Singly poled thin film lithium niobate waveguide as a tunable source of photon pairs across telecom band

Jasleen Lugani; Jyoti Arya; Muskan Arora; Pranav Chokkara

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 32 references

Singly poled thin film lithium niobate waveguide as a tunable source of photon pairs across telecom band

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A single poling period in a thin-film lithium niobate waveguide can phase-match two different telecom-band SPDC processes, selected by pump wavelength.

desk verdict Simulation-only TFLN design for a single-poling-period dual-SPDC source; the core idea is plausible and well presented, but the 10 nm coincidence needs a tolerance analysis before publication. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.17369 v1 pith:44Z47VSL submitted 2024-11-26 physics.app-ph physics.opticsquant-ph

Muskan Arora , Jyoti Arya , Pranav Chokkara , Jasleen Lugani This is my paper · ORCID

classification physics.app-phphysics.opticsquant-ph PACS 42.65.Lm42.82.Et42.65.Wi

keywords thin-filmlithiumniobatespontaneousparametricdown-conversionquasi-phasematchingtelecomObandCtypeIIphasewaveguidedispersionjointspectralintensity

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 claims that a strongly dispersive thin-film lithium niobate (TFLN) rib waveguide can serve as a switchable source of telecom photon pairs without special domain engineering: one poling period of 3.53 µm phase-matches two different type II spontaneous parametric down-conversion processes. Pumped at 710 nm, the waveguide produces spectrally correlated photon pairs at 1310 nm and 1550 nm; pumped at 775 nm, it produces spectrally uncorrelated photon pairs at 1567 nm and 1533 nm. The authors argue this versatility comes from the waveguide's strong dispersion, which makes the phase mismatch nearly identical for the two processes, unlike weakly dispersive platforms such as PPLN ridge and PPKTP waveguides. If the design works as simulated, a single fabricated waveguide could support both correlated and pure heralded single-photon sources across the telecom O and C bands by tuning only the pump wavelength.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by the quasi-phase-matching identity $\Delta k = 2\pi/\Lambda = 2\pi\sum_{r=s,i}(n_p - n_r)/\lambda_r$, which says that any down-conversion process with the same phase mismatch $\Delta k$ can be enabled by the same poling period $\Lambda$. The numerator $(n_p - n_r)$ is the difference in effective refractive index between pump and signal/idler, and the denominator $\lambda_r$ is the down-converted wavelength; in a strongly dispersive waveguide the numerator changes enough with wavelength to compensate the denominator's change, so two processes in different telecom bands land on the same $\Delta k$. A second mechanism, group-index matching $n_g^s \le n_g^p \le n_g^i$ (or equality with one of them), sets whether the joint spectral amplitude is uncorrelated, and the paper uses it to explain why the 775 nm process is spectrally pure while the 710 nm process is correlated.

What would settle it

Fabricate an 800-nm-top-width, 3.53 µm-period TFLN rib waveguide with the stated cross-section and measure the SPDC spectra under 710 nm and 775 nm pumping: the claim requires simultaneous peaks at 1310/1550 nm for the first and 1533/1567 nm for the second, so seeing only one process phase-matched, or peaks shifted by more than the pump bandwidth, would refute it.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that a nanoscale X-cut TFLN rib waveguide (800 nm top width, 200 nm etch depth, 800 nm film thickness, 80° sidewall angle) has a dispersion profile steep enough that two quite different type II SPDC processes carry the same quasi-phase-matching period. With a common poling period of 3.53 µm, the process pumped at 710 nm phase matches to 1310 nm (TM) and 1550 nm (TE), producing a spectrally correlated state with Schmidt number 1.61; the process pumped at 775 nm phase matches to 1567 nm (TM) and 1533 nm (TE), producing a spectrally uncorrelated state with Schmidt number 1.0056 and 99.45% spectral purity. The same dispersion-based argument shows why conventional weakly dispersive waveguides cannot do this: their phase mismatches for the three representative processes differ too much to share a period.

