Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 55 references

Ultra-Broadband plug-and-play photonic circuit packaging with sub-dB loss

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Pluggable fiber-to-chip link logs 0.78 dB loss

desk verdict A genuinely new plug-and-play packaging scheme with record sub-dB loss, but the headline number silently excludes Fresnel loss; worth reviewing with a clear request to show raw data. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.21168 v1 pith:DRH5RUXD submitted 2025-05-27 physics.optics physics.app-ph

Erik Jung , Helge Gehring , Frank Brueckerhoff-Plueckelmann , Linus Kraemer , Clara Vazquez-Martel , Eva Blasco , Wolfram Pernice This is my paper
classification physics.opticsphysics.app-ph
keywords integratedphotonicsphotonicpackagingout-of-planecouplingtwo-photonpolymerizationpassiveplug-and-playtotalinternalreflectioncouplersiliconnitridebroadbandcomputing
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 fiber-to-chip packaging for photonic integrated circuits can be made passive, removable, and broadband by plugging a standard multi-fiber push-on cable into alignment pins 3D-printed directly on the chip. With this approach the optimized polymer coupler transmits at -0.41 dB, the plug connection adds only 0.37 ± 0.12 dB, and the complete package reaches 0.78 dB total loss with a -0.5 dB bandwidth above 100 nm. The authors demonstrate the scheme on a 17-port silicon nitride photonic circuit and use the full 100 nm spectrum of a superluminescent diode to run broadband chaotic-light computing at 17.6 GBaud. This matters because it removes a major barrier between photonic chips and practical systems: connecting fibers becomes a mechanical plug operation with sub-decibel loss, comparable in spirit to plugging in an electrical cable.

What carries the argument

The central object is the total-internal-reflection (TIR) polymer out-of-plane coupler: a 3D-printed structure that transfers light from a silicon nitride waveguide into a polymer mode, widens the mode field, reflects the beam off a total-internal-reflection plane, and focuses it into an 8-degree-polished single-mode fiber. Its design is captured by four derived parameters: mode-field diameter at focus, focal length, propagation angle, and mode-field diameter at the surface, with the fiber-to-coupler gap held at 40-50 micrometers. The matching plug side is a female multi-fiber termination push-on (MTP) cable whose alignment pin holes slide over pins printed by two-photon polymerization (TPP) directly on the chip, aided by a 3D-printed pre-alignment structure that supports the cable and bears its weight. This combination converts micron-scale optical alignment into a purely mechanical, repeatable connection.

What would settle it

Take a packaged chip, measure each port's transmission, then remove and reinsert the MTP cable many times and inspect the printed pins under a scanning electron microscope: if any pin sits more than about 1.5 micrometers off its design position, or if the port-to-port loss spread grows past the reported ~0.14 dB standard deviation, the 0.78 dB loss and reproducibility claims would be contradicted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper establishes that a total-internal-reflection polymer out-of-plane coupler, optimized through finite-element frequency-domain simulations, can be packaged passively without sacrificing the performance of an actively aligned system. The optimized coupler reaches a peak transmission of -0.41 dB and varies by only about -0.15 dB across the S-, C-, and L-bands. Plugging the female MTP cable onto two-photon-polymerization-printed pins adds only 0.37 ± 0.12 dB of loss, giving a total passive packaging loss of 0.78 dB and a -0.5 dB bandwidth larger than 100 nm. The authors further show that the connection is repeatable, with a 0.14 dB standard deviation over repeated coupling cycles and across 16 ports of a matrix-vector-multiplication processor, enabling low-noise broadband photonic computing at 17.6 GBaud.

