Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

Resonant and Anti-resonant Exciton-Phonon Coupling in Quantum Dot Molecules

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Voltage scans of quantum dot molecule lifetimes reveal phonon resonances and anti-resonances matched by k·p theory.

desk verdict Strong joint experiment-theory paper on phonon resonances in quantum dot molecules; the core result holds, but the abstract overclaims and the experiment needs error bars. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.09906 v1 pith:FDI6HFBX submitted 2025-05-15 cond-mat.mes-hall

Michelle Lienhart , Krzysztof Gawarecki , Markus Stöcker , Frederik Bopp , Charlotte Cullip , Nadeem Akhlaq , Christopher Thalacker , Johannes Schall
show 7 more authors
Sven Rodt Arne Ludwig Dirk Reuter Stephan Reitzenstein Kai Müller Pawe{l} Machnikowski Jonathan J. Finley
This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mes-hall
keywords quantumdotmoleculeexciton-phononcouplingphononanti-resonanceacousticrelaxationk.ptheoryexcitoniclifetimespin-photoninterfacephotonicclusterstates
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

This paper claims that the voltage-dependent lifetimes of the two lowest neutral exciton branches in a quantum dot molecule are governed by acoustic-phonon-assisted relaxation, not by radiative decay alone, and that the phonon coupling has a resonant, oscillatory structure. The authors measure photoluminescence decay from both branches while tuning the interdot energy splitting with an electric field, and they reproduce the resulting rates with an eight-band $k\cdot p$ model of the coupled dots. Their central result is a direct measurement of the orbital phonon relaxation spectral function: the relaxation rate peaks near $12\ \mathrm{ns}^{-1}$ at energy splittings around $2.75\ \mathrm{meV}$ and drops into deep anti-resonances, such as the dip observed near a splitting of $4.8\ \mathrm{meV}$. The anti-resonances matter because biasing the molecule there suppresses phonon-mediated decay of the higher-energy exciton branch and could protect the entangled spin states used for photonic graph states.

What carries the argument

The central object is the phonon transition rate $\gamma_{nm}$ between exciton branches, computed from the golden-rule formula in Eq. (10), with the coupling set by the deformation-potential and piezoelectric interaction and by the exciton form factor $F_{nm,\lambda}(\mathbf{q})$, the Fourier transform of the electron and hole envelope-function overlap. Because the two dots are separated by about $10\ \mathrm{nm}$ and the electron wave function shifts from one dot to the other through the avoided crossing, the form factor oscillates as a function of phonon wave vector $\mathbf{q}$, and the energy-conserving delta functions in Eq. (10) map that oscillation onto the energy splitting $\Delta E=\hbar c_\lambda q$. These oscillations produce the resonances and anti-resonances seen in $\gamma_{21}$. The comparison to experiment runs through a four-level kinetic model, Eqs. (2a)-(2d), with voltage-dependent radiative rates computed from oscillator strengths, and the synthetic decay curves are fitted with the same exponential-plus-Gaussian functions used on the data.

What would settle it

Measure the decay-rate curves over a wider voltage range with higher statistics and check whether the two predicted low-energy-branch anti-resonances appear at energy splittings of about $3.3$ to $5.4\ \mathrm{meV}$ and whether the two high-energy-branch relaxation peaks appear near $2.75\ \mathrm{meV}$ splitting; if the features do not sit at the splittings the bulk-phonon calculation predicts, or if only one dip is visible as the authors concede is possible, the central claim would be falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

This paper establishes that phonon-mediated relaxation between the two bright neutral-exciton branches of a vertically stacked InGaAs quantum dot molecule is not a monotonic function of energy separation: the relaxation rate oscillates with applied electric field, showing resonances where the rate reaches the tens of $\mathrm{ns}^{-1}$ scale and anti-resonances where it falls to tens of $\mu\mathrm{s}^{-1}$. The key experimental evidence is a pronounced dip in the low-energy branch decay rate near a gate voltage of $0.36\ \mathrm{V}$, corresponding to a high-energy to low-energy splitting of about $4.8\ \mathrm{meV}$, and a pair of fast-decay peaks in the high-energy branch near $0.25\ \mathrm{V}$ and $0.32\ \mathrm{V}$. The authors reproduce these features with a kinetic model whose input rates come from eight-band $k\cdot p$ calculations of the carrier states and golden-rule phonon rates built from deformation-potential and piezoelectric coupling. The match between the calculated and measured voltage-dependent decay curves is the claimed benchmark of the orbital phonon spectral function.

