plane wave and a spherical wave scattered from a point-like defect. The abstract claims that this imaging, together with the source antibunching, constitutes the first spatial mapping of the self-interference of a single quantum particle hitting an obstacle.

Significance. The experiment targets an interesting and timely goal: bringing polariton hydrodynamics to the single-quantum level and interfacing a deterministic QD single-photon source with a polariton microcavity. The strengths are the clean resonance control (Fig. 2f), the measured source antibunching, the use of the measured in-plane momentum in the interference model, and the finite-defect simulations in Fig. S4 that support the point-like scatterer assumption. If the single-polariton field were directly characterized, this would be a valuable step toward single-polariton quantum devices. As it stands, the central quantum-mechanical claim rests on an inference from source statistics rather than on a measurement of the propagating field, so the significance is conditional.

major comments (2)
  1. [Results – transmission configuration; Fig. 3d and Fig. 4] The central claim that the fringes in Fig. 3d map the self-interference of a single quantum particle is not directly established, because the observable shown is a first-order intensity image. For a single-photon Fock state and a weak coherent state with the same spatial mode, the intensity I(r) ∝ ⟨E^(−)(r)E^(+)(r)⟩ is identical, so the interference pattern by itself cannot certify single-particle character. The antibunching measurement g(2)(0) = 0.16 ± 0.05 is performed on the QD source before injection (Fig. 1b and Fig. S6), and no g(2) measurement is reported on the light emitted by the polaritons after propagation. Since the linear injection process is assumed to preserve the single-photon character but is not checked, the abstract's 'first demonstration' claim is stronger than the data warrant. The authors should either provide a g(2) measurement of the polariton-emitted light, or explicitly temper the title and abstract to state that the single-particle character is inferred from the source statistics and linearity rather than directly demonstrated.
  2. [Discussion and abstract – 'single-particle self-interference' claim] The interference model in Fig. 4 is a linear wave-optics calculation: a plane wave plus a spherical wave. Agreement with this model is a useful consistency check, but it cannot distinguish quantum from classical statistics, because a weak coherent field would produce the same first-order interference pattern. The sentence in the abstract that the imaging 'together with a measurement of antibunching' constitutes a demonstration of single-particle self-interference therefore overreaches: the antibunching is a property of the input source, not of the polariton field that produces the fringes. A post-propagation nonclassicality witness, such as g(2) < 1 on the polariton-emitted light or a heralded single-event measurement, is needed to make the claimed distinction.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Results – '285,000 lifetimes' sentence] The statement that each polariton is separated from the next by more than 285,000 lifetimes is consistent with the stated average single-photon rate of about 140,000 per second and a 25 ps lifetime (mean interval ≈ 7.1 µs ≈ 285,000 lifetimes), but the wording 'repetition rate' is confusing because the laser repetition rate is 320 MHz while the relevant rate is the average single-photon arrival rate. Please clarify this in the text.
  2. [Fig. 4 caption and Methods] The relative amplitude of the plane wave and circular wave used in the interference model is not stated. Please specify the exact parameters, or state explicitly that the red contour lines are isointensity lines of a normalized sum with no additional adjustable amplitude.
  3. [Supplementary S5 – partial scattering model] The tilted momentum direction in the partial-scattering simulation (approximately 45°) appears to be an adjustable parameter. Please state explicitly which quantities are fixed by the experiment and which are chosen for consistency, so that the fit's evidentiary weight can be assessed.
  4. [Discussion – fringes ahead of the obstacle] The phrase about the polariton 'not yet supposed to know that an obstacle lays ahead' is misleading; since the image integrates over emission times, the interference ahead of the obstacle can be understood as overlap between the forward component and the backscattered component at different times. Please rephrase to avoid the appearance of retrocausality.
  5. [Throughout] Minor typographical issues include 'Enhaced Charged Coupled Device' (should be 'enhanced charge-coupled device'), 'an thus' (should be 'and thus'), 'developement' (should be 'development'), and 'Unviversity' (should be 'University').

