Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 51 references

A high-performance quantum pulse gate in thin-film lithium niobate

T0 review · 2 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Thin-film lithium niobate makes quantum pulse gates practical at milliwatt pump powers.

desk verdict First TFLN QPG is real and well-characterized, but the headline 1810 W^-1 cm^-2 efficiency is not yet established because the depletion measurement counts any pump-induced loss as conversion. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.09346 v1 pith:UEKOR543 submitted 2026-08-10 quant-ph

Silia Babel , Alejandra Alarcón , Laura Serino , Christian Golla , Laura Bollmers , Sebastian Lengeling , Jiayu Yang , Bernhard Reineke
show 5 more authors
Christof Eigner Benjamin Brecht Marko Lončar Laura Padberg Christine Silberhorn
This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph PACS 42.65.Ky42.50.Ex42.82.Et
keywords quantumpulsegatethin-filmlithiumniobatesum-frequencygenerationtemporalmodesdispersionengineeringtype-0phasematchingfrequencyconversionintegratedphotonics
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

Quantum pulse gates (QPGs) select individual temporal modes of quantum light through sum-frequency generation, but earlier devices in weakly confining waveguides needed impractically high pump powers and were locked to narrow wavelength and polarization combinations. This paper demonstrates a QPG in thin-film lithium niobate, where waveguide geometry is engineered to provide group-velocity matching for a type-0 process using the strongest nonlinear tensor element. The authors measure an internal conversion efficiency of $(89.6\pm0.1)\%$ at only 20 mW of pump power and a lower-bound normalized conversion efficiency of $(1810\pm10)\,\mathrm{W}^{-1}\mathrm{cm}^{-2}$, about three orders of magnitude above previous QPGs, while preserving an average temporal-mode selectivity of $(96.8\pm1.7)\%$. The result makes high-efficiency temporal-mode control realistic at accessible powers and opens flexible wavelength and polarization choices for integrated quantum photonics.

What carries the argument

The device is a dispersion-engineered sum-frequency-generation waveguide in periodically poled thin-film lithium niobate. The QPG transfer function $G(\nu_{\rm in},\nu_{\rm out})=\alpha(\nu_{\rm in},\nu_{\rm out})\Phi(\nu_{\rm in},\nu_{\rm out})$ factorizes into the pump envelope and a phase-matching function $\Phi(\nu_{\rm in},\nu_{\rm out})\propto\mathrm{sinc}(\Delta\beta L/2)$. Because the high index contrast of thin-film lithium niobate makes waveguide dispersion a design parameter, the authors choose a geometry (600 nm film, 1 $\mu$m top width, 500 nm etch depth) that yields group-velocity matching between signal and pump, giving a phase-matching angle near $0^\circ$. This makes the phase-matching function effectively independent of the input frequency, so the transfer function becomes separable and the process selects one temporal mode. The same strong confinement reduces the effective mode area to about $0.6\,\mu\mathrm{m}^2$, which, together with the $d_{33}$ coefficient, drives the large efficiency increase.

What would settle it

Measure the transmitted input signal and the generated sum-frequency output simultaneously over a range of pump powers, and also run a control with the pump far from the phase-matching resonance so no sum-frequency generation occurs; any pump-induced decrease in transmitted counts in that control directly measures parasitic losses that the current definition of $\eta$ would misattribute to conversion.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that thin-film lithium niobate removes both historical limitations of QPGs at once: low normalized conversion efficiency and restricted operating wavelengths and polarizations. The central discovery is that waveguide dispersion, rather than material birefringence, can achieve the required group-velocity matching between a 1553 nm signal and a 873 nm pump in a co-polarized type-0 interaction, exploiting the $d_{33}=27\,\mathrm{pm/V}$ nonlinearity. With a dispersion-engineered waveguide geometry, the device converts $89.6\%$ of the input signal at 20 mW pump power, corresponding to a normalized conversion efficiency of at least $1810\,\mathrm{W}^{-1}\mathrm{cm}^{-2}$, while maintaining $96.8\%$ average temporal-mode selectivity. The conversion-versus-pump curve deviates from a sine-squared law in a way consistent with time-ordering effects, indicating that the high-gain regime is experimentally accessible.