Load-bearing premise

The calculation assumes the acoustic phonons that carry the relaxation are ordinary bulk GaAs sound waves with a simple linear frequency-wavevector relation; if the real strained InGaAs/AlGaAs/GaAs heterostructure changes that relation, the predicted number and positions of the anti-resonances shift and the quantitative match could break.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Biasing the molecule near an anti-resonance lengthens the lifetime of the higher-energy exciton branch because phonon emission from that branch is suppressed, while radiative recombination continues at its normal voltage-dependent rate.
  • The measured voltage-dependent decay curves constitute a direct spectral measurement of the orbital phonon relaxation function, since the tunable energy splitting scans the phonon spectral density through $\Delta E = \hbar c_\lambda q$.
  • At $1.7\ \mathrm{K}$ the high-energy branch decays biexponentially because the fast component combines radiative decay with phonon emission and the slow component reflects phonon absorption; extracting either rate requires a kinetic model in which radiative and phonon rates are comparable.
  • The calculated phonon-assisted relaxation rate reaches values up to about $12\ \mathrm{ns}^{-1}$ at resonances and falls to tens of $\mu\mathrm{s}^{-1}$ at anti-resonances, giving voltage control over several orders of magnitude in relaxation speed.
  • Suppressed orbital-phonon coupling at anti-resonances is expected to be accompanied by inhibited phonon-mediated decoherence of the associated spin states, the stated motivation for using these molecules in spin-photon interfaces and multi-dimensional cluster-state generation.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial inference: Because the oscillation in the phonon rate comes from the finite interdot separation and the resulting envelope-function form factor, the same resonance and anti-resonance pattern should appear in other tunnel-coupled nanostructures and should be tunable by changing dot spacing, height, or barrier thickness.
  • Editorial inference: A direct test of the protective role of anti-resonances is to measure spin coherence or spin-photon entanglement fidelity as a function of bias; if the phonon spectral function is the dominant decoherence channel, both should improve near the anti-resonance bias.
  • Editorial inference: The authors' bulk-phonon caveat suggests a sharper experiment: compare two molecules with different barrier compositions or thicknesses and track how the anti-resonance positions move, which would map the real phonon dispersion in the strained heterostructure rather than assuming the bulk GaAs one.
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

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper reports voltage-dependent time-resolved photoluminescence of the two lowest neutral-exciton branches in an InGaAs quantum dot molecule (QDM). The measured decay rates show a dip in the low-energy branch near 0.36 V and two peaks in the high-energy branch, which the authors interpret as an anti-resonance and resonances in acoustic-phonon-assisted relaxation between the two exciton branches. The theoretical part uses an eight-band k.p model with configuration-interaction exciton states, Fermi golden rule phonon rates computed with bulk GaAs acoustic-phonon dispersion, and a four-level kinetic model that includes radiative recombination, phonon emission/absorption, and p-shell reservoir feeding. The paper reports good agreement for the anticrossing energy splitting and for the general voltage dependence of the lifetimes, and claims a quantitative benchmark of microscopic k.p theory against the measured phonon-relaxation spectral function, with potential application of the anti-resonances to protect optically unfavorable exciton states.

Significance. If the claims are correct, this would be a valuable advance: it would provide the first experimental observation of both resonances and anti-resonances in the phonon-mediated relaxation of QDM exciton states and demonstrate that the anti-resonances can be used to suppress phonon decay of selected orbital configurations, which is relevant for spin-photon interfaces and cluster-state generation. The paper has genuine strengths: the phonon-assisted rates are not fitted to the lifetime data; the QDM morphology is constrained by microscopy-informed estimates; the same fitting protocol is applied to experimental and theoretical transients; and the theoretical direct-exciton radiative rate (2.28 ns^-1) is close to the measured value (2.45 ns^-1). The main weaknesses are that the quantitative benchmark rests on a bulk-phonon-dispersion approximation that the authors themselves acknowledge may not hold, and that several parameters entering the kinetic model are not given a sensitivity analysis. These issues are load-bearing for the central 'full reconciliation' claim and need to be addressed before the manuscript can be accepted.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. III C, Eq. (10), Fig. 4(c)] The bulk GaAs acoustic-phonon dispersion used in the Fermi golden rule, Eq. (10), is load-bearing for the quantitative comparison. The theoretical LE-branch decay curve shows two anti-resonance dips for F between -15.75 and -13.5 kV/cm (corresponding to energy splittings of about 3.3 to 5.4 meV), while the experiment shows a single dip at 4.8 meV. The authors attribute this mismatch to the bulk-dispersion assumption, writing that 'the actual dispersion in a strained heterostructure may be different, which could lead to a case where only one dip is visible.' Because the paper's central claim is a quantitative benchmark of k.p theory and the anti-resonance-protection proposal depends on the positions and number of anti-resonances, this assumption must be either replaced by a realistic calculation of acoustic phonons in the strained InGaAs/AlGaAs/GaAs heterostructure or supported by a sensitivity analysis that shows which features of the predicted relaxation spectrum are robust. As written, the number and positions of anti-resonances are not robustly established, and the 'full reconciliation' claim in the conclusions is too strong.
  2. [Sec. III B, Eq. (11), Fig. 4(b)] The reservoir relaxation rates that enter the kinetic model are assumed rather than measured: the text states that 'we took gamma_r^D = 160 ns^-1 and gamma_r^I = 20 ns^-1' in Eq. (11). These rates feed the two lowest exciton states and directly influence the shape of the computed decay transients, in particular the fast component tau1^-1 of the HE branch that is compared with the phonon-assisted rate gamma_21. The manuscript should provide a sensitivity analysis showing how the extracted tau1^-1 depends on gamma_r1 and gamma_r2, and ideally an independent estimate of these rates. Without this, the claimed quantitative match between the two HE resonances and the k.p-computed gamma_21 cannot be separated from the assumed reservoir kinetics.
  3. [Sec. II B / Sec. III C, Figs. 2 and 4] The experiment is presented as a function of gate voltage V, while the theory is presented as a function of axial electric field F, but the paper never states the V-to-F calibration. The claim that theoretical maxima at F = -20.0 and -16.5 kV/cm 'align very well' with experimental peaks at 0.25 V and 0.32 V cannot be checked without this mapping. The authors should provide the conversion, for example from the effective-model parameters in Eq. (3), from the sample geometry, or from an independent electric-field calibration, and state its uncertainty.
  4. [Abstract and Sec. II] The phrase 'directly measure the spectral function of orbital phonon relaxation' overstates the inference chain. The raw data are photon arrival times, and the phonon-assisted relaxation rates are extracted through a four-level kinetic model that uses k.p-computed rates, radiative rates, and assumed reservoir feeding rates. The authors should either present a more model-independent extraction of the phonon contribution or soften the claim from 'directly measure' to 'infer from a quantitatively modeled kinetic analysis,' in order to match what the experiment actually establishes.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Sec. II B] Typos and awkward phrasing: 'deacay' appears twice in Sec. II B, 'incorperates' appears in Sec. III, 'hence forth' appears in Sec. II A, and the phrase 'more than ten years ago' is repeated redundantly in Sec. I.
  2. [Appendix 4, Eq. (5)] In Eq. (5), the erfc argument uses an unsubscripted gamma in 'mu + gamma sigma^2 - x'; this should presumably be gamma1 or gamma2 to match the two exponential components.
  3. [Sec. III B, Eqs. (2a)-(2d)] The reservoir occupation is denoted N_3 in Eqs. (2b) and (2c) but N_r in Eq. (2d); the notation should be made consistent, for example by defining N_r = N_3 explicitly.
  4. [Fig. 2(c,d) and Fig. 4(b,c)] The fitted decay rates are shown without error bars or confidence intervals. Given that the HE branch is fitted with a double exponential and that at 1.7 K the slow component is visible only for a few voltages, the uncertainty of the fast-component rate tau1^-1 should be quantified so that the significance of the two peaks and the LE dip can be assessed.
  5. [Appendix 5, Fig. 5] The temperature-dependent validation data at 10 K were taken on a different QDM with the same nominal layer structure. The text should explicitly discuss whether the same voltage-to-field calibration and the same morphology parameters are expected to apply, since sample-to-sample variations could affect the comparison.
  6. [Abstract] The phrase 'several ten ns^-1' should be 'several tens of ns^-1' for grammatical correctness, and the abstract should clarify whether the quoted range refers to the measured decay rates or to the inferred phonon-assisted rates.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the phonon-assisted relaxation rates are computed from an eight-band k·p model with fixed morphology and material parameters, then compared to independently measured lifetimes; no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction.