Load-bearing premise

The paper's central claim rests on the simulated dispersion profile of this specific TFLN waveguide being accurate enough that both phase-matching conditions really coincide at a single poling period; the ideal periods for the two processes differ by only 0.01 µm, so the coincidence is tight and no tolerance analysis is given.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

With a fixed 3.53 µm poling period, the same waveguide is a correlated O/C-band source when pumped at 710 nm and a spectrally pure C-band source when pumped at 775 nm, so the operating mode is selected simply by the pump.
Because a single uniform poling period suffices, the design avoids multi-section domain engineering, which the paper argues is harder to fabricate and reduces SPDC efficiency.
The 775 nm-pumped process yields Schmidt number 1.0056 and 99.45% spectral purity, making it a candidate for high-purity heralded single-photon generation without spectral filtering.
The comparative calculation shows that weakly dispersive PPLN and PPKTP waveguides require poling periods that differ by large factors for the same three processes, so the single-period behavior is tied to strong waveguide dispersion.
The paper also notes that reversing the polarizations in the 710 nm process would yield spectrally uncorrelated telecom O-band pairs at a 3.29 µm poling period.

Reading between the lines

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

We infer that the design's practical margin is untested: since the two ideal poling periods differ by only 0.01 µm (3.54 vs 3.53), fabrication errors, temperature drift, and dispersion-model uncertainty could easily break the coincidence, and the paper reports no tolerance analysis.
The same phase-matching identity suggests a systematic search strategy: for any high-contrast nanoscale waveguide, one can scan pump wavelengths and look for triples whose $\Delta k$ values coincide, potentially generating a catalog of single-grating multi-band sources beyond the two processes shown.
We infer that the 710 nm-pumped correlated state (Schmidt number 1.61) could be tuned continuously toward factorability by varying pump bandwidth or poling period, giving a single device with adjustable spectral correlations; the paper only states that increasing pump bandwidth can optimize the correlations.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Quick take: this is a simulation-only design paper with a plausible central claim—one TFLN waveguide, poled at 3.53 µm, phase matches two type-II SPDC processes: 710 nm → 1310 nm (TM) + 1550 nm (TE) and 775 nm → 1567 nm (TM) + 1533 nm (TE). The modal dispersion calculation is standard, the JSA/Schmidt analysis is clean, and the comparative table with PPLN/PPKTP makes the 'strong dispersion enables multiple processes' point convincingly. That part is fine.

What is actually new: the specific geometry and the optimization that lands two different processes on the same poling period. The paper is honest that the ideal periods initially differ by 0.01 µm and that the down-converted wavelengths are adjusted to get an exact crossing at 3.53 µm. The Schmidt numbers (1.61 and 1.0056) are consistent with the group-index matching argument.

Soft spots, in order. First, the central claim rests on a 10 nm coincidence between two phase-matching curves. There is no tolerance analysis. Fabrication errors in etch depth, top width, sidewall angle, or poling duty cycle can easily shift these curves relative to each other by more than 10 nm. If that happens, no single period works. That is load-bearing, not a nitpick. Second, the paper gives no conversion efficiency or nonlinear overlap integral. Phase matching is necessary but not sufficient for a usable SPDC source. Third, the dispersion curves are imported from the authors' prior work [25] without being re-derived or checked; this matters because the crossing point is exactly where the dispersion model is most sensitive. Minor: the shift from degenerate 1550/1550 (Table 1) to non-degenerate 1567/1533 (Fig. 3) is a design trade-off that should be explicitly flagged rather than presented as the same process. And the comparison with Briggs et al. [11] is too quick; the paper should say what is different about using one period for two distinct wavelength bands versus their simultaneous type-I/type-II demonstration.

The stress-test note is essentially right. The central argument is not fundamentally flawed—it is plausible—but it is fragile. The paper would be materially stronger with a sensitivity analysis and at least an order-of-magnitude brightness estimate. As it stands, it is a reasonable design proposal, not a demonstrated source.

Who this is for: people working on integrated quantum photonics in TFLN, especially multi-band photon-pair sources. A serious referee should engage with it, but acceptance should be conditional on adding the tolerance and efficiency analysis.

