pith. sign in

arxiv: 2511.09922 · v4 · submitted 2025-11-13 · ⚛️ physics.optics · quant-ph

Quantum Phase Gradient Imaging Using a Nonlocal Metasurface System

Jinliang Ren , Jinyong Ma , Katsuya Tanaka , Lukas Wesemann , Ann Roberts , Frank Setzpfandt , Andrey A. Sukhorukov This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-17 22:58 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.optics quant-ph
keywords quantum phase gradient imagingmetasurfaceentangled photon pairsspontaneous parametric down-conversionoptical transfer functionphase gradient extractionquantum sensingnonlocal resonance
0
0 comments X

The pith

A lithium niobate metasurface generates tunable entangled photons while a silicon metasurface extracts phase gradients by differentiating the photon wavefunction.

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

The paper establishes that a compact system using a lithium niobate metasurface for spontaneous parametric down-conversion and a silicon metasurface with a nearly linear optical transfer function can image quantum phase gradients. A sympathetic reader would care because this setup enables precise measurements of transparent samples under low-light conditions in a portable form. If the central claim holds, the approach integrates generation and detection of quantum states on metasurfaces without traditional bulky optics. Experimental results confirm the method works for gradients up to 25 rad/mm with 89 percent similarity to reference values.

Core claim

The integration of a LiNbO3 metasurface for generating spatially entangled photon pairs with all-optically angularly tunable emission and a Si metasurface that provides a nearly linear optical transfer function differentiates the photon wavefunction to extract phase gradients, as shown by proof-of-concept experiments that image up to 25 rad/mm phase gradients achieving 89 percent similarity with reference values.

What carries the argument

The silicon metasurface providing a nearly linear optical transfer function that differentiates the photon wavefunction to extract phase gradients.

If this is right

  • Pixel resolution can increase by orders of magnitude when metasurface dimensions and resonance quality factor are scaled up.
  • The system provides a portable platform for quantum phase-gradient imaging.
  • Applications become feasible in quantum sensing, microscopy, and LiDAR technology.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The angular tunability of emission from the lithium niobate metasurface could support adaptive scanning in dynamic environments without mechanical parts.
  • Similar nonlocal metasurface designs might extend to generating other entangled states for amplitude or polarization imaging under low light.
  • Integration with single-photon detectors could enable real-time operation for applications like biological sample analysis.

Load-bearing premise

The silicon metasurface provides a nearly linear optical transfer function that accurately differentiates the photon wavefunction to extract phase gradients without significant distortion or loss of entanglement.

What would settle it

A measurement in which the system's extracted phase gradients deviate substantially from calibrated reference values or the similarity drops well below 89 percent across multiple trials would falsify the extraction claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2511.09922 by Andrey A. Sukhorukov, Ann Roberts, Frank Setzpfandt, Jinliang Ren, Jinyong Ma, Katsuya Tanaka, Lukas Wesemann.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Schematic diagram of phase-gradient imaging using quantum light. (Left) Single-photon wave packets Ψ𝑁 (𝑧) are prepared at different spatial positions labeled 𝑁 = 1, 2, 3, . . . in the transverse direction 𝑧. Each wavepacket has a finite width with a Gaussian-like shape of the wavefunction norm |Ψ𝑁 (𝑧)|2 , as indicated by lines. (Middle) After propagating through a phase object, the wavepackets acquire a sp… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Concept of metasurface system for quantum phase-gradient imaging with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: a. A transmission setup used to experimentally check the incident-angle dependent transmission of the Si metasurface by rotating it around the 𝑦-axis. The incident wave is 𝑦-polarised. b. The experimentally measured transmission of the Si metasurface. The blue box marks the applicable region for phase-gradient imaging. c. Setup for calibrating the signal photon positions along the 𝑦 direction at different … view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Resolution of quantum phase-gradient imaging. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Calibration for phase gradient image reconstruction. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Proof-of-principle demonstration of quantum phase-gradient imaging. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Quantum phase imaging enables the analysis of transparent samples with thickness and refractive index variations in scenarios requiring precise measurements under low-light conditions. Here, we present a compact quantum phase-gradient imaging system integrating a lithium niobate (LiNbO3) metasurface for generating spatially entangled photon pairs and a silicon (Si) metasurface for phase gradient extraction. By leveraging nonlocal resonances, the LiNbO3 metasurface enables efficient spontaneous parametric down-conversion (SPDC) with all-optically angularly tunable emission, while the Si metasurface provides a nearly linear optical transfer function (OTF) that differentiates the photon wavefunction and extracts phase gradients.Experimental proof-of-concept results demonstrate the imaging of up to 25~rad/mm phase gradients, achieving 89% similarity with the reference values. The pixel resolution of the system can be potentially enhanced by orders of magnitude by increasing the metasurface dimensions and resonance quality factor.Our work showcases the application of metasurfaces in both generating and detecting quantum states and establishes a new paradigm for portable quantum phase-gradient imaging, with potential applications in quantum sensing, microscopy, and LiDAR technology.