full rationale

The central prediction is the voltage/energy dependence of phonon-assisted relaxation γ21 (Eq. 10), obtained from eight-band k·p single-particle states, configuration-interaction exciton states, Fermi's golden rule, and deformation-potential plus piezoelectric coupling. The QDM shape and composition are set by TEM-inspired parameters (Sec. III A, Appendix 6a) and are not fitted to the lifetime data. The comparison in Sec. III C solves the rate equations with these ab initio rates and then applies the same exponential fitting procedure used for the measured transients; the agreement of the fast HE decay with γ21 and the LE anti-resonance dip is therefore an independent test, not a reconstruction of inputs. The effective two-state model (Eq. 3) is fitted to PL energies, and Γ_D is measured far from resonance; these enter only the radiative baseline and kinetic reservoir rates, not the phonon matrix elements that produce the resonances and anti-resonances. The acknowledged bulk-GaAs phonon dispersion assumption (Sec. III C) is a sensitivity/robustness limitation that could change the number of predicted dips; it is not a circularity, because the calculation would still be a first-principles prediction under that stated assumption. Self-citations to prior k·p implementations and earlier theoretical predictions of QDM phonon resonances are method and history citations; the present computation is self-contained and the cited results are not used as the proof of the anti-resonance claim. No step in the derivation reduces by construction to a fitted parameter or to a self-citation chain.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on a microscopic k.p model with hand-chosen geometry and composition parameters, an effective two-state model fitted to the PL spectra, and rates borrowed from prior work or chosen by hand. The phonon-assisted relaxation rates themselves are computed rather than fitted to the lifetime data, so the benchmark is not circular, but the model inputs carry uncertainty. No new particles, forces, or conserved quantities are invented.