Load-bearing premise

The efficiency measurement treats every pump-induced drop in transmitted input-signal counts as sum-frequency conversion, so any additional pump-induced loss—such as two-photon absorption, photorefraction, thermal detuning, or scattering—would inflate the reported $89.6\%$ internal conversion efficiency.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • QPG operation moves from high pump powers to tens of milliwatts, making temporal-mode control practical in tabletop and integrated settings.
  • The wavelength and polarization combinations of a QPG can be re-designed by adjusting waveguide geometry instead of being fixed by material birefringence, opening new operating bands.
  • The high-gain regime, where time-ordering modifies temporal eigenmodes, becomes experimentally accessible and can be studied directly.
  • Multi-stage QPG architectures and frequency-encoded quantum networks become feasible because several high-efficiency gates can be integrated on a single thin-film chip.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the pump incoupling efficiency is indeed around 10%, the true normalized conversion efficiency could be an order of magnitude higher than the conservative quoted value; a direct on-chip power calibration would settle which.
  • The observed phase-matching side lobes imply spectral filtering loss in applications; improving fabrication uniformity could convert part of the efficiency margin into usable output.
  • The same dispersion-engineering approach may be portable to other wavelength bands, such as visible pumps with telecom signals, by scaling the geometry—an extension the paper only gestures toward.
  • Testing temporal-mode selectivity at high pump powers would confirm whether time-ordering degrades selectivity as predicted, defining the practical operating ceiling.
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

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports the first quantum pulse gate (QPG) in thin-film lithium niobate. The authors design a type-0 sum-frequency-generation waveguide that group-velocity matches a telecom-band input signal to a ~860 nm pump via dispersion engineering, verify the phase-matching map experimentally, and characterize QPG operation through 5x5 temporal-mode selectivity matrices at bright and single-photon input levels. They infer the internal conversion efficiency from pump-induced depletion of the transmitted input signal, reporting eta=(89.6±0.1)% at 20 mW pump power and a lower-bound normalized efficiency eta_norm=(1810±10) W^-1 cm^-2, claimed to be three orders of magnitude above previous QPGs. They also interpret the pump-power dependence of the conversion efficiency as evidence for time-ordering effects in the high-gain regime.

Significance. If the efficiency claims hold, this is an important advance: milliwatt pump powers for high-efficiency QPG operation would make temporal-mode interfaces practical in quantum photonics and open the high-gain regime to systematic study. The paper has clear strengths: direct measurement of the phase-matching function, full selectivity matrices at two photon-number levels, and a depletion-based efficiency measurement that is insensitive to output coupling and spectral-filter losses. The conservative use of front-facet pump power in the normalized-efficiency estimate is also a strength. However, the central quantitative claims rest on Eq. (6), which counts any pump-induced loss as conversion; the absence of a control separating SFG depletion from parasitic loss is a load-bearing gap that must be addressed before the headline numbers can be accepted.

major comments (2)
  1. [§4, Eq. (6)] The central quantitative claims—the internal conversion efficiency eta=(89.6±0.1)% at 20 mW and the normalized efficiency eta_norm=(1810±10) W^-1 cm^-2—are derived from Eq. (6), which counts any pump-induced reduction in transmitted input-signal counts as SFG conversion. The paper does not provide a control that separates coherent SFG depletion from other pump-induced loss mechanisms such as two-photon absorption, photorefraction, thermal detuning, or scattering; the background subtraction described in §4 only removes counts with the input blocked and does not address this. The Fig. 5 caption itself attributes high-power deviations to 'parasitic nonlinear effects', which can also contribute in the low-conversion region used for the sine-squared fit. Without a detuned-pump (phase-mismatched) transmission measurement or a photon-balance check comparing input depletion with detected SFG output, the reported values are not established as a lower bound on SFG conversion. I request such a control, or a revised claim that explicitly accounts for this ambiguity.
  2. [§4, Fig. 5] The claim that the conversion-efficiency curve exhibits 'distinct signatures of time ordering' is not yet supported. The numerical model used for the green curve is not described with equations, parameters, or uncertainty, and the observed deviation at high pump powers is attributed in the caption to 'parasitic nonlinear effects and spectral pulse phases that are not captured in the model.' A pump-power-dependent loss could mimic the saturation and deviation from the sine-squared curve without any time-ordering physics. Please either specify the model and fit quantitatively, or provide a discriminating measurement, for example the predicted pump-power dependence of temporal-mode selectivity [40], to support the time-ordering interpretation.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract and §1] The phrase 'widespread adaption' should be 'widespread adoption'; 'adaption' is nonstandard in this context.
  2. [§2] The sentence containing 'an input signal at lambda_in=1540 nm and and a pump at lambda_p=860 nm' has a duplicated 'and'.
  3. [§4 and Conclusion] The pump incoupling efficiency is quoted as a 'maximum coupling efficiency of 30%' in §4 but as 'on the order of 10%' in the Conclusion; please make these estimates consistent and state whether the incoupling efficiency was directly measured or inferred from simulations.
  4. [§4, Fig. 3] The inset description 'two prominent side lobes to the left of the main peak' is ambiguous; specifying the frequency/wavelength direction would improve clarity.
  5. [Conclusion] There is a typo in 'normalized conversione efficiency'; this should be corrected.
  6. [§2, Eq. (5)] The definition of A_eff would benefit from explicit integration domains and a statement of the normalization convention for the mode fields E_j(x,y), since the units and the power normalization are not immediately transparent.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular reasoning found: the efficiency is a direct depletion measurement with a standard low-power fit, and the scaling comparison rests on independent literature parameters and simulated mode areas.