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

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents a compact quantum phase-gradient imaging system integrating a lithium niobate metasurface for generating spatially entangled photon pairs via tunable SPDC and a silicon metasurface for extracting phase gradients through a nearly linear optical transfer function. The central claim is an experimental proof-of-concept demonstrating imaging of phase gradients up to 25 rad/mm with 89% similarity to reference values, with potential for enhanced pixel resolution via larger metasurfaces and higher Q-factors.

Significance. If validated, the work would advance compact quantum imaging by combining metasurface-based state generation and detection, offering a pathway to portable systems for low-light phase sensing with applications in microscopy and LiDAR. The experimental demonstration of high-gradient imaging is noteworthy, though current support is preliminary and requires additional characterization to confirm the quantum differentiation mechanism.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 4, Fig. 5] Section 4 and Fig. 5: The assumption of a nearly linear OTF in the Si metasurface for differentiating the two-photon wavefunction without significant distortion is supported only by FDTD simulations of the designed resonance. No post-fabrication far-field OTF or MTF measurements are shown for the spatial-frequency range corresponding to 25 rad/mm gradients, where fabrication-induced phase errors could introduce nonlinear mapping from true gradient to coincidence rate and undermine the 89% similarity figure.
  2. [Experimental results] Experimental results section and abstract: The reported 25 rad/mm gradients and 89% similarity lack error bars, sample sizes, coincidence statistics, or details on data processing and background subtraction. This omission prevents assessment of the statistical reliability and reproducibility of the quantitative claims central to the proof-of-concept.
minor comments (1)
  1. Clarify the precise metric used for the '89% similarity' comparison to reference values, including any formula or reference in the methods.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We are grateful to the referee for the thorough review and valuable suggestions that will help improve the clarity and rigor of our manuscript. We address the major comments point by point below and indicate the revisions we plan to make.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Section 4, Fig. 5] Section 4 and Fig. 5: The assumption of a nearly linear OTF in the Si metasurface for differentiating the two-photon wavefunction without significant distortion is supported only by FDTD simulations of the designed resonance. No post-fabrication far-field OTF or MTF measurements are shown for the spatial-frequency range corresponding to 25 rad/mm gradients, where fabrication-induced phase errors could introduce nonlinear mapping from true gradient to coincidence rate and undermine the 89% similarity figure.

    Authors: We thank the referee for this observation. The OTF linearity was indeed validated through comprehensive FDTD simulations of the metasurface design, which showed a nearly linear response over the spatial frequency range up to 25 rad/mm. However, we recognize that experimental characterization of the fabricated device's OTF would provide additional confidence, particularly regarding fabrication tolerances. In the revised manuscript, we will expand Section 4 to include a discussion of the fabrication process and estimated tolerances, along with an analysis of how potential phase errors might affect the linearity. Additionally, we will clarify that the 89% similarity is supported by the agreement between experimental coincidence rates and theoretical predictions based on the simulated OTF. If space permits, we may include supplementary far-field simulation data for the fabricated parameters. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Experimental results] Experimental results section and abstract: The reported 25 rad/mm gradients and 89% similarity lack error bars, sample sizes, coincidence statistics, or details on data processing and background subtraction. This omission prevents assessment of the statistical reliability and reproducibility of the quantitative claims central to the proof-of-concept.