Recommendation: send it to peer review. If I were refereeing, I would ask for major revision and then be willing to accept it as a design study.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents a simulation-based design of an X-cut TFLN rib waveguide (800 nm top width, 200 nm etch depth, 800 nm thickness, 80° sidewall) in which a single 3.53 µm poling period is claimed to phase match two type-II SPDC processes: a 710 nm pump producing 1310 nm (TM) and 1550 nm (TE) photons, and a 775 nm pump producing 1567 nm (TM) and 1533 nm (TE) photons. The authors compare the dispersion of this waveguide with a microscale PPLN ridge and a PPKTP channel waveguide, showing that the strongly dispersive TFLN geometry brings the required poling periods close together. They compute the joint spectral intensity and Schmidt numbers, obtaining K = 1.61 for the 710 nm process and K = 1.0056 for the 775 nm process, and conclude that the design is a versatile tunable telecom-band photon-pair source.

Significance. If the predicted phase-matching coincidence survives fabrication tolerances, the design would be a practical simplification over multi-section poling: one domain grating, two usable SPDC processes switched by pump wavelength, with correlated and uncorrelated spectral properties. The paper's strengths are its clear derivation of the phase-matching condition, the explicit waveguide geometry, and the comparative dispersion analysis; the JSA and Schmidt-number calculations are standard and reproducible once the missing parameters are supplied. The central weakness is that the key result—a common poling period—rests on a 10 nm coincidence in effective-index curves imported from the authors' earlier work [25], with no sensitivity analysis and no estimate of conversion efficiency. These gaps are fixable and should be addressed before the design claim is accepted.

major comments (3)

[Sec. 3, Fig. 3 and Table 1] The central claim of a single 3.53 µm poling period relies on the two phase-matching curves crossing at one point, and Table 1 shows the ideal periods for the two processes already differ by 0.01 µm (3.54 vs 3.53). The dispersion data are taken from Ref. [25] and are not re-derived or measured here. Realistic fabrication uncertainties in etch depth, top width, sidewall angle, and the lithium niobate Sellmeier coefficients can shift the two curves relative to each other by amounts comparable to or larger than this 10 nm difference. Please add a tolerance analysis—for example, scans over etch depth, width, and sidewall angle—showing how the common-period wavelengths and the period detuning vary, and specify the QPM acceptance bandwidth. Without this, the headline capability is not established as robust.
[Sec. 4, Eqs. (8)–(10)] The simulated JSI and Schmidt numbers depend on the waveguide length L and on the pump-bandwidth parameter, but the manuscript never states the value of L used, and the relation between the quoted '1.5 nm' pump bandwidth and σ_p in Eq. (9) is not defined. Please provide these values so that the spectral-purity results are reproducible.
[Secs. 3 and 4] The paper checks phase matching but does not compute the SPDC conversion efficiency or the nonlinear overlap integral for either process. Since the abstract and title present the waveguide as a 'source of photon pairs,' an estimate of the expected brightness (effective d_eff, modal overlap, poling duty cycle, propagation loss) is needed to support that claim. At minimum, state whether the overlap is comparable for both processes.

minor comments (5)

[Sec. 2] The list of SPDC processes is introduced as '1) 655 nm...' but the common-period discussion later concerns only processes 2 and 3; this should be clarified in the text.
[Sec. 4, group-index discussion] The sentence 'which satisfy the group index matching condition ( n_p^g ≈ n_i^g)' is inconsistent with the quoted values; for θ = 5.6°, n_p^g is close to n_s^g, not to n_i^g. Please correct.
[Throughout] Various typos: 'prcoesses', 'comparitive', 'doted', 'schmidt number' should be capitalized, and 'respectively.We' in the abstract needs a space.
[Eq. (7)] Equation (7) contains an apparent LaTeX artifact 'X r=s,i' that should be a summation symbol.
[Fig. 6] The PEF, PMF, and JSI panels would benefit from labeled axes with detuning units rather than unlabeled contour plots.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular reduction: the common-poling-period design is a computed consequence of the dispersion model, not an input reframed as a prediction.