free parameters (5)
  • Two-state effective Hamiltonian parameters (epsilon_I, epsilon_D, alpha, V_t) = epsilon_I = 1324.2 meV, epsilon_D = 1341.6 meV, alpha = 6.05e-2 e*nm, V_t = 0.994 meV
    Fitted to the voltage-dependent PL spectra in Fig. 1(b); used in Eqs. (1) and (11) to compute radiative rates and reservoir feeding rates.
  • Direct exciton radiative rate Gamma_D = 2.45 ns^-1
    Measured far from the avoided crossing (0.6 V) and used as an input to the effective-model radiative rates in Eq. (1).
  • Indirect exciton radiative rate Gamma_I = 0.04 ns^-1
    Estimated from electric-field-dependent Rabi oscillation data in Ref. [12]; used as an input to Eq. (1).
  • Reservoir relaxation rates gamma_r^D and gamma_r^I = gamma_r^D = 160 ns^-1, gamma_r^I = 20 ns^-1
    Chosen by hand in Appendix 6e, 'owing to the fact that intradot relaxation is much faster than phonon-assisted tunneling.' They enter the kinetic model Eqs. (2a)-(2d) and Eq. (11).
  • QDM morphology model parameters (truncated Gaussian heights, lateral length, slope, wetting layer, In composition… = h_u = 2.4 nm, h_l = 2.1 nm, l = 12 nm, w = 15 nm, wetting layer 0.6 nm, In = 0.4, blur sigma = 0.6 nm, barrier 2.3 nm
    Chosen by hand to approximate the sample structure from STEM images and growth conditions; they set the strain, single-particle states, and phonon form-factors in the k.p calculation.
assumptions (7)
  • standard math Fermi golden rule describes phonon-assisted transitions (Eq. 10).
    Assumes weak exciton-phonon coupling and Markovian relaxation; standard perturbative treatment.
  • domain assumption Eight-band k.p Hamiltonian in the envelope-function approximation describes electron and hole states.
    Standard model for strained InGaAs/GaAs QDs; invoked in Sec. III A and Appendix 6b.
  • domain assumption Acoustic phonons are treated as bulk GaAs modes with deformation-potential and piezoelectric coupling.
    Used in the Fermi golden rule calculation of gamma_nm; the authors note in Sec. III C that the actual dispersion in a strained heterostructure may differ.
  • domain assumption Kinetic rate equations (Eqs. 2a-2d) assume incoherent Markovian dynamics and neglect coherence between HE and LE states.
    The four-level model treats occupations only, with no coherences; this underlies the comparison of fitted decay rates.
  • ad hoc to paper The p-shell reservoir feeds the two lowest exciton states with rates gamma_r1 and gamma_r2 from the effective model (Eq. 11).
    The reservoir dynamics is not computed microscopically; the rates are set by the effective Hopfield coefficients and hand-chosen gamma_r values.
  • domain assumption Continuous elasticity and Gaussian-blurred composition describe strain and intermixing.
    Used in Appendix 6a to compute strain and piezoelectric potentials; validated only indirectly via energy-level agreement.
  • domain assumption Radiative rates follow from oscillator strength using the bulk GaAs refractive index n_r = 3.347.
    Eq. (9) and Appendix 6c; assumes bulk dielectric response, ignoring possible cavity or strain-induced modifications.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Resonant and Anti-resonant Exciton-Phonon Coupling in Quantum Dot Molecules." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/FDI6HFBX

@misc{pith2026250509906,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Resonant and Anti-resonant Exciton-Phonon Coupling in Quantum Dot Molecules},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/FDI6HFBX}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.09906}
}
abstract

Optically active quantum dot molecules (QDMs) can host multi-spin quantum states with the potential for the deterministic generation of photonic graph states with tailored entanglement structures. Their usefulness for the generation of such non-classical states of light is determined by orbital and spin decoherence mechanisms, particularly phonon-mediated processes dominant at energy scales up to a few millielectronvolts. Here, we directly measure the spectral function of orbital phonon relaxation in a QDM and benchmark our findings against microscopic kp theory. Our results reveal phonon-mediated relaxation rates exhibiting pronounced resonances and anti-resonances, with rates ranging from several ten ns$^{-1}$ to tens of $\mu$s$^{-1}$. Comparison with a kinetic model reveals the voltage (energy) dependent phonon coupling strength and fully explains the interplay between phonon-assisted relaxation and radiative recombination. These anti-resonances can be leveraged to increase the lifetime of energetically unfavorable charge configurations needed for realizing efficient spin-photon interfaces and multi-dimensional cluster states.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.09906 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (a) Schematic structure showing the central part [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. (a) The model of In-distribution in the structure [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. FIG. 4. (a) The theoretical results for the two-lowest ex [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Voltage dependent lifetime measurements at a tem [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Modeling the g-factors, hyperfine interaction and optical properties of semiconductor QDs: the atomistic and eight-band $k \cdot p$ approaches

    cond-mat.mes-hall 2025-06 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A corrected eight-band k.p model for InGaAs/GaAs quantum dots reproduces tight-binding electron energies and g-factors, with both models agreeing on Overhauser field trends and differing by up to 30% in exciton lifetimes.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

68 extracted references · 51 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    The heights of the top and bottom QDs were precisely controlled at 2.9 nm and 2.7 nm, respectively, through the In-flush technique during the growth process [48]

    Sample The QDM investigated here was fabricated using solid- source molecular beam epitaxy, comprising two vertically stacked indium arsenide (InAs) QDs which are embedded within a gallium arsenide (GaAs) matrix. The heights of the top and bottom QDs were precisely controlled at 2.9 nm and 2.7 nm, respectively, through the In-flush technique during the gr...

    work page

  2. [2]

    (nm) −0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 −10 −5 0 5 10 (b) 0.67 |Xr⟩ |vac.⟩ |X1 ,2⟩ γr2 γ21 γr1 γ1 2 Γ2 Γ1 FIG. 3. (a) The model of In-distribution in the structure and the Al0.33Ga0.67As barrier. (b) The conduction band and heavy-hole band edges along the axis crossing the QDs centers [as marked in panel (a) by the dashed line]. (c) Schematic structure of states and proc...