Load-bearing premise

The claim assumes that alignment pins printed with the lower-resolution 10x objective stay accurate to about 1.5 micrometers, keeping fiber misalignment loss below 0.3 dB; if fabrication variability, thermal drift, or wear exceeds that, the sub-decibel total and port-to-port reproducibility will not hold.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A 17-port photonic circuit can be interfaced without active alignment, and the same chip can be unplugged, re-plugged, pretested, and reconfigured with 0.14 dB repeatability.
  • Out-of-plane packaging with this loss and bandwidth becomes competitive with in-plane facet packaging while still addressing a two-dimensional grid of ports.
  • The full 100 nm SLED spectrum can be coupled into the chip, which suppresses noise in chaotic-light matrix-vector multiplication at 17.6 GBaud.
  • Because the packaging and the coupler are made in separate processes, the same printed-pin plug can be adapted to other out-of-plane couplers, including grating couplers, and to other material platforms.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If pin-printing accuracy improves beyond the current 1.5 micrometers, the packaging loss should approach the coupler-only value of 0.41 dB, making the passive connection indistinguishable from active alignment.
  • Since the MTP cable is an industry-standard interconnect, the approach points toward standardized, vendor-independent fiber-to-chip sockets that could lower packaging costs in data centers and quantum systems.
  • The same plug architecture could be tested for chip-to-chip photonic interconnects by putting matching pins and couplers on both chips, removing the fiber from the connection entirely.
  • The reported measurements do not include thermal or vibration cycling, so the long-term mechanical claim is a natural next test rather than an established result.
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.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports a passive, plug-and-play fiber-to-PIC packaging scheme based on two-photon-polymerized total-internal-reflection (TIR) out-of-plane couplers on a Si3N4 platform. The authors combine FEFD simulations with transmission measurements to optimize the couplers, then interface them with a female MTP cable using TPP-printed alignment pins and a DLP-printed pre-alignment structure. They report a peak coupler transmission of -0.41 dB, an average additional packaging loss of 0.37 dB, a total packaged loss of 0.78 dB, and a -0.5 dB bandwidth exceeding 100 nm. They further demonstrate reproducibility across a 16-input-port photonic matrix and use the broadband package for a 17.6 GBaud photonic-computing experiment with a superluminescent LED.

Significance. If the quoted loss values are taken at face value, the work is significant: sub-dB, reconfigurable, multiport, out-of-plane passive packaging with >100 nm bandwidth would be a clear improvement over grating-coupler-based pluggable solutions listed in Table 1 and would approach in-plane V-groove packaging while enabling two-dimensional port arrays. The paper's strengths include a direct simulation-experiment comparison, explicit discussion of fabrication-related angle offsets and alignment tolerances, and reproducibility statistics across ports and connection cycles. However, the headline 'sub-dB' claim is tied to a Fresnel-loss subtraction whose value is neither measured nor derived, so the central quantitative claim needs verification before the record claim can be accepted.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 2.1] The Fresnel-loss subtraction is load-bearing for the central claim. The text states: 'we measure experimental values and subtract Fresnel losses (0.15 dB) to align with theoretical predictions' and 'We are subtracting the Fresnel losses for all the following experimental data.' This means the quoted -0.41 dB coupler loss, the -0.37 dB packaging loss, and the headline -0.78 dB total are all net of a correction. Fresnel reflection at the fiber/air and air/polymer interfaces is a real insertion loss experienced by the user, not a measurement artifact. The 0.15 dB value is not justified by any measurement, simulation, or calculation in the paper. A first-order estimate with n_fiber ≈ 1.467 and n_polymer ≈ 1.53 for two uncoated interfaces gives roughly 0.35 dB, which would move the total packaged loss to about 1.1 dB, above the sub-dB threshold. Please provide raw, unsubtracted spectra and either a direct measurement of the Fresnel contribution or a calculation that justifies 0.15 dB; then restate all headline losses on a consistent basis, clearly stating whether Fresnel losses are included or excluded in every quoted number and in Table 1.
  2. [Table 1 and Section 3] The comparison with prior work is inconsistent if the Fresnel subtraction is applied only to this work. Table 1 labels the column 'Minimum loss [dB]' and lists 0.78 dB for this work, but the other entries (Wan, Jimenez, Bundalo, Scarcella, Barwicz) are presumably reported as measured packaged losses without a comparable Fresnel correction. If the 0.78 dB value excludes a physical interface loss while the comparison values include all interface losses, the claimed superiority is not established on a like-for-like basis. The table should state the accounting convention for every entry, and the comparison should be recomputed with the same convention for all rows.
  3. [Section 2.2] The reported packaging-loss statistics are internally inconsistent and need clarification. The abstract reports '0.37±0.12 dB', Table 1 reports '0.37 ± 0.11', the Discussion reports 'standard deviation of 0.11 dB', and Section 2.3 reports a standard deviation of 0.14 dB over attachment cycles. Please identify which standard deviation corresponds to which measurement (port-to-port at 1550 nm, wavelength-averaged, multiple plug cycles), and reconcile the three values. This matters because the 0.37 dB packaging-loss figure is a central quantitative result and its uncertainty is quoted differently in different places.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Section 2.1] The phrase 'low average standard deviation of -0.05 dB' should read '0.05 dB'; a standard deviation cannot be negative.
  2. [Section 2.1] The text says 'they are an inherit property of the air to polymer material transition'; 'inherit' should be 'inherent'.
  3. [Fig. 5 caption] The caption says 'The left inlet shows...' and 'the left inlet is showing...'; this should be 'inset'.
  4. [Section 4] The sentence 'a 12x /24x female MTP breakout cable' is ambiguous; please specify whether this is a 12-fiber or 24-fiber cable, and use a consistent notation.
  5. [General] The manuscript references Supplement A1, A2, and A.3 for the transition loss (0.12 dB per transition), angular-mismatch analysis, and multi-cycle reproducibility, but the supplementary material was not included with the arXiv submission. Since these data support quantitative claims in the main text, please ensure the supplement is available and that the main text summarizes the key numbers from it.
  6. [Section 2.1] The simulation-experiment comparison reports a 1° angle offset attributed to shrinkage, but no measurement of the fabricated coupler angle is shown. Including scanning-electron or optical profilometry data would strengthen this attribution.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the paper's loss numbers rest on an explicit constant Fresnel correction and direct measurements, not on fitted parameters or load-bearing self-citations.