full rationale

The central claim—that a single 3.53 µm poling period phase matches 710 nm → 1310 nm (TM) + 1550 nm (TE) and 775 nm → 1567 nm (TM) + 1533 nm (TE)—is obtained by solving energy and momentum conservation, Eqs. (2) and (7), using the effective-index dispersion curves of the chosen TFLN geometry. The poling period is the output of this search, not a fitted input; the process wavelengths are likewise solved for at the common period, not imposed to force the result. The only self-referential element is that the dispersion curves are inherited from the authors' prior work: 'The dispersion of TFLN waveguide is taken from our previous work [25]'. This is a genuine dependency and a robustness risk—the paper gives no tolerance analysis, and the ideal periods for the two processes initially differ by 0.01 µm (3.54 vs 3.53 µm)—but it is not circularity. No equation is defined in terms of the target result, no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no uniqueness theorem from prior work is used to force the choice. The spectral-purity results (Schmidt numbers 1.61 and 1.0056) are also computed from the same dispersion and are independent consequences of the phase-matching calculation. Concerns about the unverified, self-cited dispersion model and fabrication sensitivity should be treated as correctness/experimental-validation risk, not as circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The core contribution rests on modal dispersion data inherited from the authors' earlier paper and on the selection of a common poling period. No new physical entities are introduced, but the tight coincidence of two phase-matching curves is the fragile load-bearing point.

free parameters (3)

Common poling period = 3.53 µm
Chosen to simultaneously phase match the 710 nm and 775 nm pumped processes; a 0.01 µm change in period alters the phase-matched wavelengths and may break the coincidence.
Waveguide cross-section dimensions = top width 800 nm, etch 200 nm, thickness 800 nm, sidewall 80°
Inherited from the authors' prior work [25]; not re-justified or varied in this paper.
Pump bandwidth = 1.5 nm
Used in the JSI simulations; affects the Schmidt number and purity estimates.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption The modal dispersion model from prior work [25] accurately represents the fabricated waveguide.
All phase-matching and spectral predictions rest on this effective-index model, including material dispersion and geometry-dependent waveguide dispersion.
domain assumption Quasi-phase-matching with a single poling period can be treated as exact for both processes simultaneously, even though the ideal periods differ by 0.01 µm.
The paper transitions from processes with periods 3.54 and 3.53 µm to a single 3.53 µm period without fabrication tolerance analysis.
standard math Standard SPDC JSA formalism (pump envelope times phase matching function) applies with a Gaussian pump and sinc PMF.
Used in Section 4 for JSI, Schmidt number, and purity calculations.
domain assumption The comparison to PPLN and PPKTP is based on faithfully reproduced dispersion from references [22] and [23].
No details are given for how these dispersions were computed or extracted from the cited works.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Singly poled thin film lithium niobate waveguide as a tunable source of photon pairs across telecom band." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/44Z47VSL

@misc{pith2026241117369,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Singly poled thin film lithium niobate waveguide as a tunable source of photon pairs across telecom band},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/44Z47VSL}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.17369}
}

read the original abstract

Spontaneous parametric down conversion (SPDC), especially in non-linear waveguides, serves as an important process to generate quantum states of light with desired properties. In this work, we report on a design of a strongly dispersive, singly poled thin film lithium niobate (TFLN) waveguide geometry which acts as a convertible source of photon pairs across telecom band with tunable spectral properties. Through our simulations, we demonstrate that by using this optimized waveguide geometry, two completely different yet desirable type II phase-matched SPDC processes are enabled using a single poling period. One process generates spectrally correlated non-degenerate photon pairs with one photon at 1310 nm (telecom O band) and the other at 1550 nm (telecom C band). The second SPDC process results in spectrally uncorrelated photon pairs in telecom C band at 1533 nm and 1567 nm respectively.We attribute this versatility of TFLN waveguide to its strong dispersion properties and make a comparative study with the existing weakly dispersive waveguide platforms. We believe that such a versatile source of photon pairs will serve as an important ingredient in various quantum optical tasks which require photons at different telecom bands and desired spectral properties.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