    work page

  3. [3]

    The dependence on the gate- voltage (eF) enters via the termα eF

    Coupled two-state Hamiltonian The neutral exciton in our system can be described by the following effective two-state Hamiltonian: Heff = εI +α eF V t Vt εD ,(3) whereε I,ε D are the energies of the indirect and direct ex- citon states when the tunnel coupling and external elec- tric field are neglected. The dependence on the gate- voltage (eF) enters via...

    work page

  4. [4]

    A 5 ps laser pulse is applied to excite the crystal ground state (|vac⟩) to the p-orbital of the neutral exciton (p-shell excita- tion)

    Experimental setup All measurements discussed in the main text were per- formed at a temperature of 1.7 K within an Attodry2100 dry magnet system, employing a pulsed fs-laser (Coher- ent Mira 900f) for excitation of the QDM. A 5 ps laser pulse is applied to excite the crystal ground state (|vac⟩) to the p-orbital of the neutral exciton (p-shell excita- ti...

    work page

  5. [5]

    2 were measured at 1.7 K

    Decay rates at 10 K The decay rates of the neutral exciton presented in Fig. 2 were measured at 1.7 K. A different QDM with the same layer structure was measured at 10 K exhibiting the same behavior in the voltage dependent decay rates. Due to the higher temperature, up-scattering is much more likely, leading to a double exponential decay in the high ener...

    work page

  6. [6]

    Fit functions of lifetime measurements a. Exponential convolved with a Gaussian The lifetime measurements with a mono-exponential decay are fitted with an exponential function convolved with a Gaussian (exponentially modified Gaussian) sup- plemented by a constantCaccounting for the back- ground Gl(t) = Aγ 2 eγ(µ−x+γσ 2/2) erfc µ+γσ 2−x√ 2σ +C,(4) whereµi...

    work page

  7. [7]

    N. H. Lindner and T. Rudolph, Proposal for Pulsed On- Demand Sources of Photonic Cluster State Strings, Phys. Rev. Lett.103, 113602 (2009)

    2009

  8. [8]

    Calculation details a. QD model and strain distribution The QDs are modeled as truncated Gaussians [33], where their top surfaces are given by the formula S(x,y) = min wexp ( − x2 +y 2 l2 ) ,h ! ,(6) 9 wherewis related to the slope steepness,his the maxi- mal height, and the lateral extension is set by the param- eterl. For both QDs, we usel= 12nm andw= 1...

    work page

Show all 68 references
  1. [9]

    D. D. Awschalom, R. Hanson, J. Wrachtrup, and B. B. Zhou, Quantum technologies with optically interfaced solid-state spins, Nat. Photon.12, 516–527 (2018)

    2018

  2. [10]

    Bayer, G

    M. Bayer, G. Ortner, O. Stern, A. Kuther, A. A. Gor- bunov, A. Forchel, P. Hawrylak, S. Fafard, K. Hinzer, T. L. Reinecke, S. N. Walck, J. P. Reithmaier, F. Klopf, and F. Sch¨ afer, Fine structure of neutral and charged excitons in self-assembled In(Ga)As/(Al)GaAs quantum dots...

    2002

  3. [11]

    W. B. Gao, P. Fallahi, E. Togan, J. Miguel-Sanchez, and A. Imamoglu, Observation of entanglement between a quantum dot spin and a single photon, Nature491, 426–430 (2012)

    2012

  4. [12]

    Stockill, M

    R. Stockill, M. J. Stanley, L. Huthmacher, E. Clarke, M. Hugues, A. J. Miller, C. Matthiesen, C. Le Gall, and M. Atat¨ ure, Phase-tuned entangled state generation be- tween distant spin qubits, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 010503 (2017)

    2017

  5. [13]

    Favero, G

    I. Favero, G. Cassabois, R. Ferreira, D. Darson, C. Voisin, J. Tignon, C. Delalande, G. Bastard, P. Roussignol, and J. M. Gerard, Acoustic phonon sidebands in the emission line of single InAs/GaAs quantum dots, Physical Review B68, 233301 (2003)

    2003

  6. [14]

    A. V. Kuhlmann, J. H. Prechtel, J. Houel, A. Lud- wig, D. Reuter, A. D. Wieck, and R. J. Warburton, Transform-limited single photons from a single quantum dot, Nat. Commun.6, 8204 (2015)

    2015

  7. [15]

    Vezvaee, P

    A. Vezvaee, P. Hilaire, M. F. Doty, and S. E. Economou, Deterministic Generation of Entangled Photonic Cluster States from Quantum Dot Molecules, Phys. Rev. Applied 18, L061003 (2022)

    2022

  8. [16]

    Cogan, Z.-E

    D. Cogan, Z.-E. Su, O. Kenneth, and D. Gershoni, De- terministic generation of indistinguishable photons in a cluster state, Nature Photonics17, 324 (2023)

    2023

  9. [17]

    K. X. Tran, A. S. Bracker, M. K. Yakes, J. Q. Grim, and S. G. Carter, Enhanced Spin Coherence of a Self- Assembled Quantum Dot Molecule at the Optimal Elec- trical Bias, Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 027403 (2022)