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation: the interference model is an independent consistency check and the single-polariton premise rests on an externally measured source g(2).

full rationale

The paper's central claim is an experimental observation (spatial mapping of the self-interference of a single polariton), not a derived prediction. The interference fringes are modeled by superposing a plane wave and a spherical wave (Fig. 4 and SI S4, S5) using the independently measured in-plane wavevector k ≈ 0.28 µm−1; no parameter is fitted to the fringe pattern itself, and the model is checked against simulated defect-size patterns and the free-propagation image. This is a consistency check with standard wave optics rather than a reduction of the conclusion to its inputs. The single-particle character is imported from the quantum dot source, where g(2)(0) = 0.16 ± 0.05 is measured with a Hanbury Brown and Twiss setup (Results, Fig. 1b) and repeated after each pulse-rate doubling (SI S6), not from the fringes; the inference that resonant injection preserves that character is supported by prior experiments [27, 28] by overlapping authors, but those are external, falsifiable measurements rather than an unverified self-citation chain. The absence of a downstream g(2) measurement and the arithmetic slip about '285,000 lifetimes' (with a 320 MHz repetition rate and a 25 ps lifetime, the separation is about 125 lifetimes, not 285,000) are evidence and correctness concerns rather than circularity: a weak coherent field would produce identical fringes, but this does not make any equation equal to its own input. No step in the paper's derivation chain is equivalent by definition or by construction to its conclusion.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim is an experimental observation. It uses standard single-particle quantum mechanics, a linear coupling assumption, and a point-like defect model. The in-plane momentum is measured rather than fitted to the fringes; the only manually adjusted quantity is the tilted momentum direction in a supplementary simulation. No new entities are introduced.

free parameters (2)
  • In-plane momentum k (transmission) = 0.28 µm^-1
    Input to the plane-wave plus circular-wave interference model in Fig. 4c; determined from the measured microcavity dispersion and injection angle, not fitted to the fringe pattern.
  • Tilted momentum direction for partial-scattering simulation = approximately 45 degrees
    Introduced in Supplementary Fig. S5; the paper states the tilted direction is an approximation valid only locally and adjusts it to reproduce the weak fringes.
assumptions (4)
  • standard math A single quantum particle's wavefunction interferes with itself, so the time-integrated spatial intensity of many single-particle emissions forms an interference pattern.
    Used to interpret the fringes in Fig. 3d as self-interference; stated in the Discussion.
  • domain assumption Linear resonant coupling of a single-photon Fock state to the cavity mode produces a single-polariton excitation, preserving the single-particle sector.
    No direct measurement of the polariton field g2; the single-particle propagation is inferred from the QD source g2(0)=0.16 and timing arguments (Results, S6).
  • domain assumption The structural defect acts as a point-like scatterer with radius much smaller than the polariton in-plane wavelength of about 20 µm.
    Supported by the simulations in Supplementary Fig. S4; used to justify the plane-wave plus circular-wave model in Fig. 4.
  • domain assumption Polaritons emit photons continuously along their propagation with an exponential decay, so the EMCCD image maps the spatial probability distribution of the propagating wavefunction.
    Invoked in the Discussion to relate the time-integrated image to the spatial dynamics of the single polariton.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Quantum hydrodynamics of a single particle." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/JOBPPTDL

@misc{pith2026190803472,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Quantum hydrodynamics of a single particle},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/JOBPPTDL}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.03472}
}
read the original abstract

Semiconductor devices are strong competitors in the race for the development of quantum com-putational systems. In this work, we interface two semiconductor building blocks of different di-mensionality and with complementary properties: (1) a quantum dot hosting a single exciton andacting as a nearly ideal single-photon emitter and (2) a quantum well in a 2D microcavity sustain-ing polaritons, which are known for their strong interactions and unique hydrodynamics propertiesincluding ultrafast real-time monitoring of their propagation and phase-mapping. In the presentexperiment we can thus observe how the injected single particles propagate and evolve inside themicrocavity, giving rise to hydrodynamics features typical of macroscopic systems despite their in-trinsic genuine quantum nature. In the presence of a structural defect, we observe the celebratedquantum interference of a single particle that produces fringes reminiscent of a wave propagation.While this behaviour could be theoretically expected, our imaging of such an interference pattern,together with a measurement of antibunching, constitutes the first demonstration of spatial mappingof the self-interference of a single quantum particle hitting an obstacle.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.03472 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. a) Schematic picture of the experiment: a pulsed laser pumps a QD to generate single photons that are injected [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. a) Energy dispersion of the microcavity-quantum well system at the point of incidence of photons in reflection [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. a) Energy dispersion of the microcavity at the photon injection point in transmission configuration, compared with the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. a) Numerical space distribution of the electric field of an incoming plane wave and b) for a circular wave, as it could [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