full rationale

The central quantitative claims derive from Eq. (6), eta = 1 - C_pump_on/C_pump_off, which is a depletion measurement, not a quantity defined in terms of the claimed result. The normalized efficiency eta_norm=(1810±10) W^-1cm^-2 is obtained by fitting a sine-squared function to the low-conversion (<40%) region only; the 89.6% internal efficiency at 20 mW is the directly measured point at that power, not a back-prediction from the fit. The phase-matching characterization, temporal-mode selectivity matrix, and high/low photon-number benchmarks are independent measurements. The theoretical scaling argument uses literature nonlinear coefficients (d33=27 pm/V vs d31=4.5 pm/V) and simulated effective mode areas (0.6 vs 64 um^2), neither of which is fitted to the measured efficiency. The comparison with prior QPGs cites Ref. [19] as an external benchmark; although the groups overlap, the comparison is not used to justify any derivation. The 'time-ordering' claim is supported by a separate numerical model reproducing the curve, and the paper explicitly leaves high-gain selectivity verification to future work. The acknowledged AI-assisted drafting and data-availability statement are not load-bearing. The skeptic's concern about parasitic pump-induced losses in Eq. (6) is a measurement-validity issue, not circularity: no equation or fitted parameter is equivalent by construction to the claimed output. Therefore the paper is self-contained against circularity, with score 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims are experimental, so the ledger is dominated by modeling and measurement assumptions rather than free parameters. The only adjustable correction is the pump incoupling efficiency, which does not affect the conservative lower bound. No new physical entities are introduced. The most load-bearing assumption is that depletion of the input signal is caused only by SFG conversion.

free parameters (1)
  • Pump incoupling efficiency = assumed ~10% (conclusion); max 30% per simulation; not directly measured
    Used to estimate how much higher the true normalized conversion efficiency is than the quoted lower bound and to reconcile the measurement with scaling theory. The headline lower bound of 1810 W^-1 cm^-2 does not depend on this number.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption QPG transfer function model G = alpha * Phi with sinc phase matching (Eqs. 1-2) and the group-velocity-matching angle formula (Eq. 3) are valid for describing the device.
    Standard theory from Refs. [3,4,41]; used throughout the design and interpretation. The measured phase-matching map deviates from this ideal, showing the model is approximate.
  • domain assumption Sellmeier equations from Ref. [43] and Lumerical mode simulations accurately describe the dispersion of the fabricated 5% MgO-doped TFLN waveguide.
    Used in Section 2 to select waveguide geometry. The measured phase-matching angle of -3.0 degrees versus the simulated 0.15 degrees indicates the assumption is only approximately valid.
  • domain assumption Fabricated waveguide dimensions and poling periods match the design closely enough for quasi-phase matching at the target wavelengths.
    The sample uses measured thickness 604 nm and a nominal poling period of 3.178 um; observed side peaks in the phase-matching map indicate fabrication inhomogeneities are present.
  • domain assumption The only pump-induced effect on the transmitted input-signal counts is coherent SFG depletion.
    Underlies Eq. 6 and the internal conversion efficiency measurement; no control measurement separates SFG from other pump-induced losses.
  • domain assumption The numerical time-ordering model from Refs. [40,51] captures the high-power conversion behavior.
    Used to explain the deviation from sine-squared behavior in Figure 5; the model details are not given in the paper.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A high-performance quantum pulse gate in thin-film lithium niobate." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/UEKOR543