    Authors: We agree with the referee that including statistical information and methodological details is crucial for a robust proof-of-concept. In the revised manuscript, we will update the Experimental results section to include error bars on the phase gradient measurements, report the sample sizes and total coincidence counts used for each data point, and provide a step-by-step description of the data processing, including background subtraction and normalization procedures. We will also ensure that the abstract accurately reflects these enhanced details where appropriate. These additions will allow readers to better evaluate the reliability of the reported 89% similarity and the maximum gradient of 25 rad/mm. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; experimental results validated externally

full rationale

The paper reports an experimental proof-of-concept demonstration of quantum phase-gradient imaging, with the 89% similarity figure obtained by direct comparison to independent reference measurements rather than any internal fit or self-referential derivation. The metasurface designs rely on standard FDTD simulations and nonlocal resonance principles, with no load-bearing steps that reduce by construction to fitted parameters renamed as predictions or to self-citations whose validity depends on the present work. The derivation chain for the OTF linearity and differentiation effect is grounded in the physical design and external validation, rendering the overall analysis self-contained.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central experimental claim rests on standard quantum optics assumptions about SPDC and linear optical transfer functions; no new free parameters or invented entities are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Spontaneous parametric down-conversion in a lithium niobate metasurface produces spatially entangled photon pairs whose wavefunction can be differentiated by a subsequent linear optical transfer function.
    Invoked in the description of the LiNbO3 and Si metasurface roles.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5515 in / 1263 out tokens · 44463 ms · 2026-05-17T22:58:26.293563+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references · 42 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Optical imaging by means of 2-photon quantum entanglement

    T. B. Pittman, Y. H. Shih, D. V. Strekalov, and A. V. Sergienko, “Optical imaging by means of 2-photon quantum entanglement”, Phys. Rev. A52, R3429–R3432 (1995) 10.1103/PhysRevA.52.R3429

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.52.r3429 1995

  2. [2]

    Quantum Imaging

    Y. Shih, “Quantum Imaging”, IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quantum Electron.13, 1016–1030 (2007) 10.1109/JSTQE.2007.902724

    work page doi:10.1109/jstqe.2007.902724 2007

  3. [3]

    An introduction to ghost imaging: quantum and classical

    M. J. Padgett and R. W. Boyd, “An introduction to ghost imaging: quantum and classical”, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A375, 20160233 (2017) 10.1098/rsta.2016.0233

    work page doi:10.1098/rsta.2016.0233 2017

  4. [4]

    Imaging with quantum states of light

    P.-A. Moreau, E. Toninelli, T. Gregory, and M. J. Padgett, “Imaging with quantum states of light”, Nat. Rev. Phys.1, 367–380 (2019) 10.1038/s42254-019-0056-0

    work page doi:10.1038/s42254-019-0056-0 2019

  5. [5]

    PerspectivesforApplicationsofQuantumImaging

    M. Gilaberte Basset, F. Setzpfandt, F. Steinlechner, E. Beckert, T. Pertsch, and M. Gräfe, “PerspectivesforApplicationsofQuantumImaging”,Laser&PhotonicsRev.13,1900097 (2019) 10.1002/lpor.201900097

    work page doi:10.1002/lpor.201900097 2019

  6. [6]

    Shaping the spatial correlations of entangled photon pairs

    P. Cameron, B. Courme, D. Faccio, and H. Defienne, “Shaping the spatial correlations of entangled photon pairs”, J. Phys. Phot.6, 033001 (2024) 10.1088/2515-7647/ad50b1

    work page doi:10.1088/2515-7647/ad50b1 2024

  7. [7]

    Advances in quantum imaging

    H. Defienne, W. P. Bowen, M. Chekhova, G. B. Lemos, D. Oron, S. Ramelow, N. Treps, and D. Faccio, “Advances in quantum imaging”, Nat. Photon.18, 1024–1036 (2024) 10.1038/s41566-024-01516-w

    work page doi:10.1038/s41566-024-01516-w 2024

  8. [8]

    How a thirty-year-old quantum tale of two photons became ghost imaging

    A. Forbes and F. Nothlawala, “How a thirty-year-old quantum tale of two photons became ghost imaging”, Commun. Phys.8, 174 (2025) 10.1038/s42005-025-02099-w

    work page doi:10.1038/s42005-025-02099-w 2025

  9. [9]

    Experimental realization of sub-shot-noise quantum imaging

    G. Brida, M. Genovese, and I. Ruo Berchera, “Experimental realization of sub-shot-noise quantum imaging”, Nat. Photonics4, 227–230 (2010) 10.1038/nphoton.2010.29

    work page doi:10.1038/nphoton.2010.29 2010

  10. [10]

    Realization of the first sub-shot-noise wide field microscope

    N. Samantaray, I. Ruo-Berchera, A. Meda, and M. Genovese, “Realization of the first sub-shot-noise wide field microscope”, Light. Sci. & Appl.6, e17005–e17005 (2017) 10.1038/lsa.2017.5

    work page doi:10.1038/lsa.2017.5 2017

  11. [11]