    2022

  10. [18]

    M. F. Doty, J. I. Climente, A. Greilich, M. Yakes, A. S. Bracker, and D. Gammon, Hole-spin mixing in inas quan- tum dot molecules, Phys. Rev. B81, 035308 (2010)

    2010

  11. [19]

    Ardelt, K

    P.-L. Ardelt, K. Gawarecki, K. M¨ uller, A. M. Waeber, A. Bechtold, K. Oberhofer, J. M. Daniels, F. Klotz, M. Bichler, T. Kuhn, H. J. Krenner, P. Machnikowski, and J. J. Finley, Coulomb mediated hybridization of ex- citons in coupled quantum dots, Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 077401 (2016)

    2016

  12. [20]

    F. Bopp, J. Schall, N. Bart, F. V¨ ogl, C. Cullip, F. Sbresny, K. Boos, C. Thalacker, M. Lienhart, S. Rodt, D. Reuter, A. Ludwig, A. D. Wieck, S. Reitzenstein, K. M¨ uller, and J. J. Finley, Coherent driving of direct and indirect excitons in a quantum dot molecule, Phys. Rev....

    2023

  13. [21]

    F. Bopp, J. Rojas, N. Revenga, H. Riedl, F. Sbresny, K. Boos, T. Simmet, A. Ahmadi, D. Gershoni, J. Kasprzak, A. Ludwig, S. Reitzenstein, A. Wieck, D. Reuter, K. M¨ uller, and J. J. Finley, Quantum Dot Molecule Devices with Optical Control of Charge Status and Electronic Contr...

    2022

  14. [22]

    S. E. Economou, N. Lindner, and T. Rudolph, Optically Generated 2-Dimensional Photonic Cluster State from Coupled Quantum Dots, Phys. Rev. Lett.105, 093601 (2010)

    2010

  15. [23]

    K. C. Wijesundara, J. E. Rolon, S. E. Ulloa, A. S. Bracker, D. Gammon, and E. A. Stinaff, Tunable exci- ton relaxation in vertically coupled semiconductor inas quantum dots, Phys. Rev. B84, 081404 (2011)

    2011

  16. [24]

    Nakaoka, E

    T. Nakaoka, E. C. Clark, H. J. Krenner, M. Sabathil, M. Bichler, Y. Arakawa, G. Abstreiter, and J. J. Finley, Direct observation of acoustic phonon mediated relax- ation between coupled exciton states in a single quantum dot molecule, Phys. Rev. B74, 121305(R) (2006)

    2006

  17. [25]

    Borri, W

    P. Borri, W. Langbein, S. Schneider, U. Woggon, R. L. Sellin, D. Ouyang, and D. Bimberg, Ultralong Dephasing Time in InGaAs Quantum Dots, Phys. Rev. Lett.87, 157401 (2001)

    2001

  18. [26]

    K. Kawa, T. Kuhn, and P. Machnikowski, Coherence lim- itations in the optical control of the singlet-triplet qubit in a quantum dot molecule, Phys. Rev. B106, 125308 (2022)

    2022

  19. [27]

    Wiercinski, E

    J. Wiercinski, E. M. Gauger, and M. Cygorek, Phonon coupling versus pure dephasing in the photon statistics of cooperative emitters, Phys. Rev. Res.5, 013176 (2023)

    2023

  20. [28]

    A. J. Ramsay, A. V. Gopal, E. M. Gauger, A. Nazir, B. W. Lovett, A. M. Fox, and M. S. Skolnick, Damping of exciton rabi rotations by acoustic phonons in optically excitedInGaAs/GaAsquantum dots, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 017402 (2010). 11

    2010

  21. [29]

    Vagov, V

    A. Vagov, V. M. Axt, T. Kuhn, W. Langbein, P. Borri, and U. Woggon, Nonmonotonous temperature depen- dence of the initial decoherence in quantum dots, Phys. Rev. B70, 201305 (2004)

    2004

  22. [30]

    Butscher and A

    S. Butscher and A. Knorr, Theory of strong elec- tron–phonon coupling for ultrafast intersubband excita- tions, physica status solidi (b)243, 2423 (2006)

    2006

  23. [31]

    F. Bopp, C. Cullip, C. Thalacker, M. Lienhart, J. Schall, N. Bart, F. Sbresny, K. Boos, S. Rodt, D. Reuter, A. Ludwig, A. D. Wieck, S. Reitzenstein, F. Troiani, G. Goldoni, E. Molinari, K. M¨ uller, and J. J. Fin- ley, Magnetic tuning of the tunnel coupling in an op- tically a...