full rationale

The paper's central claims are derived from an independent optimization loop: FEFD simulations of TIR-coupler geometries are compared with fabricated couplers measured through U-shaped backloops, and discrepancies (e.g., the 1° angle offset and the -3.5 dB deviation away from the optimum) are explained physically rather than fitted away. The quoted coupler loss of -0.41 dB and packaging loss of 0.37 dB are experimental values after a stated constant Fresnel correction of 0.15 dB. This correction is applied uniformly to all measurements as a physical accounting convention, and the paper does not tune it per device or per geometry; thus the subsequent comparison to simulations is not forced by construction. The alignment tolerance claim of -1 dB at 4 µm is supported by the paper's own offset measurements in Fig. 4(d), and the reference to [25] is corroborative, not load-bearing. The 17-port computing demonstration and the SLED eye diagram provide an external functional check of the packaging's bandwidth and reproducibility. No self-definitional step, fitted-input-as-prediction step, or author-imported uniqueness argument is evident. The Fresnel subtraction could be debated on accounting grounds, but that is a correctness or convention concern, not circularity.

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

The central claims rest on standard electromagnetic simulation, Gaussian beam optics, and assumptions about loss attribution and fair comparison with literature. No invented physical entities are introduced, and no free parameters are fitted to the experimental results beyond design optimization.

assumptions (4)
  • standard math Gaussian beam divergence formula (Eq. 1) accurately describes the beam evolution from SMF-28 fiber to the coupler surface.
    Used to set the focal length and mode field diameter for coupler design.
  • domain assumption On-chip propagation losses are negligible for the U-shaped backloops, so measured transmission differences are attributed solely to the couplers.
    Stated in Section 2.1; if false, the per-coupler loss would be overestimated.
  • domain assumption The 0.15 dB Fresnel loss subtraction is an appropriate correction to align experimental data with simulations.
    Applied to all experimental data; if reflections differ, absolute quoted losses would be underestimated.
  • domain assumption The comparison in Table 1 is fair across different packaging approaches; prior works do not apply the same Fresnel subtraction.
    If prior works include Fresnel losses, the 'record' claim could be overstated.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Ultra-Broadband plug-and-play photonic circuit packaging with sub-dB loss." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DRH5RUXD

@misc{pith2026250521168,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Ultra-Broadband plug-and-play photonic circuit packaging with sub-dB loss},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DRH5RUXD}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.21168}
}
read the original abstract

Photonic Integrated Circuits (PICs) offer transformative potential for computing systems, enabling high-bandwidth neuromorphic processors and facilitating low decoherence quantum computing on a chip scale platform. However, the development of robust and scalable optical packaging solutions remains a major challenge. Efficient fiber-to-chip coupling is essential for minimizing loss and enabling high optical bandwidth, key requirements for photonic computing. Here, we introduce a novel plug-and-play solution for fiber-to-PIC connections using female multi-fiber termination push-on cables and additively fabricate the alignment counterpart on the circuit via two-photon polymerization. We develop 3D out-of-plane couplers, offering a peak transmission of -0.41 dB and broadband performance with losses below 0.55 dB across the 1500-1600 nm range. Integration of the couplers with the plug-and-play solution adds in average only 0.37+-0.12 dB of loss, setting a record in passive out-of-plane packaging solution with losses of 0.78 dB, as well as -0.5 dB bandwidth greater than 100 nm. We characterize the reproducibility of this out-of-plane packaging solution in terms of losses, as well as bandwidth by interfacing a 17-port photonic circuit for incoherent photonic computing. The high bandwidth of the packaging is crucial to couple the full 100 nm bandwidth spectrum of a superluminescent light emitting diode, which consequently enables low noise computing at 17.6 GBaud. Our concept enables multiport, passive and reconfigurable photonic integrated circuit packaging providing reliability and versatility driving photonic packaging towards the scalability and robustness of electric chip packaging.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