@misc{pith2026260809346,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A high-performance quantum pulse gate in thin-film lithium niobate},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/UEKOR543}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.09346}
}
abstract

In this work, we demonstrate a quantum pulse gate (QPG) in thin-film lithium niobate. QPGs enable the selective manipulation and detection of temporal modes of quantum light and form the basis of numerous applications in photonic quantum technologies. To date, their widespread adaption is held back by two main limitations: restricted wavelength and polarization combinations of the involved fields and low normalized conversion efficiencies. We overcome these limitations through developing a QPG in thin-film lithium niobate. We design a waveguide geometry that provides the required dispersion properties for a highly efficient type-0 sum-frequency generation.We verify our design through mapping of the phase matching intensity, and demonstrate high-quality QPG operation by measuring a temporal-mode selectivity of (96.8$\pm$1.7)% on par with existing QPGs. Thanks to the strong confinement in thin-film lithium niobate, we succeed in demonstrating an internal conversion efficiency of (89.6$\pm$0.1)% for a pump power of only 20mW in front of our sample. This yields a lower-bound estimate for the normalized conversion efficiency of (1810$\pm$10)$\mathrm{W}^{-1}\mathrm{cm}^{-2}$, three orders of magnitude higher than in previous QPGs. Our results establish thin-film lithium niobate as ideal platform for high-performance QPGs and are a major step towards practical QPGs for photonic quantum technologies.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.09346 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Simulation for finding a suitable waveguide geometry for a TFLN QPG. a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Sketch of the experimental setup for benchmarking the TFLN QPG. The input [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Map of the phase matching intensity |Φ(𝜆in, 𝜆out)|2 . The angle of the phase matching function evaluates to 𝜙PM = (−3.0 ± 0.3) ◦ , thus verifying operation close to perfect group velocity matching. The inset shows a cut through the phase matching intensity at 𝜆in = 1550 nm. The two prominent side lobes to the left of the main peak are likely caused by fabrication imperfections and will be spectrally filtered during … view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Temporal-mode selectivity plots for a) high and b) low input signal photon [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Internal conversion efficiency as a function of the pump power in front of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

51 extracted references · 46 canonical work pages

  1. [40]

    Temporal mode selectivity by frequency conversion in second-order nonlinear optical waveguides,

    D. V. Reddy, M. G. Raymer, C. J. McKinstrie,et al., “Temporal mode selectivity by frequency conversion in second-order nonlinear optical waveguides,” Opt. express21, 13840–13863 (2013)

    work page 2013

  2. [1]

    Photon temporal modes: a complete framework for quantum information science,

    B. Brecht, D. V. Reddy, C. Silberhorn, and M. G. Raymer, “Photon temporal modes: a complete framework for quantum information science,” Phys. Rev. X5, 041017 (2015)

    work page 2015

  3. [2]

    Temporal modes in quantum optics: Then and now,

    M. G. Raymer and I. A. Walmsley, “Temporal modes in quantum optics: Then and now,” Phys. Scripta95, 064002 (2020)

    work page 2020

  4. [3]

    A quantum pulse gate based on spectrally engineered sum frequency generation,

    A. Eckstein, B. Brecht, and C. Silberhorn, “A quantum pulse gate based on spectrally engineered sum frequency generation,” Opt. express19, 13770–13778 (2011)

    work page 2011

  5. [4]

    Demonstration of coherent time-frequency schmidt mode selection using dispersion-engineered frequency conversion,

    B. Brecht, A. Eckstein, R. Ricken,et al., “Demonstration of coherent time-frequency schmidt mode selection using dispersion-engineered frequency conversion,” Phys. Rev. A90, 030302 (2014)

    work page 2014

  6. [5]

    Complementarity-based complementarity: The choice of mutually unbiased observables shapes quantum uncertainty relations,

    L. Serino, G. Chesi, B. Brecht,et al., “Complementarity-based complementarity: The choice of mutually unbiased observables shapes quantum uncertainty relations,” Phys. Rev. Res.7, 033152 (2025)

    work page 2025

  7. [6]

    Realization of high-fidelity unitary operations on up to 64 frequency bins,

    S. De, V. Ansari, J. Sperling,etal., “Realization of high-fidelity unitary operations on up to 64 frequency bins,” Phys. Rev. Res.6, L022040 (2024)

    work page 2024

  8. [7]