    2023 doi arXiv

  24. [32]

    Gawarecki, Spin-orbit coupling and magnetic-field de- pendence of carrier states in a self-assembled quantum dot, Phys

    K. Gawarecki, Spin-orbit coupling and magnetic-field de- pendence of carrier states in a self-assembled quantum dot, Phys. Rev. B97, 235408 (2018)

    2018

  25. [33]

    J. I. Climente, A. Bertoni, G. Goldoni, and E. Moli- nari, Phonon-induced electron relaxation in weakly con- fined single and coupled quantum dots, Phys. Rev. B74, 035313 (2006)

    2006

  26. [34]

    Gawarecki, M

    K. Gawarecki, M. Pochwała, A. Grodecka-Grad, and P. Machnikowski, Phonon-assisted relaxation and tunnel- ing in self-assembled quantum dot molecules, Phys. Rev. B81, 245312 (2010)

    2010

  27. [35]

    Gawarecki and P

    K. Gawarecki and P. Machnikowski, Phonon-assisted re- laxation between hole states in quantum dot molecules, Phys. Rev. B85, 041305 (2012)

    2012

  28. [36]

    Grodecka-Grad and J

    A. Grodecka-Grad and J. F¨ orstner, Theory of phonon- mediated relaxation in doped quantum dot molecules, Phys. Rev. B81, 115305 (2010)

    2010

  29. [37]

    M¨ uller, A

    K. M¨ uller, A. Bechtold, C. Ruppert, M. Zecherle, G. Rei- thmaier, M. Bichler, H. J. Krenner, G. Abstreiter, A. W. Holleitner, J. M. Villas-Boas, M. Betz, and J. J. Finley, Electrical control of interdot electron tunneling in a dou- ble ingaas quantum-dot nanostructure, Phys....

    2012

  30. [38]

    H. J. Krenner, M. Sabathil, E. C. Clark, A. Kress, D. Schuh, M. Bichler, G. Abstreiter, and J. J. Finley, Direct observation of controlled coupling in an individ- ual quantum dot molecule, Phys. Rev. Lett.94, 057402 (2005)

    2005

  31. [39]

    Andrzejewski, G

    J. Andrzejewski, G. Sęk, E. O’Reilly, A. Fiore, and J. Misiewicz, Eight-band k.p calculations of the composi- tion contrast effect on the linear polarization properties of columnar quantum dots, J. Appl. Phys.107, 073509 (2010)

    2010

  32. [40]

    M¨ uller, G

    K. M¨ uller, G. Reithmaier, E. C. Clark, V. Jovanov, M. Bichler, H. J. Krenner, M. Betz, G. Abstreiter, and J. J. Finley, Excited state quantum couplings and opti- cal switching of an artificial molecule, Phys. Rev. B84, 081302 (2011)

    2011

  33. [41]

    Gawarecki, C

    K. Gawarecki, C. Spinnler, L. Zhai, G. N. Nguyen, A. Ludwig, R. J. Warburton, M. C. L¨ obl, D. E. Re- iter, and P. Machnikowski, Symmetry breaking via al- loy disorder to explain radiative auger transitions in self-assembled quantum dots, Phys. Rev. B108, 235410 (2023)

    2023

  34. [42]

    M. C. L¨ obl, S. Scholz, I. S¨ ollner, J. Ritzmann, T. Den- neulin, A. Kov´ acs, B. E. Kardynał, A. D. Wieck, A. Lud- wig, and R. J. Warburton, Excitons in InGaAs quan- tum dots without electron wetting layer states, Commun. Phys.2, 93 (2019)

    2019

  35. [43]

    Pryor, J

    C. Pryor, J. Kim, L. W. Wang, A. J. Williamson, and A. Zunger, Comparison of two methods for describing the strain profiles in quantum dots, J. Appl. Phys.83, 2548 (1998)

    1998

  36. [44]

    Bester, X

    G. Bester, X. Wu, D. Vanderbilt, and A. Zunger, Im- portance of Second-Order Piezoelectric Effects in Zinc- Blende Semiconductors, Phys. Rev. Lett.96, 187602 (2006)

    2006

  37. [45]

    Winkler,Spin-Orbit Coupling Effects in Two- Dimensional Electron and Hole Systems(Springer, 2003)

    R. Winkler,Spin-Orbit Coupling Effects in Two- Dimensional Electron and Hole Systems(Springer, 2003)

    2003

  38. [46]

    H. R. Trebin, U. R¨ ossler, and R. Ranvaud, Quantum res- onances in the valence bands of zinc-blende semiconduc- tors. I. Theoretical aspects, Phys. Rev. B20, 686 (1979)

    1979

  39. [47]

    Stock, M.-R

    E. Stock, M.-R. Dachner, T. Warming, A. Schliwa, A. Lochmann, A. Hoffmann, A. I. Toropov, A. K. Bakarov, I. A. Derebezov, M. Richter, V. A. Haisler, A. Knorr, and D. Bimberg, Acoustic and optical phonon scattering in a single In(Ga)As quantum dot, Phys. Rev. B83, 041304 (2011)

    2011

  40. [48]

    Gawełczyk, M

    M. Gawełczyk, M. Syperek, A. Maryński, P. Mrowiński, L. Dusanowski, K. Gawarecki, J. Misiewicz, A. Somers, J. P. Reithmaier, S. H¨ ofling, and G. Sęk, Exciton lifetime and emission polarization dispersion in strongly in-plane asymmetric nanostructures, Phys. Rev. B96, 245425 (2017)

    2017

  41. [49]

    R. P. Feynman, Forces in Molecules, Phys. Rev.56, 340 (1939)

    1939

  42. [50]

    L. C. Lew Yan Voon and L. R. Ram-Mohan, Tight- binding representation of the optical matrix elements: Theory and applications, Phys. Rev. B47, 15500 (1993)

    1993

  43. [51]