    Quantum-mechanical noise in an interferometer

    C. M. Caves, “Quantum-mechanical noise in an interferometer”, Phys. Rev. D23, 1693– 1708 (1981) 10.1103/PhysRevD.23.1693

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.23.1693 1981

  12. [12]

    Rusca and N

    D. Rusca and N. Gisin,Quantum cryptography: an overview of quantum key distribution, 2024, https://arxiv.org/abs/2411.04044

    work page arXiv 2024

  13. [13]

    Quantum imaging with undetected photons

    G. B. Lemos, V. Borish, G. D. Cole, S. Ramelow, R. Lapkiewicz, and A. Zeilinger, “Quantum imaging with undetected photons”, Nature512, 409–412 (2014) 10.1038/ nature13586

    work page 2014

  14. [14]

    Tunable optical coherence tomography in the infrared range using visible photons

    A. V. Paterova, H. Z. Yang, C. W. An, D. A. Kalashnikov, and L. A. Krivitsky, “Tunable optical coherence tomography in the infrared range using visible photons”, Quantum Sci. Technol.3, 025008 (2018) 10.1088/2058-9565/aab567

    work page doi:10.1088/2058-9565/aab567 2018

  15. [15]

    Advances in quantum metrology

    V. Giovannetti, S. Lloyd, and L. Maccone, “Advances in quantum metrology”, Nat. Photonics5, 222–229 (2011) 10.1038/nphoton.2011.35

    work page doi:10.1038/nphoton.2011.35 2011

  16. [16]

    Quantum enhanced non-interferometric quantitative phase imaging

    G. Ortolano, A. Paniate, P. Boucher, C. Napoli, S. Soman, S. F. Pereira, I. Ruo-Berchera, and M. Genovese, “Quantum enhanced non-interferometric quantitative phase imaging”, Light. Sci. & Appl.12, 171 (2023) 10.1038/s41377-023-01215-1

    work page doi:10.1038/s41377-023-01215-1 2023

  17. [17]

    Quantitative phase imaging: recent advances and expanding potential in biomedicine

    T. L. Nguyen, S. Pradeep, R. L. Judson-Torres, J. Reed, M. A. Teitell, and T. A. Zangle, “Quantitative phase imaging: recent advances and expanding potential in biomedicine”, ACS Nano16, 11516–11544 (2022) 10.1021/acsnano.1c11507

    work page doi:10.1021/acsnano.1c11507 2022

  18. [18]

    Phase retrieval algorithms: a personal tour [invited]

    J. R. Fienup, “Phase retrieval algorithms: a personal tour [invited]”, Appl. Opt.52, 45 (2013) 10.1364/AO.52.000045

    work page doi:10.1364/ao.52.000045 2013

  19. [19]

    Quantitative phase imaging in biomedicine

    Y. Park, C. Depeursinge, and G. Popescu, “Quantitative phase imaging in biomedicine”, Nat. Photonics12, 578–589 (2018) 10.1038/s41566-018-0253-x

    work page doi:10.1038/s41566-018-0253-x 2018

  20. [20]

    Phase contrast, a new method for the microscopic observation of transparent objects part ii

    F. Zernike, “Phase contrast, a new method for the microscopic observation of transparent objects part ii”, Physica9, 974–986 (1942) 10.1016/S0031-8914(42)80079-8

    work page doi:10.1016/s0031-8914(42)80079-8 1942

  21. [21]

    Performing mathematical operations with metamaterials

    A. Silva, F. Monticone, G. Castaldi, V. Galdi, A. Alù, and N. Engheta, “Performing mathematical operations with metamaterials”, Science343, 160–163 (2014) 10.1126/ science.1242818

    work page 2014

  22. [22]

    Plasmonic computing of spatial differentiation

    T. Zhu, Y. Zhou, Y. Lou, H. Ye, M. Qiu, Z. Ruan, and S. Fan, “Plasmonic computing of spatial differentiation”, Nat Commun8, 15391 (2017) 10.1038/ncomms15391

    work page doi:10.1038/ncomms15391 2017

  23. [23]

    Single-shotquantitative phasegradientmicroscopyusingasystemofmultifunctionalmetasurfaces

    H.Kwon,E.Arbabi,S.M.Kamali,M.Faraji-Dana,andA.Faraon,“Single-shotquantitative phasegradientmicroscopyusingasystemofmultifunctionalmetasurfaces”,Nat.Photonics 14, 109–114 (2020) 10.1038/s41566-019-0536-x

    work page doi:10.1038/s41566-019-0536-x 2020

  24. [24]