    Temporal-mode measurement tomography of a quantum pulse gate,

    V. Ansari, G. Harder, M. Allgaier,et al., “Temporal-mode measurement tomography of a quantum pulse gate,” Phys. Rev. A96, 063817 (2017)

    work page 2017

Show all 51 references
  1. [8]

    Self-guided tomography of time-frequency qudits,

    L. Serino, M. Rambach, B. Brecht,etal., “Self-guided tomography of time-frequency qudits,” Quantum Sci. Technol. 10, 025024 (2025)

    2025

  2. [9]

    Universal compressive tomography in the time-frequency domain,

    J. Gil-Lopez, Y. S. Teo, S. De,etal., “Universal compressive tomography in the time-frequency domain,” Optica8, 1296–1305 (2021)

    2021

  3. [10]

    Photon-subtracted continuous-variable graph states,

    M. Walschaers, V. Parigi, and N. Treps, “Photon-subtracted continuous-variable graph states,” Quantum Inf. Meas. (QIM) V: Quantum Technol. p. S2B.5. OSA Technical Digest (Optica Publishing Group, 2019)

    2019

  4. [11]

    Quantumopticalarbitrarywaveformmanipulationandmeasurement in real time,

    A.S.Kowligy, P.Manurkar, N.V.Corzo, etal., “Quantumopticalarbitrarywaveformmanipulationandmeasurement in real time,” Opt. Express22, 27942–27957 (2014)

    2014

  5. [12]

    Highly efficient frequency conversion with bandwidth compression of quantum light,

    M. Allgaier, V. Ansari, L. Sansoni,et al., “Highly efficient frequency conversion with bandwidth compression of quantum light,” Nat. communications8, 14288 (2017)

    2017

  6. [13]

    Programmable time-frequency mode-sorting of single photons with a multi-output quantum pulse gate,

    L. Serino, C. Eigner, B. Brecht, and C. Silberhorn, “Programmable time-frequency mode-sorting of single photons with a multi-output quantum pulse gate,” Opt. Express33, 5577–5586 (2025)

    2025

  7. [14]

    Quantum-limited time-frequency estimation through mode-selective photon measurement,

    J. M. Donohue, V. Ansari, J. Řeháček,et al., “Quantum-limited time-frequency estimation through mode-selective photon measurement,” Phys. review letters121, 090501 (2018)

    2018

  8. [15]

    Achieving the ultimate quantum timing resolution,

    V. Ansari, B. Brecht, J. Gil-Lopez,et al., “Achieving the ultimate quantum timing resolution,” PRX Quantum2, 010301 (2021)

    2021

  9. [16]

    Quantum optical tomography based on time-resolved and mode-selective single-photon detection by femtosecond up-conversion,

    N. Namekata, N. Kobayashi, K. Nomura,et al., “Quantum optical tomography based on time-resolved and mode-selective single-photon detection by femtosecond up-conversion,” Sci. reports13, 21080 (2023)

    2023

  10. [17]

    Near-infraredopticaltomographyusinganopticaltime-of-flightmeasurement based on the quantum pulse gating,

    N.Namekata,N.Takata,andS.Inoue,“Near-infraredopticaltomographyusinganopticaltime-of-flightmeasurement based on the quantum pulse gating,” JSAP Rev.2026, 260410 (2026)

    2026

  11. [18]

    A framework for fully programmable frequency-encoded quantum networks harnessing multioutput quantum pulse gates,

    P. Folge, M. Stefszky, B. Brecht, and C. Silberhorn, “A framework for fully programmable frequency-encoded quantum networks harnessing multioutput quantum pulse gates,” PRX Quantum5, 040329 (2024)

    2024

  12. [19]

    Improved non-linear devices for quantum applications,

    J. Gil-Lopez, M. Santandrea, G. Roeland,et al., “Improved non-linear devices for quantum applications,” New J. Phys.23(2021)

    2021

  13. [20]

    Lithium niobate: Summary of physical properties and crystal structure,

    R. Weis and T. Gaylord, “Lithium niobate: Summary of physical properties and crystal structure,” Appl. Phys. A37, 191–203 (1985)

    1985

  14. [21]

    Dispersion-engineered𝜒2 nanophotonics: a flexible tool for nonclassical light,

    M. Jankowski, J. Mishra, and M. Fejer, “Dispersion-engineered𝜒2 nanophotonics: a flexible tool for nonclassical light,” J. Physics: Photonics3, 042005 (2021)