55 extracted references · 38 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Advancement in Silicon Integrated Photonics Technologies for Sensing Applications in Near-Infrared and Mid-Infrared Region: A Review,

    N. L. Kazanskiy, S. N. Khonina, and M. A. Butt, “Advancement in Silicon Integrated Photonics Technologies for Sensing Applications in Near-Infrared and Mid-Infrared Region: A Review,” Photonics, vol. 9, no. 5, p. 331, May 2022, doi: 10.3390/photonics9050331

    work page doi:10.3390/photonics9050331 2022

  2. [2]

    Recent Advances in Integrated Photonic Sensors,

    V. Passaro, C. Tullio, B. Troia, M. Notte, G. Giannoccaro, and F. Leonardis, “Recent Advances in Integrated Photonic Sensors,” Sensors, vol. 12, no. 11, pp. 15558–15598, Nov. 2012, doi: 10.3390/s121115558

    work page doi:10.3390/s121115558 2012

  3. [3]

    Quantum nanophotonic and nanoplasmonic sensing: towards quantum optical bioscience laboratories on chip,

    J. Xavier, D. Yu, C. Jones, E. Zossimova, and F. Vollmer, “Quantum nanophotonic and nanoplasmonic sensing: towards quantum optical bioscience laboratories on chip,” Nanophotonics, vol. 10, no. 5, pp. 1387–1435, Mar. 2021, doi: 10.1515/nanoph-2020-0593

    work page doi:10.1515/nanoph-2020-0593 2021

  4. [4]

    Semiconductor Quantum Dots for Integrated Quantum Photonics,

    S. Hepp, M. Jetter, S. L. Portalupi, and P. Michler, “Semiconductor Quantum Dots for Integrated Quantum Photonics,” Adv Quantum Tech, vol. 2, no. 9, p. 1900020, Sep. 2019, doi: 10.1002/qute.201900020

    work page doi:10.1002/qute.201900020 2019

  5. [5]

    Waveguide-integrated superconducting nanowire single-photon detectors,

    S. Ferrari, C. Schuck, and W. Pernice, “Waveguide-integrated superconducting nanowire single-photon detectors,” Nanophotonics, vol. 7, no. 11, pp. 1725–1758, Oct. 2018, doi: 10.1515/nanoph-2018-0059

    work page doi:10.1515/nanoph-2018-0059 2018

  6. [6]

    Diamond as a Platform for Integrated Quantum Photonics,

    F. Lenzini, N. Gruhler, N. Walter, and W. H. P. Pernice, “Diamond as a Platform for Integrated Quantum Photonics,” Adv Quantum Tech, vol. 1, no. 3, p. 1800061, Dec. 2018, doi: 10.1002/qute.201800061

    doi:10.1002/qute.201800061 2018

  7. [7]

    Scaling capacity of fiber-optic transmission systems via silicon photonics,

    W. Shi, Y. Tian, and A. Gervais, “Scaling capacity of fiber-optic transmission systems via silicon photonics,” Nanophotonics, vol. 9, no. 16, pp. 4629–4663, Nov. 2020, doi: 10.1515/nanoph-2020-0309

    work page doi:10.1515/nanoph-2020-0309 2020

  8. [8]

    Chip-to-chip optical interconnections between stacked self-aligned SOI photonic chips,

    S. Bernabé, C. Kopp, M. Volpert, J. Harduin, J.-M. Fédéli, and H. Ribot, “Chip-to-chip optical interconnections between stacked self-aligned SOI photonic chips,” Opt. Express, vol. 20, no. 7, p. 7886, Mar. 2012, doi: 10.1364/OE.20.007886

    work page doi:10.1364/oe.20.007886 2012

Show all 55 references
  1. [9]

    Parallel convolutional processing using an integrated photonic tensor core,

    J. Feldmann et al., “Parallel convolutional processing using an integrated photonic tensor core,” Nature, vol. 589, no. 7840, pp. 52–58, Jan. 2021, doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-03070-1

    2021 doi

  2. [10]

