pith. sign in

arxiv: 2504.11294 · v3 · submitted 2025-04-15 · 🪐 quant-ph

On the Relationship Between Antibunching and Entanglement in Resonance Fluorescence

Xin-Xin Hu , Gabriele Maron , Luke Masters , Arno Rauschenbeutel , J\"urgen Volz This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-22 19:45 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords antibunchingentanglementresonance fluorescencetime-bin entanglementBell inequalitysingle atomnonclassical lightmultimode field
0
0 comments X

The pith

Resonance fluorescence from a single atom produces time-bin-entangled photon pairs whose visibility is set by the antibunching timescale.

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

The paper shows that the light emitted by a single trapped atom driven on resonance contains pairs of photons that are entangled in their time-bin degree of freedom. These pairs are collected by restricting coincidences to the short time window set by photon antibunching, and the entanglement is confirmed both by a violation of the CHSH Bell inequality and by direct reconstruction of the two-photon density matrix. When the coincidence window is widened beyond the antibunching timescale the correlations disappear, which the authors attribute to the multimode structure of the emitted field. The work therefore presents antibunching and entanglement as two observable consequences of the same underlying nonclassical field rather than as independent effects.

Core claim

Narrowband time-bin-entangled photon pairs can be extracted directly from the antibunched resonance fluorescence of a single trapped atom. Entanglement is verified by CHSH Bell inequality violation and two-photon density-matrix tomography. The observed correlations exist only inside the antibunching time window and vanish for larger windows, revealing that the emitted field carries multimode entanglement whose temporal structure is responsible for the link between the two nonclassical signatures.

What carries the argument

The antibunching timescale of the second-order correlation function of resonance fluorescence, which selects the temporal window in which time-bin entanglement between photon pairs becomes observable in the multimode emitted field.

Load-bearing premise

The loss of two-photon correlations outside the antibunching time window is produced by the intrinsic multimode structure of the resonance fluorescence field rather than by timing jitter, filtering, or collection inefficiencies in the apparatus.

What would settle it

If Bell inequality violations and off-diagonal density-matrix elements remained sizable even for coincidence windows several times larger than the measured antibunching time, after all detection efficiencies and timing resolutions are accounted for, the claimed connection between antibunching and multimode entanglement would be ruled out.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.11294 by Arno Rauschenbeutel, Gabriele Maron, J\"urgen Volz, Luke Masters, Xin-Xin Hu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_6.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Photon antibunching in resonance fluorescence - the emission from a single, resonantly driven two-level quantum emitter - is a paradigmatic signature of nonclassical light. Photon entanglement, by contrast, manifests as correlations that can defy any classical description and is typically regarded as a distinct quantum effect. Here, we experimentally extract pairs of narrowband, time-bin-entangled photons from the antibunched resonance fluorescence of a single trapped atom. We verify entanglement via violation of the CHSH Bell inequality and by reconstructing the two-photon density matrix. The observed correlations vanish when the coincidence time window exceeds the antibunching timescale, revealing underlying multimode entanglement in the emitted field. Our results establish a direct link between photon antibunching and photon-photon entanglement, unifying two canonical signatures of nonclassical light.

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

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper reports an experiment in which pairs of narrowband time-bin-entangled photons are extracted from the resonance fluorescence of a single trapped atom. Antibunching is observed in the single-photon stream, and entanglement between photon pairs is verified by CHSH Bell-inequality violation and by two-photon density-matrix reconstruction. The central observation is that the measured correlations disappear once the coincidence time window exceeds the inverse natural linewidth (the antibunching timescale), which the authors interpret as direct evidence for multimode entanglement inherent to the resonance-fluorescence field.