    Eissfeller,Theory of the Electronic Structure of Quan- tum Dots in External Fields, Ph.D

    T. Eissfeller,Theory of the Electronic Structure of Quan- tum Dots in External Fields, Ph.D. thesis, Technical Uni- versity of Munich (2012)

    2012

  44. [52]

    Krzykowski, K

    M. Krzykowski, K. Gawarecki, and P. Machnikowski, Hole spin-flip transitions in a self-assembled quantum dot, Phys. Rev. B102, 205301 (2020)

    2020

  45. [53]

    L. M. Woods, T. L. Reinecke, and R. Kotlyar, Hole spin relaxation in quantum dots, Phys. Rev. B69, 125330 (2004)

    2004

  46. [54]

    Wu and Z

    J. Wu and Z. M. Wang, eds.,Quantum Dot Molecules, Lecture Notes in Nanoscale Science and Technology No. volume 14 (Springer, New York, 2014)

    2014

  47. [55]

    Van Den Zegel, N

    M. Van Den Zegel, N. Boens, D. Daems, and F. De Schryver, Possibilities and limitations of the time- correlated single photon counting technique: a compar- ative study of correction methods for the wavelength dependence of the instrument response function, Chem. Phys.101, 311 (1986)

    1986

  48. [56]

    Wasilewski, S

    Z. Wasilewski, S. Fafard, and J. McCaffrey, Size and shape engineering of vertically stacked self-assembled quantum dots, Journal of Crystal Growth201-202, 1131 (1999)

    1999

  49. [57]

    A. S. Bracker, M. Scheibner, M. F. Doty, E. A. Stinaff, I. V. Ponomarev, J. C. Kim, L. J. Whitman, T. L. Rei- necke, and D. Gammon, Engineering electron and hole tunneling with asymmetric InAs quantum dot molecules, Applied Physics Letters89, 233110 (2006)

    2006

  50. [58]

    Schall, M

    J. Schall, M. Deconinck, N. Bart, M. Florian, M. von Helversen, C. Dangel, R. Schmidt, L. Bremer, F. Bopp, I. H¨ ullen, C. Gies, D. Reuter, A. D. Wieck, S. Rodt, J. J. Finley, F. Jahnke, A. Ludwig, and S. Reitzenstein, Bright electrically controllable quantum-dot-molecule de- ...

    2021

  51. [59]

    G. A. Narvaez, G. Bester, and A. Zunger, Carrier relax- ation mechanisms in self-assembled (in,ga)as/gaas quan- tum dots: Efficient p–¿s auger relaxation of electrons, 12 Phys. Rev. B74, 075403 (2006)

    2006

  52. [60]

    X.-Q. Li, H. Nakayama, and Y. Arakawa, Phonon bot- tleneck in quantum dots: Role of lifetime of the confined optical phonons, Phys. Rev. B59, 5069 (1999)

    1999

  53. [61]

    Urayama, T

    J. Urayama, T. B. Norris, J. Singh, and P. Bhattacharya, Observation of phonon bottleneck in quantum dot elec- tronic relaxation, Phys. Rev. Lett.86, 4930 (2001)

    2001

  54. [62]

    Bacher, R

    G. Bacher, R. Weigand, J. Seufert, V. D. Kulakovskii, N. A. Gippius, A. Forchel, K. Leonardi, and D. Hommel, Biexciton versus exciton lifetime in a single semiconduc- tor quantum dot, Phys. Rev. Lett.83, 4417 (1999)

    1999

  55. [64]

    Świderski, M

    M. Świderski, M. Zieliński, Exact diagonalization ap- proach for atomistic calculation of piezoelectric effects in semiconductor quantum dots, Acta Phys. Pol., A129, 79 (2016)

    2016

  56. [65]

    Thr¨ anhardt, C

    A. Thr¨ anhardt, C. Ell, G. Khitrova, and H. M. Gibbs, Relation between dipole moment and radiative lifetime in interface fluctuation quantum dots, Phys. Rev. B65, 035327 (2002)

    2002

  57. [66]

    Amirtharaj and D

    P. Amirtharaj and D. Seiler,Optical Properties of Semi- conductors, in Handbook of Optics, Vol. 2: Devices, Mea- surements, and Properties, 2nd ed.(McGraw-Hill Profes- sional, New York, San Francisco, 1994)

    1994

  58. [67]

    J. M. Daniels, P. Machnikowski, and T. Kuhn, Excitons in quantum dot molecules: Coulomb coupling, spin-orbit effects, and phonon-induced line broadening, Phys. Rev. B88, 205307 (2013)

    2013

  59. [68]

    Virtanen, R

    P. Virtanen, R. Gommers, T. E. Oliphant, M. Haber- land, T. Reddy, D. Cournapeau, E. Burovski, P. Pe- terson, W. Weckesser, J. Bright, S. J. van der Walt, M. Brett, J. Wilson, K. J. Millman, N. Mayorov, A. R. J. Nelson, E. Jones, R. Kern, E. Larson, C. J. Carey, ˙I. Po- lat, Y...

    2020

  60. [110]

    (nm) −10 −5 0 5 10 −30 −20 −10 0 10 20 30 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 In content (a) (c) Al0.33Ga As barrier E (eV)

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.