32 extracted references · 30 canonical work pages

[25]

Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics 57(15), 155501 (2024)

Arora, M., Chokkara, P., Lugani, J.: Avoiding lateral mode leakage in thin film lithium niobate waveguides for the generation of spectrally pure photons at tele- com wavelengths. Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics 57(15), 155501 (2024)

work page 2024
[11]

Optics Express 29(16), 26183–26190 (2021)

Briggs, I., Hou, S., Cui, C., Fan, L.: Simultaneous type-i and type-ii phase match- ing for second-order nonlinearity in integrated lithium niobate waveguide. Optics Express 29(16), 26183–26190 (2021)

work page 2021
[1]

Nature Photonics 3(12), 687–695 (2009)

O’brien, J.L., Furusawa, A., Vuˇ ckovi´ c, J.: Photonic quantum technologies. Nature Photonics 3(12), 687–695 (2009)

work page 2009
[2]

Nature Photonics 14(5), 273–284 (2020)

Wang, J., Sciarrino, F., Laing, A., Thompson, M.G.: Integrated photonic quantum technologies. Nature Photonics 14(5), 273–284 (2020)

work page 2020
[3]

Photonics Research 11(2), 270–278 (2023) 11

Francesconi, S., Raymond, A., Duhamel, R., Filloux, P., Lema ˆ ıtre, A., Milman, P., Amanti, M., Baboux, F., Ducci, S.: On-chip generation of hybrid polarization- frequency entangled biphoton states. Photonics Research 11(2), 270–278 (2023) 11

work page 2023
[4]

Chinese Physics B (2023)

Chen, Y.-H., Jiang, Z., He, G.-Q.: Generation of hyperentangled photon pairs based on lithium niobate waveguide. Chinese Physics B (2023)

work page 2023
[5]

In: CLEO: Science and Innovations, pp

Koefoed, J.G., M¨ uller, R.R., Rottwitt, K.: High-dimensional mode-entangled pho- ton pairs from a tapered silicon waveguide. In: CLEO: Science and Innovations, pp. 2–47 (2023). Optica Publishing Group

work page 2023
[6]

Advanced Optical Materials 9(22), 2100789 (2021)

Saravi, S., Pertsch, T., Setzpfandt, F.: Lithium niobate on insulator: An emerging platform for integrated quantum photonics. Advanced Optical Materials 9(22), 2100789 (2021)

work page 2021

Show all 32 references

[7]

Advanced Photonics 4(3), 034001–034001 (2022)

Vazimali, M.G., Fathpour, S.: Applications of thin-film lithium niobate in nonlinear integrated photonics. Advanced Photonics 4(3), 034001–034001 (2022)

2022
[8]

In: 2020 22nd International Conference on Transparent Optical Networks (ICTON), pp

Lomonte, E., Lenzini, F., Ferrari, S., Wolff, M., Schuck, C., Pernice, W.: On-chip manipulation and detection of single photons in lithium niobate nanophotonic circuits. In: 2020 22nd International Conference on Transparent Optical Networks (ICTON), pp. 1–4 (2020). IEEE

2020
[9]

In: CLEO: Science and Innovations, pp

Colangelo, M., Desiatov, B., Zhu, D., Holzgrafe, J., Medeiros, O., Loncar, M., Berggren, K.: Superconducting nanowire single-photon detector on thin-film lithium niobate photonic waveguide. In: CLEO: Science and Innovations, pp. 4–4 (2020). Optica Publishing Group

2020
[10]

Frontiers in Photonics 3, 951949 (2022)

Kumar, P., Younesi, M., Saravi, S., Setzpfandt, F., Pertsch, T.: Group-index- matched frequency conversion in lithium niobate on insulator waveguides. Frontiers in Photonics 3, 951949 (2022)

2022
[12]

Physical review letters 124(16), 163603 (2020)