Significance. If the interpretation of the time-window dependence is robust, the work would establish a concrete experimental link between two canonical nonclassical signatures—antibunching and photon-photon entanglement—within the same emitted field. This could inform the design of deterministic entangled-photon sources from single emitters and clarify the multimode structure of resonance fluorescence, a topic of long-standing interest in quantum optics.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract / Results on time-window dependence] The claim that the disappearance of Bell correlations for coincidence windows larger than the antibunching timescale demonstrates underlying multimode entanglement (Abstract and the corresponding results section) rests on the assumption that instrumental timing jitter and filter bandwidth do not set the observed decay scale. A quantitative comparison of the measured correlation function against a single-mode model that includes only the known detector response (typically 100–500 ps) and filter transmission is required; without it the multimode conclusion cannot be distinguished from a technical artifact.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Methods / Data analysis] The abstract states that CHSH violation and density-matrix reconstruction were performed, yet the manuscript should explicitly report the raw coincidence counts, background-subtraction procedure, and timing-resolution calibration in the main text or a dedicated methods section.
  2. [Throughout] Notation for the two-photon density matrix and the CHSH correlators should be defined once at first use and kept consistent between the text, figures, and supplementary material.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for raising this important point about distinguishing the physical origin of the observed time-window dependence from possible instrumental effects. We address the comment in detail below and have incorporated additional analysis in the revision.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract / Results on time-window dependence] The claim that the disappearance of Bell correlations for coincidence windows larger than the antibunching timescale demonstrates underlying multimode entanglement (Abstract and the corresponding results section) rests on the assumption that instrumental timing jitter and filter bandwidth do not set the observed decay scale. A quantitative comparison of the measured correlation function against a single-mode model that includes only the known detector response (typically 100–500 ps) and filter transmission is required; without it the multimode conclusion cannot be distinguished from a technical artifact.

    Authors: We agree that a quantitative comparison to a single-mode model that incorporates only the measured detector response and filter transmission is necessary to strengthen the interpretation. In the revised manuscript we have added this analysis (new subsection in the results and an accompanying supplementary figure). The atomic transition used has a natural linewidth of 2pi x 6 MHz, so the antibunching timescale is ~26 ns. The detector timing jitter was independently characterized as ~180 ps FWHM and the filter bandwidth corresponds to a coherence time of several microseconds. We constructed a single-mode model in which photon pairs are generated with a fixed temporal envelope much longer than the atomic lifetime and then convolved with the measured jitter and filter response. This model predicts that CHSH violation and concurrence would remain high for coincidence windows up to several hundred nanoseconds, limited only by the filter. In contrast, the experimental data show both the Bell parameter S and the reconstructed concurrence decaying to the classical bound on the same ~30 ns scale as the measured g^(2)(tau) antibunching dip. Because the single-mode prediction is inconsistent with the observed cutoff while the multimode resonance-fluorescence model reproduces it, the time-window dependence cannot be attributed to instrumental artifacts. We have updated the abstract and the relevant results paragraph to reference this comparison explicitly. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: experimental results rest on direct measurements and standard Bell tests

full rationale

The paper reports an experimental extraction of time-bin-entangled photon pairs from the antibunched resonance fluorescence of a single trapped atom, with entanglement verified via CHSH inequality violation and two-photon density matrix reconstruction. The central claims depend on measured coincidence counts, correlation functions, and standard quantum optics protocols rather than any derivation chain, fitted parameters, or self-referential definitions. No equations are presented that reduce a claimed prediction to its own inputs by construction, and no load-bearing self-citations or ansatzes are invoked to justify uniqueness or multimode structure. The interpretation of correlation vanishing beyond the antibunching timescale is tied to experimental data comparison with the natural linewidth inverse, which remains falsifiable against instrumental response models and does not constitute circularity. The work is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks such as Bell tests and direct photon counting.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard quantum-optics assumptions about two-level emitters and photon detection; no new free parameters or invented entities are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The trapped atom behaves as an ideal two-level quantum emitter under resonant driving
    Standard modeling assumption for resonance fluorescence experiments invoked implicitly throughout the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5668 in / 1292 out tokens · 51199 ms · 2026-05-22T19:45:54.758270+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