47 extracted references · 46 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Integrated solution for quantum technologies

    Rachel Won. Integrated solution for quantum technologies. Nature Photonics, 13(2):77–79, jan 2019

    work page 2019

  2. [2]

    Semiconductor quantum dots as an ideal source of polarization-entangled photon pairs on-demand: A review, 2018

    Daniel Huber, Marcus Reindl, Johannes Aberl, Armando Rastelli, and Rinaldo Trotta. Semiconductor quantum dots as an ideal source of polarization-entangled photon pairs on-demand: A review, 2018

    work page 2018

  3. [3]

    Elshaari, Iman Esmaeil Zadeh, Andreas Fognini, Michael E

    Ali W. Elshaari, Iman Esmaeil Zadeh, Andreas Fognini, Michael E. Reimer, Dan Dalacu, Philip J. Poole, Val Zwiller, and Klaus D. Jns. On-chip single photon filtering and multiplexing in hybrid quantum photonic circuits. Nature Communications, 8(1), aug 2017

    work page 2017

  4. [4]

    Kwiat, Edo Waks, Andrew G

    Paul G. Kwiat, Edo Waks, Andrew G. White, Ian Appelbaum, and Philippe H. Eberhard. Ultrabright source of polarization-entangled photons. Phys. Rev. A, 60:R773–R776, Aug 1999

    work page 1999

  5. [5]

    A wavelength-tunable fiber-coupled source of narrowband entangled photons

    Alessandro Fedrizzi, Thomas Herbst, Andreas Poppe, Thomas Jennewein, and Anton Zeilinger. A wavelength-tunable fiber-coupled source of narrowband entangled photons. Opt. Express, 15(23):15377–15386, Nov 2007

    work page 2007

  6. [6]

    Superconducting nanowire single-photon detector on dielectric optical films for visible and near infrared wavelengths

    Lixing You, Hao Li, Weijun Zhang, Xiaoyan Yang, Lu Zhang, Sijing Chen, Hui Zhou, Zhen Wang, and Xiaoming Xie. Superconducting nanowire single-photon detector on dielectric optical films for visible and near infrared wavelengths. Superconductor Science and Technology, 2017

    work page 2017

  7. [7]

    Elshaari, Gabriele Bulgarini, Johannes W

    Ronan Gourgues, Iman Esmaeil Zadeh, Ali W. Elshaari, Gabriele Bulgarini, Johannes W. N. Los, Julien Zichi, Dan Dalacu, Philip J. Poole, Sander N. Dorenbos, and Val Zwiller. Controlled integration of selected detectors and emitters in photonic integrated circuits. Optics Express, 27(3):3710, feb 2019

    work page 2019

  8. [8]

    Portalupi, Konstantin llin, Michael Jetter, Michael Siegel, and Peter Michler

    Mario Schwartz, Ekkehart Schmidt, Ulrich Rengstl, Florian Hornung, Stefan Hepp, Simone L. Portalupi, Konstantin llin, Michael Jetter, Michael Siegel, and Peter Michler. Fully on-chip single-photon Hanbury-Brown and Twiss experiment on a monolithic semiconductorsuperconductor platform. Nano Letters, 18(11):6892–6897, 2018

    work page 2018

Show all 47 references
  1. [9]

    Carolan, C

    J. Carolan, C. Harrold, C. Sparrow, E. Martin-Lopez, N. J. Russell, J. W. Silverstone, P. J. Shadbolt, N. Matsuda, M. Oguma, M. Itoh, G. D. Marshall, M. G. Thompson, J. C. F. Matthews, T. Hashimoto, J. L. O’Brien, and A. Laing. Universal linear optics. Science, 349(6249):711–7...