Zhao, J., Ma, C., R¨ using, M., Mookherjea, S.: High quality entangled photon pair generation in periodically poled thin-film lithium niobate waveguides. Physical review letters 124(16), 163603 (2020)

2020
[13]

JOSA B 37(7), 2139–2145 (2020)

Duan, J.-C., Zhang, J.-N., Zhu, Y.-J., Sun, C.-W., Liu, Y.-C., Xu, P., Xie, Z., Gong, Y.-X., Zhu, S.-N.: Generation of narrowband counterpropagating polarization-entangled photon pairs based on thin-film lithium niobate on insu- lator. JOSA B 37(7), 2139–2145 (2020)

2020
[14]

Physical Review Letters127(18), 183601 (2021)

Javid, U.A., Ling, J., Staffa, J., Li, M., He, Y., Lin, Q.: Ultrabroadband entangled photons on a nanophotonic chip. Physical Review Letters127(18), 183601 (2021)

2021
[15]

Optics Letters 47(6), 1506–1509 (2022) 12

Chen, P.-K., Briggs, I., Hou, S., Fan, L.: Ultra-broadband quadrature squeezing with thin-film lithium niobate nanophotonics. Optics Letters 47(6), 1506–1509 (2022) 12

2022
[16]

Journal of Modern Optics 48(13), 1997–2007 (2001)

Kurtsiefer, C., Oberparleiter, M., Weinfurter, H.: Generation of correlated photon pairs in type-ii parametric down conversion—revisited. Journal of Modern Optics 48(13), 1997–2007 (2001)

2001
[17]

In: Springer Handbook of Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics, pp

Boyd, R.W., Gaeta, A.L., Giese, E.: Nonlinear optics. In: Springer Handbook of Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics, pp. 1097–1110. Springer, ??? (2008)

2008
[18]

Optics express 28(4), 5147–5163 (2020)

Lugani, J., Francis-Jones, R.J., Boutari, J., Walmsley, I.A.: Spectrally pure single photons at telecommunications wavelengths using commercial birefringent optical fiber. Optics express 28(4), 5147–5163 (2020)

2020
[19]

Optics express 17(2), 1033–1041 (2009)

Martin, A., Cristofori, V., Aboussouan, P., Herrmann, H., Sohler, W., Ostrowsky, D.B., Alibart, O., Tanzilli, S.: Integrated optical source of polarization entangled photons at 1310 nm. Optics express 17(2), 1033–1041 (2009)

2009
[20]

Review of Scientific Instruments 92(4) (2021)

Anwar, A., Perumangatt, C., Steinlechner, F., Jennewein, T., Ling, A.: Entan- gled photon-pair sources based on three-wave mixing in bulk crystals. Review of Scientific Instruments 92(4) (2021)

2021
[21]

Optics express 24(3), 2941–2953 (2016)

Lee, S.M., Kim, H., Cha, M., Moon, H.S.: Polarization-entangled photon-pair source obtained via type-ii non-collinear spdc process with ppktp crystal. Optics express 24(3), 2941–2953 (2016)

2016
[22]

Physical Review A 102(3), 033722 (2020)

Kumar, R., Yadav, V.K., Ghosh, J.: Postselection-free, hyperentangled photon pairs in a periodically poled lithium-niobate ridge waveguide. Physical Review A 102(3), 033722 (2020)

2020
[23]

PhD thesis, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (2021)

Meier, K.A.: Comparison, optimization, and application of various spontaneous parametric downconversion sources of polarization-entangled photon pairs. PhD thesis, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (2021)

2021
[24]

Light: Science & Applications 9(1), 197 (2020)

Sun, D., Zhang, Y., Wang, D., Song, W., Liu, X., Pang, J., Geng, D., Sang, Y., Liu, H.: Microstructure and domain engineering of lithium niobate crystal films for integrated photonic applications. Light: Science & Applications 9(1), 197 (2020)

2020
[26]

Applied Physics B 127, 1–12 (2021)

Shukla, V.K., Ghosh, J.: Polarization-entangled biphoton states: a comparison of biperiod waveguides in ktp and ln. Applied Physics B 127, 1–12 (2021)