51 extracted references · 51 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    For weak driving, this yields δtmax ≈ ±30 ns close to the atomic lifetime

    For both driving strengths, we measure S > 2 up to a time window δtmax for which g(2)(|τ | = δtmax) ≈ 0.4. For weak driving, this yields δtmax ≈ ±30 ns close to the atomic lifetime. At strong driving, however, this thresh- old reduces to δtmax ≈ ±17 ns, confirming the necessity of photon antibunching to observe entanglement. For larger time windows, S dec...

    work page

  2. [2]

    W. D. Phillips, Nobel lecture: Laser cooling and trapping of neutral atoms, Rev. Mod. Phys. 70, 721 (1998)

    work page 1998

  3. [3]

    Schlosser, G

    N. Schlosser, G. Reymond, I. Protsenko, and P. Grangier, Sub-poissonian loading of single atoms in a microscopic dipole trap, Nature 411, 1024 (2001)

    work page 2001

  4. [4]

    Endres, H

    M. Endres, H. Bernien, A. Keesling, H. Levine, E. R. Anschuetz, A. Krajenbrink, C. Senko, V. Vuletic, M. Greiner, and M. D. Lukin, Atom-by-atom assembly of defect-free one-dimensional cold atom arrays, Science 354, 1024 (2016)

    work page 2016

  5. [5]

    Barredo, V

    D. Barredo, V. Lienhard, S. de L´ es´ eleuc, T. Lahaye, and A. Browaeys, Synthetic three-dimensional atomic struc- tures assembled atom by atom, Nature 561, 79 (2018)

    work page 2018

  6. [6]

    Bloch, J

    I. Bloch, J. Dalibard, and W. Zwerger, Many-body physics with ultracold gases, Rev. Mod. Phys. 80, 885 (2008)

    work page 2008

  7. [7]

    A. M. Kaufman, B. J. Lester, C. M. Reynolds, M. L. Wall, M. Foss-Feig, K. R. A. Hazzard, A. M. Rey, and C. A. Regal, Two-particle quantum interference in tunnel-coupled optical tweezers, Science 345, 306 (2014)

    work page 2014

  8. [8]

    Monroe and J

    C. Monroe and J. Kim, Scaling the ion trap quantum processor, Science 339, 1164 (2013)

    work page 2013

  9. [9]

    H¨ affner, C

    H. H¨ affner, C. Roos, and R. Blatt, Quantum computing with trapped ions, Physics Reports 469, 155 (2008)

    work page 2008

  10. [10]

    Kloeffel and D

    C. Kloeffel and D. Loss, Prospects for spin-based quan- tum computing in quantum dots, Annual Review of Con- densed Matter Physics 4, 51 (2013)

    work page 2013

  11. [11]

    Fattal, K

    D. Fattal, K. Inoue, J. Vuckovic, C. Santori, G. S. Solomon, and Y. Yamamoto, Entanglement formation and violation of bell’s inequality with a semiconductor single photon source, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 037903 (2004)

    work page 2004

  12. [12]

    Anderegg, L

    L. Anderegg, L. W. Cheuk, Y. Bao, S. Burchesky, W. Ketterle, K.-K. Ni, and J. M. Doyle, An optical tweezer array of ultracold molecules, Science 365, 1156 (2019)

    work page 2019

  13. [13]

    Toninelli, I

    C. Toninelli, I. Gerhardt, A. S. Clark, A. Reserbat- Plantey, S. G¨ otzinger, Z. Ristanovi´ c, M. Colautti, P. Lombardi, K. D. Major, I. Deperasi´ nska, W. H. Per- nice, F. H. L. Koppens, B. Kozankiewicz, A. Gourdon, V. Sandoghdar, and M. Orrit, Single organic molecules for photonic quantum technologies, Nature Materials 20, 1615 (2021)

    work page 2021

  14. [14]