    2015

  2. [10]

    Sharapova, Raimund Ricken, Torsten Meier, Harald Her- rmann, and Christine Silberhorn

    Kai-Hong Luo, Sebastian Brauner, Christof Eigner, Polina R. Sharapova, Raimund Ricken, Torsten Meier, Harald Her- rmann, and Christine Silberhorn. Nonlinear integrated quantum electro-optic circuits. Science Advances, 5(1):eaat1451, jan 2019

    2019

  3. [11]

    Moss, Roberto Morandotti, Alexander L

    David J. Moss, Roberto Morandotti, Alexander L. Gaeta, and Michal Lipson. New CMOS-compatible platforms based on silicon nitride and hydex for nonlinear optics. Nature Photonics, 7(8):597–607, aug 2013

    2013

  4. [12]

    H. Jin, F. M. Liu, P. Xu, J. L. Xia, M. L. Zhong, Y. Yuan, J. W. Zhou, Y. X. Gong, W. Wang, and S. N. Zhu. On-chip generation and manipulation of entangled photons based on reconfigurable lithium-niobate waveguide circuits. Physical Review Letters, 113(10), sep 2014

    2014

  5. [13]

    Integrated photonic quantum gates for polarization qubits

    Andrea Crespi, Roberta Ramponi, Roberto Osellame, Linda Sansoni, Irene Bongioanni, Fabio Sciarrino, Giuseppe Vallone, and Paolo Mataloni. Integrated photonic quantum gates for polarization qubits. Nature Communications, 2(1), sep 2011

    2011

  6. [14]

    Politi, M

    A. Politi, M. J. Cryan, J. G. Rarity, S. Yu, and J. L. O’Brien. Silica-on-silicon waveguide quantum circuits. Science, 320(5876):646–649, may 2008

    2008

  7. [15]

    Experimental Boson sampling

    Max Tillmann, Borivoje Daki´ c, Ren´ e Heilmann, Stefan Nolte, Alexander Szameit, and Philip Walther. Experimental Boson sampling. Nature Photonics, 7(7):540–544, may 2013

    2013

  8. [16]

    Advances in quantum metrology

    Vittorio Giovannetti, Seth Lloyd, and Lorenzo Maccone. Advances in quantum metrology. Nature Photonics, 5(4):222–229, apr 2011. 8

    2011

  9. [17]

    Sanvitto and S

    D. Sanvitto and S. K´ ena-Cohen. The road towards polaritonic devices. Nature Materials, 15(10):1061–1073, Jul 2016

    2016

  10. [18]

    Ballarini, M

    D. Ballarini, M. De Giorgi, E. Cancellieri, R. Houdr´ e, E. Giacobino, R. Cingolani, A. Bramati, G. Gigli, and D. Sanvitto. All-optical polariton transistor. Nature Communications, 4(1), apr 2013

    2013

  11. [19]

    Leyder, T

    C. Leyder, T. C. H. Liew, A. V. Kavokin, I. A. Shelykh, M. Romanelli, J. Ph. Karr, E. Giacobino, and A. Bramati. Interference of coherent polariton beams in microcavities: Polarization-controlled optical gates. Physical Review Letters, 99(19), nov 2007

    2007

  12. [20]

    Carusotto and C

    I. Carusotto and C. Ciuti. Quantum fluids of light. Rev. Mod. Phys., 85:299–366, Feb 2013

    2013

  13. [21]

    Quantum statistics of polariton parametric interactions

    Mathias Sassermann, Zoltn Vrs, Mohsen Razavi, Wolfgang Langbein, and Gregor Weihs. Quantum statistics of polariton parametric interactions. arXiv:1808.01127v1, 2018

    2018 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Boulier, M

    T. Boulier, M. Bamba, A. Amo, C. Adrados, A. Lemaitre, E. Galopin, I. Sagnes, J. Bloch, C. Ciuti, E. Giacobino, and A. Bramati. Polariton-generated intensity squeezing in semiconductor micropillars. Nature Communications, 5(1), feb 2014

    2014

  15. [23]

    Bunching visibility of optical parametric emission in a semiconductor microcavity

    Vincenzo Ardizzone, Marco Abbarchi, Aristide Lemaitre, Isabelle Sagnes, Pascale Senellart, Jacqueline Bloch, Claude Delalande, Jerome Tignon, and Philippe Roussignol. Bunching visibility of optical parametric emission in a semiconductor microcavity. Physical Review B, 86(4), jul 2012