    Photonics for artificial intelligence and neuromorphic computing,

    B. J. Shastri et al., “Photonics for artificial intelligence and neuromorphic computing,” Nat. Photonics, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 102–114, Feb. 2021, doi: 10.1038/s41566-020-00754-y

    2021 doi

  3. [11]

    Deep learning with coherent nanophotonic circuits,

    Y. Shen et al., “Deep learning with coherent nanophotonic circuits,” Nature Photon, vol. 11, no. 7, pp. 441–446, Jul. 2017, doi: 10.1038/nphoton.2017.93

    2017 doi

  4. [12]

    Integrated Photonics Packaging: Challenges and Opportunities,

    L. Ranno et al., “Integrated Photonics Packaging: Challenges and Opportunities,” ACS Photonics, vol. 9, no. 11, pp. 3467–3485, Nov. 2022, doi: 10.1021/acsphotonics.2c00891

    2022 doi

  5. [13]

    Co-Packaged Photonics For High Performance Computing: Status, Challenges And Opportunities,

    R. Mahajan et al., “Co-Packaged Photonics For High Performance Computing: Status, Challenges And Opportunities,” J. Lightwave Technol., vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 379–392, Jan. 2022, doi: 10.1109/JLT.2021.3104725. 18

    2022

  6. [14]

    Coupling strategies for silicon photonics integrated chips [Invited],

    R. Marchetti, C. Lacava, L. Carroll, K. Gradkowski, and P. Minzioni, “Coupling strategies for silicon photonics integrated chips [Invited],” Photon. Res., vol. 7, no. 2, p. 201, Feb. 2019, doi: 10.1364/PRJ.7.000201

    2019 doi

  7. [15]

    High-efficiency broadband light coupling between optical fibers and photonic integrated circuits,

    G. Son, S. Han, J. Park, K. Kwon, and K. Yu, “High-efficiency broadband light coupling between optical fibers and photonic integrated circuits,” Nanophotonics, vol. 7, no. 12, pp. 1845–1864, Nov. 2018, doi: 10.1515/nanoph-2018-0075

    2018 doi

  8. [16]

    In situ 3D nanoprinting of free-form coupling elements for hybrid photonic integration,

    P.-I. Dietrich et al., “In situ 3D nanoprinting of free-form coupling elements for hybrid photonic integration,” Nature Photon, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 241–247, Apr. 2018, doi: 10.1038/s41566-018-0133-4

    2018 doi

  9. [17]

    3D-printed facet-attached optical elements for connecting VCSEL and photodiodes to fiber arrays and multi-core fibers,

    P. Maier et al., “3D-printed facet-attached optical elements for connecting VCSEL and photodiodes to fiber arrays and multi-core fibers,” Opt. Express, vol. 30, no. 26, p. 46602, Dec. 2022, doi: 10.1364/OE.470676

    2022 doi

  10. [18]

    Post-Integrated Dual-Core Large-End Spot-Size Converter With Si Vertical Taper for Fiber Butt-Coupling to Si- Photonics Chip,

    M. Tokushima, H. Kawashima, T. Horikawa, and K. Kurata, “Post-Integrated Dual-Core Large-End Spot-Size Converter With Si Vertical Taper for Fiber Butt-Coupling to Si- Photonics Chip,” J. Lightwave Technol., vol. 36, no. 20, pp. 4783–4791, Oct. 2018, doi: 10.1109/JLT.2018.2863732

    2018

  11. [19]

    Simple and fully CMOS-compatible low-loss fiber coupling structure for a silicon photonics platform,

    Y. Maegami et al., “Simple and fully CMOS-compatible low-loss fiber coupling structure for a silicon photonics platform,” Opt. Lett., vol. 45, no. 7, p. 2095, Apr. 2020, doi: 10.1364/OL.388267

    2020 doi

  12. [20]

    Efficient fiber-optical interface for nanophotonic devices,

    T. G. Tiecke et al., “Efficient fiber-optical interface for nanophotonic devices,” Optica, vol. 2, no. 2, p. 70, Feb. 2015, doi: 10.1364/OPTICA.2.000070

    2015 doi

  13. [21]

    GRATING COUPLER FOR EFFICIENT EXCITATION OF OPTICAL GUIDED WAVES IN THIN FILMS,

    M. L. Dakss, L. Kuhn, P. F. Heidrich, and B. A. Scott, “GRATING COUPLER FOR EFFICIENT EXCITATION OF OPTICAL GUIDED WAVES IN THIN FILMS,” Applied Physics Letters, vol. 16, no. 12, pp. 523–525, Jun. 1970, doi: 10.1063/1.1653091