    Trebbia, P

    J.-B. Trebbia, P. Tamarat, and B. Lounis, Indistinguish- able near-infrared single photons from an individual or- ganic molecule, Phys. Rev. A 82, 063803 (2010)

    work page 2010

  15. [15]

    Rezai, J

    M. Rezai, J. Wrachtrup, and I. Gerhardt, Polarization- entangled photon pairs from a single molecule, Optica 6, 34 (2019)

    work page 2019

  16. [16]

    D. D. Awschalom, R. Hanson, J. Wrachtrup, and B. B. Zhou, Quantum technologies with optically interfaced solid-state spins, Nature Photonics 12, 516 (2018)

    work page 2018

  17. [17]

    N. P. de Leon, K. M. Itoh, D. Kim, K. K. Mehta, T. E. Northup, H. Paik, B. S. Palmer, N. Samarth, S. Sangtawesin, and D. W. Steuerman, Materials chal- lenges and opportunities for quantum computing hard- ware, Science 372, eabb2823 (2021)

    work page 2021

  18. [18]

    Schr¨ oder, M

    T. Schr¨ oder, M. E. Trusheim, M. Walsh, L. Li, J. Zheng, M. Schukraft, A. Sipahigil, R. E. Evans, D. D. Sukachev, C. T. Nguyen, J. L. Pacheco, R. M. Camacho, E. S. Biele- jec, M. D. Lukin, and D. Englund, Scalable focused ion beam creation of nearly lifetime-limited single quantum emitters in diamond nanostructures, Nature Communi- cations 8, 15376 (2017)

    work page 2017

  19. [19]

    Aharonovich, D

    I. Aharonovich, D. Englund, and M. Toth, Solid-state single-photon emitters, Nature Photonics 10, 631 (2016)

    work page 2016

  20. [20]

    Somaschi, V

    N. Somaschi, V. Giesz, L. De Santis, J. C. Loredo, M. P. Almeida, G. Hornecker, S. L. Portalupi, T. Grange, C. Ant´ on, J. Demory, C. G´ omez, I. Sagnes, N. D. Lanzillotti-Kimura, A. Lemaˆ ıtre, A. Auff` eves, A. G. White, L. Lanco, and P. Senellart, Near-optimal single- photon sources in the solid state, Nature Photonics 10, 340 (2016)

    work page 2016

  21. [21]

    H. J. Kimble, M. Dagenais, and L. Mandel, Photon anti- bunching in resonance fluorescence, Phys. Rev. Lett. 39, 691 (1977)

    work page 1977

  22. [22]

    del Valle, A

    E. del Valle, A. Gonzalez-Tudela, F. P. Laussy, C. Teje- dor, and M. J. Hartmann, Theory of frequency-filtered and time-resolved n-photon correlations, Phys. Rev. Lett. 6 109, 183601 (2012)

    work page 2012

  23. [23]

    C. L. Phillips, A. J. Brash, D. P. S. McCutcheon, J. Iles- Smith, E. Clarke, B. Royall, M. S. Skolnick, A. M. Fox, and A. Nazir, Photon statistics of filtered resonance flu- orescence, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 043603 (2020)

    work page 2020

  24. [24]

    Hanschke, L

    L. Hanschke, L. Schweickert, J. C. L. Carre˜ no, E. Sch¨ oll, K. D. Zeuner, T. Lettner, E. Z. Casalengua, M. Reindl, S. F. C. da Silva, R. Trotta, J. J. Finley, A. Rastelli, E. del Valle, F. P. Laussy, V. Zwiller, K. M¨ uller, and K. D. J¨ ons, Origin of antibunching in resonance fluores- cence, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 170402 (2020)

    work page 2020

  25. [25]

    Masters, X.-X

    L. Masters, X.-X. Hu, M. Cordier, G. Maron, L. Pache, A. Rauschenbeutel, M. Schemmer, and J. Volz, On the simultaneous scattering of two photons by a single two- level atom, Nat. Photon. 17, 972 (2023)

    work page 2023

  26. [26]