    2012

  16. [24]

    Towards polariton blockade of confined exciton-polaritons

    Delteil Aymeric, Fink Thomas, Schade Anne, H¨ ofling Sven, Schneider Christian, and Imamo˘ glu Ata. Towards polariton blockade of confined exciton-polaritons. Nature Materials, 18(3):219222, 2019

    2019

  17. [25]

    Emer- gence of quantum correlations from interacting fibre-cavity polaritons

    Mu˜ noz-Matutano Guillermo, Wood Andrew, Johnsson Mattias, Vidal Xavier, Baragiola Ben Q., Reinhard Andreas, Lema- tre Aristide, Bloch Jacqueline, Amo Alberto, Nogues Gilles, Besga Benjamin, Richard Maxime, and Volz Thomas. Emer- gence of quantum correlations from interacting ...

    2019

  18. [26]

    Quantum nonlinearities at the single-particle level

    Gerace Dario, Laussy Fabrice, and Sanvitto Daniele. Quantum nonlinearities at the single-particle level. Nature Materials, 18(3):200201, 2019

    2019

  19. [27]

    J. C. L´ opez Carre˜ no, C. S’anchez Mu˜ noz, D. Sanvitto, E. Del Valle, and F. P. Laussy. Exciting Polaritons with Quantum Light. Physical Review Letters, 2015

    2015

  20. [28]

    ´Alvaro Cuevas, Juan Camilo L´ opez Carre˜ no, Blanca Silva, Milena De Giorgi, Daniel G. Su´ arez-Forero, Carlos S´ anchez Mu˜ noz, Antonio Fieramosca, Filippo Cardano, Lorenzo Marrucci, Vittorianna Tasco, Giorgio Biasiol, Elena Del Valle, Lorenzo Dominici, Dario Ballarini, Gi...

    2018

  21. [29]

    Johnsen, Deny R

    Piotr Kolenderski, Carmelo Scarcella, Kelsey D. Johnsen, Deny R. Hamel, Catherine Holloway, Lynden K. Shalm, Simone Tisa, Alberto Tosi, Kevin J. Resch, and Thomas Jennewein. Time-resolved double-slit interference pattern measurement with entangled photons. Scientific Reports, 4...

    2014

  22. [30]

    The Feynman Lectures on Physics - Volume 3: Quantum mechanics

    Feynman. The Feynman Lectures on Physics - Volume 3: Quantum mechanics. Addison-Wesley, 2010

    2010

  23. [31]

    Aspden, Peter A

    Paul-Antoine Moreau, Ermes Toninelli, Thomas Gregory, Reuben S. Aspden, Peter A. Morris, and Miles J. Padgett. Imaging bell-type nonlocal behavior. Science Advances, 5(7):eaaw2563, jul 2019

    2019

  24. [32]

    A wavelength-tunable fiber-coupled source of narrowband entangled photons

    Alessandro Fedrizzi, Thomas Herbst, Andreas Poppe, Thomas Jennewein, and Anton Zeilinger. A wavelength-tunable fiber-coupled source of narrowband entangled photons. Optics Express, 2007

    2007

  25. [33]

    J¨ ons, Katharina D

    Lucas Schweickert, Klaus D. J¨ ons, Katharina D. Zeuner, Saimon Filipe Covre da Silva, Huiying Huang, Thomas Lettner, Marcus Reindl, Julien Zichi, Rinaldo Trotta, Armando Rastelli, and Val Zwiller. On-demand generation of background-free single photons from a solid-state sourc...

    2018

  26. [34]

    Strain-Tunable GaAs Quantum Dot: A Nearly Dephasing-Free Source of Entangled Photon Pairs on Demand

    Daniel Huber, Marcus Reindl, Saimon Filipe Covre Da Silva, Christian Schimpf, Javier Martn-Snchez, Huiying Huang, Giovanni Piredda, Johannes Edlinger, Armando Rastelli, and Rinaldo Trotta. Strain-Tunable GaAs Quantum Dot: A Nearly Dephasing-Free Source of Entangled Photon Pair...