    1970 doi

  14. [22]

    Scalable and efficient grating couplers on low-index photonic platforms enabled by cryogenic deep silicon etching,

    E. Lomonte, M. Stappers, L. Krämer, W. H. P. Pernice, and F. Lenzini, “Scalable and efficient grating couplers on low-index photonic platforms enabled by cryogenic deep silicon etching,” Sci Rep, vol. 14, no. 1, p. 4256, Feb. 2024, doi: 10.1038/s41598-024- 53975-4

    2024 doi

  15. [23]

    C- and O-Band Dual-Polarization Fiber-to-Chip Grating Couplers for Silicon Nitride Photonics,

    M. Kohli et al., “C- and O-Band Dual-Polarization Fiber-to-Chip Grating Couplers for Silicon Nitride Photonics,” ACS Photonics, vol. 10, no. 9, pp. 3366–3373, Sep. 2023, doi: 10.1021/acsphotonics.3c00834

    2023 doi

  16. [24]

    Inverse design of near unity efficiency perfectly vertical grating couplers,

    A. Michaels and E. Yablonovitch, “Inverse design of near unity efficiency perfectly vertical grating couplers,” Opt. Express, vol. 26, no. 4, p. 4766, Feb. 2018, doi: 10.1364/OE.26.004766

    2018 doi

  17. [25]

    Low-loss fiber-to-chip couplers with ultrawide optical bandwidth,

    H. Gehring et al., “Low-loss fiber-to-chip couplers with ultrawide optical bandwidth,” APL Photonics, vol. 4, no. 1, p. 010801, Jan. 2019, doi: 10.1063/1.5064401

    2019 doi

  18. [26]

    Broadband out-of-plane coupling at visible wavelengths,

    H. Gehring, A. Eich, C. Schuck, and W. H. P. Pernice, “Broadband out-of-plane coupling at visible wavelengths,” Opt. Lett., vol. 44, no. 20, p. 5089, Oct. 2019, doi: 10.1364/OL.44.005089

    2019 doi

  19. [27]

    3D-Printed Ultra-Broadband Highly Efficient Out-of-Plane Coupler for Photonic Integrated Circuits,

    M. Blaicher et al., “3D-Printed Ultra-Broadband Highly Efficient Out-of-Plane Coupler for Photonic Integrated Circuits,” in Conference on Lasers and Electro-Optics, San Jose, California: OSA, 2018, p. STh1A.1. doi: 10.1364/CLEO_SI.2018.STh1A.1

    2018 doi

  20. [28]

    Low-loss and broadband fiber-to-chip coupler by 3D fabrication on a silicon photonic platform,

    H. Luo, F. Xie, Y. Cao, S. Yu, L. Chen, and X. Cai, “Low-loss and broadband fiber-to-chip coupler by 3D fabrication on a silicon photonic platform,” Opt. Lett., vol. 45, no. 5, p. 1236, Mar. 2020, doi: 10.1364/OL.386550. 19

    2020 doi

  21. [29]

    Efficient four-way vertical coupler array for chip- scale space-division-multiplexing applications,

    H. Luo, L. Chen, S. Yu, and X. Cai, “Efficient four-way vertical coupler array for chip- scale space-division-multiplexing applications,” Opt. Lett., vol. 46, no. 17, p. 4324, Sep. 2021, doi: 10.1364/OL.434736

    2021 doi

  22. [30]

    Free‐Form Micro‐Optics Enabling Ultra‐Broadband Low‐Loss Off‐Chip Coupling,

    S. Yu et al., “Free‐Form Micro‐Optics Enabling Ultra‐Broadband Low‐Loss Off‐Chip Coupling,” Laser & Photonics Reviews, vol. 17, no. 6, p. 2200025, Jun. 2023, doi: 10.1002/lpor.202200025

    2023 doi

  23. [31]

    Packaging Process for Grating-Coupled Silicon Photonic Waveguides Using Angle-Polished Fibers,

    B. Snyder and P. O’Brien, “Packaging Process for Grating-Coupled Silicon Photonic Waveguides Using Angle-Polished Fibers,” IEEE Trans. Compon., Packag. Manufact. Technol., vol. 3, no. 6, pp. 954–959, Jun. 2013, doi: 10.1109/TCPMT.2012.2237052

    2013

  24. [32]

    Grating Couplers for Coupling between Optical Fibers and Nanophotonic Waveguides,