2021
[27]

Cambridge university press, ??? (2010)

Nielsen, M.A., Chuang, I.L.: Quantum Computation and Quantum Information. Cambridge university press, ??? (2010)

2010
[28]

Physical review letters 117(21), 210502 (2016)

Wang, X.-L., Chen, L.-K., Li, W., Huang, H.-L., Liu, C., Chen, C., Luo, Y.-H., Su, 13 Z.-E., Wu, D., Li, Z.-D., et al.: Experimental ten-photon entanglement. Physical review letters 117(21), 210502 (2016)

2016
[29]

nature 409(6816), 46–52 (2001)

Knill, E., Laflamme, R., Milburn, G.J.: A scheme for efficient quantum compu- tation with linear optics. nature 409(6816), 46–52 (2001)

2001
[30]

Optics express 21(9), 10659–10666 (2013)

Jin, R.-B., Shimizu, R., Wakui, K., Benichi, H., Sasaki, M.: Widely tunable single photon source with high purity at telecom wavelength. Optics express 21(9), 10659–10666 (2013)

2013
[31]

PhD thesis, University of Oxford (2007)

Mosley, P., Mosley, P.: Generation of heralded single photons in pure quantum states. PhD thesis, University of Oxford (2007)

2007
[32]

Edamatsu, K., Shimizu, R., Ueno, W., Jin, R.-B., Kaneda, F., Yabuno, M., Suzuki, H., Nagano, S., Syouji, A., Suizu, K.: Photon pair sources with controlled frequency correlation. Prog. Inform 8(8), 19–26 (2011) 14

2011

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [25]

Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics 57(15), 155501 (2024)

Arora, M., Chokkara, P., Lugani, J.: Avoiding lateral mode leakage in thin film lithium niobate waveguides for the generation of spectrally pure photons at tele- com wavelengths. Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics 57(15), 155501 (2024)

work page 2024

[2] [11]

Optics Express 29(16), 26183–26190 (2021)

Briggs, I., Hou, S., Cui, C., Fan, L.: Simultaneous type-i and type-ii phase match- ing for second-order nonlinearity in integrated lithium niobate waveguide. Optics Express 29(16), 26183–26190 (2021)

work page 2021

[3] [1]

Nature Photonics 3(12), 687–695 (2009)

O’brien, J.L., Furusawa, A., Vuˇ ckovi´ c, J.: Photonic quantum technologies. Nature Photonics 3(12), 687–695 (2009)

work page 2009

[4] [2]

Nature Photonics 14(5), 273–284 (2020)

Wang, J., Sciarrino, F., Laing, A., Thompson, M.G.: Integrated photonic quantum technologies. Nature Photonics 14(5), 273–284 (2020)

work page 2020

[5] [3]

Photonics Research 11(2), 270–278 (2023) 11

Francesconi, S., Raymond, A., Duhamel, R., Filloux, P., Lema ˆ ıtre, A., Milman, P., Amanti, M., Baboux, F., Ducci, S.: On-chip generation of hybrid polarization- frequency entangled biphoton states. Photonics Research 11(2), 270–278 (2023) 11

work page 2023

[6] [4]

Chinese Physics B (2023)

Chen, Y.-H., Jiang, Z., He, G.-Q.: Generation of hyperentangled photon pairs based on lithium niobate waveguide. Chinese Physics B (2023)

work page 2023

[7] [5]

In: CLEO: Science and Innovations, pp

Koefoed, J.G., M¨ uller, R.R., Rottwitt, K.: High-dimensional mode-entangled pho- ton pairs from a tapered silicon waveguide. In: CLEO: Science and Innovations, pp. 2–47 (2023). Optica Publishing Group

work page 2023

[8] [6]

Advanced Optical Materials 9(22), 2100789 (2021)

Saravi, S., Pertsch, T., Setzpfandt, F.: Lithium niobate on insulator: An emerging platform for integrated quantum photonics. Advanced Optical Materials 9(22), 2100789 (2021)

work page 2021