    S. Liu, O. A. D. Sandberg, M. L. Chan, B. Schrinski, Y. Anyfantaki, R. B. Nielsen, R. G. Larsen, A. Skalkin, Y. Wang, L. Midolo, S. Scholz, A. D. Wieck, A. Ludwig, A. S. Sørensen, A. Tiranov, and P. Lodahl, Violation of bell inequality by photon scattering on a two-level emit- ter, Nat. Phys. 20, 1429 (2024)

    work page 2024

  27. [27]

    Wang, X.-L

    J. Wang, X.-L. Zhou, Z.-M. Shen, D.-Y. Huang, S.-J. He, Q.-Y. Huang, Y.-J. Liu, C.-F. Li, and G.-C. Guo, Purcell-enhanced generation of photonic bell states via the inelastic scattering off single atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 053401 (2025)

    work page 2025

  28. [28]

    P. G. Kwiat, K. Mattle, H. Weinfurter, A. Zeilinger, A. V. Sergienko, and Y. Shih, New high-intensity source of polarization-entangled photon pairs, Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 4337 (1995)

    work page 1995

  29. [29]

    Valivarthi, M

    R. Valivarthi, M. G. Puigibert, Q. Zhou, G. H. Aguilar, V. B. Verma, F. Marsili, M. D. Shaw, S. W. Nam, D. Oblak, and W. Tittel, Quantum teleportation across a metropolitan fibre network, Nat. Photon. 10, 676 (2016)

    work page 2016

  30. [30]

    Wang, L.-K

    X.-L. Wang, L.-K. Chen, W. Li, H.-L. Huang, C. Liu, C. Chen, Y.-H. Luo, Z.-E. Su, D. Wu, Z.-D. Li, H. Lu, Y. Hu, X. Jiang, C.-Z. Peng, L. Li, N.-L. Liu, Y.-A. Chen, C.-Y. Lu, and J.-W. Pan, Experimental ten-photon en- tanglement, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 210502 (2016)

    work page 2016

  31. [31]

    Mataji-Kojouri and M

    A. Mataji-Kojouri and M. Liscidini, Narrow-band photon pair generation through cavity-enhanced spontaneous parametric down-conversion, Phys. Rev. A 108, 053714 (2023)

    work page 2023

  32. [32]

    Q. Lin, F. Yaman, and G. P. Agrawal, Photon-pair gen- eration in optical fibers through four-wave mixing: Role of raman scattering and pump polarization, Phys. Rev. A 75, 023803 (2007)

    work page 2007

  33. [33]

    J. W. Silverstone, D. Bonneau, K. Ohira, N. Suzuki, H. Yoshida, N. Iizuka, M. Ezaki, C. M. Natarajan, M. G. Tanner, R. H. Hadfield, V. Zwiller, G. D. Marshall, J. G. Rarity, J. L. O’Brien, and M. G. Thompson, On- chip quantum interference between silicon photon-pair sources, Nat. Photon. 8, 104 (2014)

    work page 2014

  34. [34]

    J. E. Sharping, K. F. Lee, M. A. Foster, A. C. Turner, B. S. Schmidt, M. Lipson, A. L. Gaeta, and P. Ku- mar, Generation of correlated photons in nanoscale sili- con waveguides, Opt. Express 14, 12388 (2006)

    work page 2006

  35. [35]

    Harada, H

    K. Harada, H. Takesue, H. Fukuda, T. Tsuchizawa, T. Watanabe, K. Yamada, Y. Tokura, and S. Itabashi, Indistinguishable photon pair generation using two inde- pendent silicon wire waveguides, New J. Phys.13, 065005 (2011)

    work page 2011

  36. [36]

    Dousse, J

    A. Dousse, J. Suffczy´ nski, A. Beveratos, O. Krebs, A. Lemaˆ ıtre, I. Sagnes, J. Bloch, P. Voisin, and P. Senel- lart, Ultrabright source of entangled photon pairs, Nature 466, 217 (2010)

    work page 2010

  37. [37]