    D. Taillaert et al., “Grating Couplers for Coupling between Optical Fibers and Nanophotonic Waveguides,” jjap, vol. 45, no. 8R, p. 6071, Aug. 2006, doi: 10.1143/JJAP.45.6071

    2006 doi

  25. [33]

    Connecting Silicon Photonic Circuits to Multicore Fibers by Photonic Wire Bonding,

    N. Lindenmann et al., “Connecting Silicon Photonic Circuits to Multicore Fibers by Photonic Wire Bonding,” J. Lightwave Technol., vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 755–760, Feb. 2015, doi: 10.1109/JLT.2014.2373051

    2015

  26. [34]

    Automated, high-throughput photonic packaging,

    T. Barwicz et al., “Automated, high-throughput photonic packaging,” Optical Fiber Technology, vol. 44, pp. 24–35, Aug. 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.yofte.2018.02.019

    2018 doi

  27. [35]

    3D printed fiber sockets for plug and play micro-optics,

    P. Nair S, J. Trisno, H. Wang, and J. K. W. Yang, “3D printed fiber sockets for plug and play micro-optics,” Int. J. Extrem. Manuf., vol. 3, no. 1, p. 015301, Jan. 2021, doi: 10.1088/2631-7990/abc674

    2021 doi

  28. [36]

    Plug-and-play fiber to waveguide connector,

    O. A. Jimenez Gordillo, S. Chaitanya, Y.-C. Chang, U. D. Dave, A. Mohanty, and M. Lipson, “Plug-and-play fiber to waveguide connector,” Opt. Express, vol. 27, no. 15, p. 20305, Jul. 2019, doi: 10.1364/OE.27.020305

    2019 doi

  29. [37]

    Pluggable Single-Mode Fiber-Array-to-PIC Coupling Using Micro- Lenses,

    C. Scarcella et al., “Pluggable Single-Mode Fiber-Array-to-PIC Coupling Using Micro- Lenses,” IEEE Photon. Technol. Lett., vol. 29, no. 22, pp. 1943–1946, Nov. 2017, doi: 10.1109/LPT.2017.2757082

    1943

  30. [38]

    PIXAPP Photonics Packaging Pilot Line – Development of a Silicon Photonic Optical Transceiver With Pluggable Fiber Connectivity,

    I.-L. Bundalo et al., “PIXAPP Photonics Packaging Pilot Line – Development of a Silicon Photonic Optical Transceiver With Pluggable Fiber Connectivity,” IEEE J. Select. Topics Quantum Electron., vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 1–11, May 2022, doi: 10.1109/JSTQE.2022.3158891

    2022

  31. [39]

    Fiber- Interconnect Silicon Chiplet Technology for Self-Aligned Fiber-to-Chip Assembly,

    C. Wan, J. L. Gonzalez, T. Fan, A. Adibi, T. K. Gaylord, and M. S. Bakir, “Fiber- Interconnect Silicon Chiplet Technology for Self-Aligned Fiber-to-Chip Assembly,” IEEE Photon. Technol. Lett., vol. 31, no. 16, pp. 1311–1314, Aug. 2019, doi: 10.1109/LPT.2019.2923206

    2019

  32. [40]

    Beam Divergence from an SMF-28 Optical Fiber:,

    Jr. Kowalevicz, B. Andrew M., and Frank, “Beam Divergence from an SMF-28 Optical Fiber:,” Defense Technical Information Center, Fort Belvoir, VA, Oct. 2006. doi: 10.21236/ADA456331

    2006 doi

  33. [41]

    Partial coherence enhances parallelized photonic computing,

    B. Dong et al., “Partial coherence enhances parallelized photonic computing,” Nature, vol. 632, no. 8023, pp. 55–62, Aug. 2024, doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-07590-y

    2024 doi

  34. [42]

    Probabilistic photonic computing with chaotic light,

    F. Brückerhoff-Plückelmann et al., “Probabilistic photonic computing with chaotic light,” Nat Commun, vol. 15, no. 1, p. 10445, Dec. 2024, doi: 10.1038/s41467-024-54931-6

    2024 doi

  35. [43]

    Review of Silicon Photonics Technology and Platform Development,

    S. Y. Siew et al., “Review of Silicon Photonics Technology and Platform Development,” J. Lightwave Technol., vol. 39, no. 13, pp. 4374–4389, Jul. 2021, doi: 10.1109/JLT.2021.3066203

    2021

  36. [44]