    Nanophotonics enhanced coverslip for phase imaging in biology

    L. Wesemann, J. Rickett, J. C. Song, J. Q. Lou, E. Hinde, T. J. Davis, and A. Roberts, “Nanophotonics enhanced coverslip for phase imaging in biology”, Light Sci. Appl.10, 98 (2021) 10.1038/s41377-021-00540-7

    work page doi:10.1038/s41377-021-00540-7 2021

  25. [25]

    Meta-optical and thin film devices for all-optical information processing

    L. Wesemann, T. J. Davis, and A. Roberts, “Meta-optical and thin film devices for all-optical information processing”, Appl. Phys. Rev.8, 31309 (2021) 10.1063/5.0048758

    work page doi:10.1063/5.0048758 2021

  26. [26]

    Atlantic overturning inferred from air-sea heat fluxes indicates no decline since the 1960s,

    A. Ji, J.-H. Song, Q. Li, F. Xu, C.-T. Tsai, R. C. Tiberio, B. Cui, P. Lalanne, P. G. Kik, D. A. B. Miller, and M. L. Brongersma, “Quantitative phase contrast imaging with a nonlocal angle-selective metasurface”, Nat Commun13, 7848 (2022) 10.1038/s41467- 022-34197-6

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467- 2022

  27. [27]

    Metasurfaces for quantum technologies

    K. Wang, M. Chekhova, and Y. Kivshar, “Metasurfaces for quantum technologies”, Phys. Today75, 38–44 (2022) 10.1063/PT.3.5062

    work page doi:10.1063/pt.3.5062 2022

  28. [28]

    Advances in Metaphotonics Empowered Single Photon Emission

    Y. Kan and S. I. Bozhevolnyi, “Advances in Metaphotonics Empowered Single Photon Emission”, Adv. Opt. Mater.11, 2202759 (2023) 10.1002/adom.202202759

    work page doi:10.1002/adom.202202759 2023

  29. [29]

    Engineering Quantum Light Sources with Flat Optics

    J. Ma, J. Zhang, J. Horder, A. A. Sukhorukov, M. Toth, D. N. Neshev, and I. Aharonovich, “Engineering Quantum Light Sources with Flat Optics”, Adv. Mater., 2313589 (2024) 10.1002/adma.202313589

    work page doi:10.1002/adma.202313589 2024

  30. [30]

    Photon pairs from resonant metasurfaces

    T. Santiago-Cruz, A. Fedotova, V. Sultanov, M. A. Weissflog, D. Arslan, M. Younesi, T. Pertsch, I. Staude, F. Setzpfandt, and M. Chekhova, “Photon pairs from resonant metasurfaces”, Nano Lett.21, 4423–4429 (2021) 10.1021/acs.nanolett.1c01125

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.nanolett.1c01125 2021

  31. [31]

    Resonantmetasurfacesforgeneratingcomplexquantumstates

    T. Santiago-Cruz, S. D. Gennaro, O. Mitrofanov, S. Addamane, J. Reno, I. Brener, and M.V.Chekhova,“Resonantmetasurfacesforgeneratingcomplexquantumstates”,Science 377, 991–995 (2022) 10.1126/science.abq8684

    work page doi:10.1126/science.abq8684 2022

  32. [32]

    Fano interference of photon pairs from a metasurface

    J. Noh, T. Santiago-Cruz, C. F. Doiron, H. Jung, J. Yu, S. J. Addamane, M. V. Chekhova, and I. Brener, “Fano interference of photon pairs from a metasurface”, Light Sci. Appl. 14, 371 (2025) 10.1038/s41377-025-01998-5

    work page doi:10.1038/s41377-025-01998-5 2025

  33. [33]

    Spatially entangled photon pairs from lithium niobate nonlocal metasurfaces

    J. H. Zhang, J. Y. Ma, M. Parry, M. Cai, R. Camacho-Morales, L. Xu, D. N. Neshev, and A. A. Sukhorukov, “Spatially entangled photon pairs from lithium niobate nonlocal metasurfaces”, Sci. Adv.8, eabq4240 (2022) 10.1126/sciadv.abq4240

    work page doi:10.1126/sciadv.abq4240 2022

  34. [34]

    Polarization engineering of entangled photons from a lithium niobate nonlinear metasurface