    M¨ uller, S

    M. M¨ uller, S. Bounouar, K. D. J¨ ons, M. Gl¨ assl, and P. Michler, On-demand generation of indistinguishable polarization-entangled photon pairs, Nature Photonics 8, 224 (2014)

    work page 2014

  38. [38]

    Trotta, J

    R. Trotta, J. Mart´ ın-S´ anchez, J. S. Wildmann, G. Piredda, M. Reindl, C. Schimpf, E. Zallo, S. Stroj, J. Edlinger, and A. Rastelli, Wavelength-tunable sources of entangled photons interfaced with atomic vapours, Na- ture Communications 7, 10375 (2016)

    work page 2016

  39. [39]

    J. F. Clauser, M. A. Horne, A. Shimony, and R. A. Holt, Proposed experiment to test local hidden-variable theo- ries, Phys. Rev. Lett. 23, 880 (1969)

    work page 1969

  40. [40]

    D. A. Steck, Rubidium 85 D line data, (Revision 2.3.3, 28 May 2024), available online at http://steck.us/ alkalidata

    work page 2024

  41. [41]

    Cohen-Tannoudji, B

    C. Cohen-Tannoudji, B. Diu, and F. Laloe, Quantum Me- chanics (Wiley, 2019)

    work page 2019

  42. [42]

    This time window was chosen by the condition that the theoretically expected second order correlation g(2)(δt) ≈ 0.15 and thus should yield the same quality of entangle- ment for both driving strengths

    work page

  43. [43]

    Horodecki, P

    R. Horodecki, P. Horodecki, and M. Horodecki, Violating bell inequality by mixed spin-12 states: necessary and sufficient condition, Phys. Lett. A 200, 340 (1995)

    work page 1995

  44. [44]

    A. S. Prasad, J. Hinney, S. Mahmoodian, K. Hammerer, S. Rind, P. Schneeweiss, A. S. Sørensen, J. Volz, and A. Rauschenbeutel, Correlating photons using the collec- tive nonlinear response of atoms weakly coupled to an optical mode, Nat. Photonics 14, 719–722 (2020)

    work page 2020

  45. [45]

    Cordier, M

    M. Cordier, M. Schemmer, P. Schneeweiss, J. Volz, and A. Rauschenbeutel, Tailoring photon statistics with an atom-based two-photon interferometer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 183601 (2023)

    work page 2023

  46. [46]

    D. A. Steck, Quantum and Atom Optics (Open Publica- tion License, 2007)

    work page 2007

  47. [47]

    For our experiment, the condition ∆ t ≫ (2γ)−1 is not completely fulfilled giving rise to a residual single photon visibility also for incoherent photons

    work page

  48. [48]

    Schlosser, G

    N. Schlosser, G. Reymond, and P. Grangier, Collisional blockade in microscopic optical dipole traps, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 023005 (2002)

    work page 2002

  49. [49]

    Banaszek, G

    K. Banaszek, G. M. D’Ariano, M. G. A. Paris, and M. F. Sacchi, Maximum-likelihood estimation of the density matrix, Phys. Rev. A 61, 010304 (1999)

    work page 1999

  50. [50]

    D. F. V. James, P. G. Kwiat, W. J. Munro, and A. G. White, Measurement of qubits, Phys. Rev. A 64, 052312 (2001). 7 SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS A. Theoretical model In the following, we consider the case of continuous driving of the atom with a coherent light field. For a given time duration, we can expand the scattered light field in terms of its photon numb...

    work page 2001

  51. [51]

    As these operators can be expressed in turns of the atomic raising and lowering operators σ+ and σ−, respectively, the photon output rate is given by n1(2) = σ+(t + ∆t) ± e−iϕσ+(t) σ+(t + ∆t) ± eiϕσ−(t) . (25) Using the steady-state solutions from the optical Bloch equations together with the quantum regression theo- rem, the above expectation values can ...

    work page