    Integrated photonics on thin-film lithium niobate,

    D. Zhu et al., “Integrated photonics on thin-film lithium niobate,” Adv. Opt. Photon., vol. 13, no. 2, p. 242, Jun. 2021, doi: 10.1364/AOP.411024. 20

    2021 doi

  37. [45]

    Single-photon detection and cryogenic reconfigurability in lithium niobate nanophotonic circuits,

    E. Lomonte et al., “Single-photon detection and cryogenic reconfigurability in lithium niobate nanophotonic circuits,” Nat Commun, vol. 12, no. 1, p. 6847, Nov. 2021, doi: 10.1038/s41467-021-27205-8

    2021 doi

  38. [46]

    Tantala Kerr nonlinear integrated photonics,

    H. Jung, S.-P. Yu, D. R. Carlson, T. E. Drake, T. C. Briles, and S. B. Papp, “Tantala Kerr nonlinear integrated photonics,” Optica, vol. 8, no. 6, p. 811, Jun. 2021, doi: 10.1364/OPTICA.411968

    2021 doi

  39. [47]

    Toward integrated tantalum pentoxide optical parametric oscillators,

    M. Timmerkamp, N. M. Lüpken, S. Adrian Abazi, J. Rasmus Bankwitz, C. Schuck, and C. Fallnich, “Toward integrated tantalum pentoxide optical parametric oscillators,” Opt. Lett., vol. 48, no. 17, p. 4621, Sep. 2023, doi: 10.1364/OL.496990

    2023 doi

  40. [48]

    High-quality factor Ta2 O5 -on-insulator resonators with ultimate thermal stability,

    J. Rasmus Bankwitz et al., “High-quality factor Ta2 O5 -on-insulator resonators with ultimate thermal stability,” Opt. Lett., vol. 48, no. 21, p. 5783, Nov. 2023, doi: 10.1364/OL.499726

    2023 doi

  41. [49]

    A Novel Approach to Photonic Packaging Leveraging Existing High- Throughput Microelectronic Facilities,

    T. Barwicz et al., “A Novel Approach to Photonic Packaging Leveraging Existing High- Throughput Microelectronic Facilities,” IEEE J. Select. Topics Quantum Electron., vol. 22, no. 6, pp. 455–466, Nov. 2016, doi: 10.1109/JSTQE.2016.2593637

    2016

  42. [50]

    Radiation-hard/high-speed parallel optical links,

    K. K. Gan et al., “Radiation-hard/high-speed parallel optical links,” Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment, vol. 831, pp. 246–249, Sep. 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.nima.2016.03.032

    2016 doi

  43. [51]

    AlGaN/AlN heterostructures: an emerging platform for nonlinear integrated photonics,

    S. Gündogdu et al., “AlGaN/AlN heterostructures: an emerging platform for nonlinear integrated photonics,” 2023, arXiv. doi: 10.48550/ARXIV.2312.03128

    2023 doi arXiv

  44. [52]

    Towards ‘smart transceivers’ in FPGA-controlled lithium-niobate- on-insulator integrated circuits for edge computing applications [Invited],

    J. R. Bankwitz et al., “Towards ‘smart transceivers’ in FPGA-controlled lithium-niobate- on-insulator integrated circuits for edge computing applications [Invited],” Opt. Mater. Express, vol. 13, no. 12, p. 3667, Dec. 2023, doi: 10.1364/OME.503340

    2023 doi

  45. [53]

    Integrated microcavity electric field sensors using Pound-Drever-Hall detection,

    X. Ma et al., “Integrated microcavity electric field sensors using Pound-Drever-Hall detection,” Nat Commun, vol. 15, no. 1, p. 1386, Feb. 2024, doi: 10.1038/s41467-024- 45699-w

    2024 doi

  46. [54]

    Large area multi-material-multi- photon 3D printing with fast in-situ material replacement,

    Y. Gao, S. Toukabri, Y. Yu, A. Richter, and R. Kirchner, “Large area multi-material-multi- photon 3D printing with fast in-situ material replacement,” in Laser 3D Manufacturing VIII, H. Helvajian, B. Gu, and H. Chen, Eds., Online Only, United States: SPIE, Mar. 2021, p. 13. do...

    2021 doi

  47. [55]

    Caghan Ünlüer, cuenlueer/npxpy: v0.1.1. (Mar. 17, 2025). Zenodo. doi: 10.5281/ZENODO.15041492. First Author is a PhD student at Heidelberg University . He received his BS and MS degrees in physics from KIT in 2019 and 2021. His current research interests include integrated pho...

    2025 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.