    2018

  27. [35]

    Baumberg, Guillaume Malpuech, and Fabrice P

    Alexey Kavokin, Jeremy J. Baumberg, Guillaume Malpuech, and Fabrice P. Laussy. Microcavities. Oxford Science, second edition, 2008

    2008

  28. [36]

    Wildmann, Oliver G

    Daniel Huber, Marcus Reindl, Yongheng Huo, Huiying Huang, Johannes S. Wildmann, Oliver G. Schmidt, Armando Rastelli, and Rinaldo Trotta. Highly indistinguishable and strongly entangled photons from symmetric GaAs quantum dots. Nature Communications, 2017

    2017

  29. [37]

    Moon, Jong Lam Lee, and Hyung Mo Yoo

    Eun A. Moon, Jong Lam Lee, and Hyung Mo Yoo. Selective wet etching of GaAs on AlxGa1-xAs for Al- GaAs/InGaAs/AlGaAs pseudomorphic high electron mobility transistor. Journal of Applied Physics, 1998

    1998

  30. [38]

    Weber, Daniel Huber, Christian Schimpf, Saimon F

    Marcus Reindl, Jonas H. Weber, Daniel Huber, Christian Schimpf, Saimon F. Covre da Silva, Simone L. Portalupi, Rinaldo Trotta, Peter Michler, and Armando Rastelli. Highly indistinguishable single photons from incoherently and coherently excited GaAs quantum dots. arXiv e-print...

    1901 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Wave-particle duality for single photons

    Alain Aspect and Philippe Grangier. Wave-particle duality for single photons. Hyperfine Interactions, 37(1):1–17, Dec 1987

    1987

  32. [40]

    Tonomura, J

    A. Tonomura, J. Endo, T. Matsuda, T. Kawasaki, and H. Ezawa. Demonstration of singleelectron buildup of an interference pattern. American Journal of Physics, 1989

    1989

  33. [41]

    Ebbesen, Alexandre Baron, Jean-Claude Rodier, Jean-Paul Hugonin, Philippe Lalanne, Jean-Jacques Greffet, Ga´ etan Messin, and Fran¸ cois Marquier

    Marie-Christine Dheur, Elo¨ ıse Devaux, Thomas W. Ebbesen, Alexandre Baron, Jean-Claude Rodier, Jean-Paul Hugonin, Philippe Lalanne, Jean-Jacques Greffet, Ga´ etan Messin, and Fran¸ cois Marquier. Single-plasmon interferences. Science Advances, 2016

    2016

  34. [42]

    Aspden, Miles J

    Reuben S. Aspden, Miles J. Padgett, and Gabriel C. Spalding. Video recording true single-photon double-slit interference. American Journal of Physics, 84(9):671–677, sep 2016. 9

    2016

  35. [43]

    Anton Zeilinger, Roland Ghler, C. G. Shull, Wolfgang Treimer, and Walter Mampe. Single- and double-slit diffraction of neutrons. Reviews of Modern Physics, 60(4):1067–1073, oct 1988

    1988

  36. [44]

    Wave–particle duality of c60 molecules

    Markus Arndt, Olaf Nairz, Julian Vos-Andreae, Claudia Keller, Gerbrand van der Zouw, and Anton Zeilinger. Wave–particle duality of c60 molecules. Nature, 401(6754):680–682, oct 1999

    1999

  37. [45]

    Jacques, E

    V. Jacques, E. Wu, F. Grosshans, F. Treussart, P. Grangier, A. Aspect, and J.-F. Roch. Experimental realization of Wheeler’s delayed-choice Gedanken experiment. Science, 315:966, 2007

    2007

  38. [46]

    Goswami, C

    K. Goswami, C. Giarmatzi, M. Kewming, F. Costa, C. Branciard, J. Romero, and A.G. White. Indefinite causal order in a quantum switch. Phys. Rev. Lett., 121:090503, 2018

    2018

  39. [47]

    Cilibrizzi, H

    P. Cilibrizzi, H. Ohadi, T. Ostatnicky, A. Askitopoulos, W. Langbein, and P. Lagoudakis. Linear wave dynamics explains observations attributed to dark solitons in a polariton quantum fluid. Phys. Rev. Lett., 113:103901, Sep 2014. i Supporting Information DEDUCTION OF THE POLARI...

    2014

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.