    J. Y. Ma, J. H. Zhang, Y. X. Jiang, T. M. Fan, M. Parry, D. N. Neshev, and A. A. Sukhorukov, “Polarization engineering of entangled photons from a lithium niobate nonlinear metasurface”, Nano Lett.23, 8091–8098 (2023) 10.1021/acs.nanolett.3c02055

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.nanolett.3c02055 2023

  35. [35]

    Polarization-entangled Bell state generation from an epsilon-near-zero metasurface

    W. H. Jia, G. Saerens, U. Talts, H. Weigand, R. J. Chapman, L. Li, R. Grange, and Y. M. Yang, “Polarization-entangled Bell state generation from an epsilon-near-zero metasurface”, Sci. Adv.11, eads3576 (2025) 10.1126/sciadv.ads3576

    work page doi:10.1126/sciadv.ads3576 2025

  36. [36]

    Quantum Pair Generation in Nonlinear Metasurfaces with Mixed and Pure Photon Polarizations

    J. Noh, T. Santiago-Cruz, V. Sultanov, C. F. Doiron, S. D. Gennaro, M. V. Chekhova, and I. Brener, “Quantum Pair Generation in Nonlinear Metasurfaces with Mixed and Pure Photon Polarizations”, Nano Lett.24, 15356–15362 (2024) 10.1021/acs.nanolett.4c04398

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.nanolett.4c04398 2024

  37. [37]

    Nonlinearity symmetry breaking for generating tunable quantum entanglement in semiconductor metasurfaces

    J. Y. Ma, T. M. Fan, T. Haggren, L. V. Molina, M. Parry, S. Shinde, C. McManus- Barrett, J. H. Zhang, R. C. Morales, F. Setzpfandt, H. H. Tan, C. Jagadish, D. N. Neshev, and A. A. Sukhorukov, “Nonlinearity symmetry breaking for generating tunable quantum entanglement in semiconductor metasurfaces”, Sci. Adv.11, eadu4133 (2025) 10.1126/sciadv.adu4133

    work page doi:10.1126/sciadv.adu4133 2025

  38. [38]

    Quantum imaging using spatially entangled photon pairs from a nonlinear metasurface

    J. Y. Ma, J. L. Ren, J. H. Zhang, J. J. Meng, C. McManus-Barrett, K. B. Crozier, and A. A. Sukhorukov, “Quantum imaging using spatially entangled photon pairs from a nonlinear metasurface”, eLight5, 2 (2025) 10.1186/s43593-024-00080-8

    work page doi:10.1186/s43593-024-00080-8 2025

  39. [39]

    Directionally tunable co- and counter- propagating photon pairs from a nonlinear metasurface

    M. A. Weissflog, J. Y. Ma, J. H. Zhang, T. M. Fan, S. Lung, T. Pertsch, D. N. Neshev, S. Saravi, F. Setzpfandt, and A. A. Sukhorukov, “Directionally tunable co- and counter- propagating photon pairs from a nonlinear metasurface”, Nanophotonics13, 3563–3573 (2024) 10.1515/nanoph-2024-0122

    work page doi:10.1515/nanoph-2024-0122 2024

  40. [40]

    First-orderopticalspatialdifferentiatorbasedonaguided-moderesonant grating

    D. A. Bykov, L. L. Doskolovich, A. A. Morozov, V. V. Podlipnov, E. A. Bezus, P. Verma, andV.A.Soifer,“First-orderopticalspatialdifferentiatorbasedonaguided-moderesonant grating”, Opt. Express26, 10997–11006 (2018) 10.1364/OE.26.010997

    work page doi:10.1364/oe.26.010997 2018

  41. [41]

    Compact incoherent image differentiation with nanophotonic structures

    H. Wang, C. Guo, Z. Zhao, and S. Fan, “Compact incoherent image differentiation with nanophotonic structures”, ACS Photonics7, 338–343 (2020) 10.1021/acsphotonics. 9b01465

    work page doi:10.1021/acsphotonics 2020

  42. [42]

    Understanding diffraction grating behavior: including conical diffraction and Rayleigh anomalies from transmission gratings

    J. E. Harvey and R. N. Pfisterer, “Understanding diffraction grating behavior: including conical diffraction and Rayleigh anomalies from transmission gratings”, Opt. Eng.58, 087105 (2019) 10.1117/1.OE.58.8.087105

    work page doi:10.1117/1.oe.58.8.087105 2019