    2021

  15. [22]

    Applications of thin-film lithium niobate in nonlinear integrated photonics,

    M. G. Vazimali and S. Fathpour, “Applications of thin-film lithium niobate in nonlinear integrated photonics,” Adv. Photonics4, 034001–034001 (2022)

    2022

  16. [23]

    Twenty-nine million intrinsic q-factor monolithic microresonators on thin-film lithium niobate,

    X. Zhu, Y. Hu, S. Lu,et al., “Twenty-nine million intrinsic q-factor monolithic microresonators on thin-film lithium niobate,” Photonics Res.12, A63–A68 (2024)

    2024

  17. [24]

    Wafer-scalelow-losslithiumniobatephotonicintegratedcircuits,

    K.Luke,P.Kharel,C.Reimer, etal.,“Wafer-scalelow-losslithiumniobatephotonicintegratedcircuits,”Opt.Express 28, 24452–24458 (2020)

    2020

  18. [25]

    Reduced material loss in thin-film lithium niobate waveguides,

    A. Shams-Ansari, G. Huang, L. He,et al., “Reduced material loss in thin-film lithium niobate waveguides,” Apl Photonics7(2022)

    2022

  19. [26]

    Dual-polarization thin-film lithium niobate in-phase quadrature modulators for terabit-per-second transmission,

    M. Xu, Y. Zhu, F. Pittalà,et al., “Dual-polarization thin-film lithium niobate in-phase quadrature modulators for terabit-per-second transmission,” Optica9, 61–62 (2022)

    2022

  20. [27]

    Systematic investigation of millimeter-wave optic modulation performance in thin-film lithium niobate,

    Y. Zhang, L. Shao, J. Yang,et al., “Systematic investigation of millimeter-wave optic modulation performance in thin-film lithium niobate,” Photonics Res.10, 2380–2387 (2022)

    2022

  21. [28]

    Integrated electro-optics on thin-film lithium niobate,

    Y. Hu, D. Zhu, S. Lu,et al., “Integrated electro-optics on thin-film lithium niobate,” Nat. Rev. Phys. pp. 1–18 (2025)

    2025

  22. [29]

    Sum-frequency generation in a high-quality thin film lithium niobate microdisk via cyclic quasi-phase matching,

    J. Zhu, X. Sun, T. Ding,etal., “Sum-frequency generation in a high-quality thin film lithium niobate microdisk via cyclic quasi-phase matching,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. B40, D44–D49 (2023)

    2023

  23. [30]

    Quantum frequency conversion and single-photon detection with lithium niobate nanophotonic chips,

    X. Wang, X. Jiao, B. Wang,et al., “Quantum frequency conversion and single-photon detection with lithium niobate nanophotonic chips,” npj Quantum Inf.9, 38 (2023)

    2023

  24. [31]

    Nanodomain poling unlocking backward nonlinear light generation in thin film lithium niobate,

    A. Sabatti, J. Kellner, R. J. Chapman, and R. Grange, “Nanodomain poling unlocking backward nonlinear light generation in thin film lithium niobate,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.13004 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  25. [32]

    Counter-propagating spontaneous parametric down-conversion source in lithium niobate on insulator,

    J. Kellner, A. Sabatti, T. Kuttner,etal., “Counter-propagating spontaneous parametric down-conversion source in lithium niobate on insulator,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.21396 (2025)

    2025

  26. [33]

    Shallow-etched thin-film lithium niobate waveguides for highly-efficient second-harmonic generation,

    J. Zhao, M. Rüsing, U. A. Javid,et al., “Shallow-etched thin-film lithium niobate waveguides for highly-efficient second-harmonic generation,” Opt. Express28, 19669–19682 (2020)

    2020

  27. [34]

    Electrically pumped ultra-efficient quantum frequency conversion on thin-film lithium niobate chip,

    X. Wang, X.-F. Jiao, B. Cao,etal., “Electrically pumped ultra-efficient quantum frequency conversion on thin-film lithium niobate chip,” Adv. Photonics8, 016011–016011 (2026)

    2026

  28. [35]

    Quantum logical controlled-not gate in a lithium niobate-on-insulator photonic quantum walk,

    R. J. Chapman, S. Häusler, G. Finco,etal., “Quantum logical controlled-not gate in a lithium niobate-on-insulator photonic quantum walk,” Quantum Sci. Technol.9, 015016 (2023)

    2023

  29. [36]

    Demonstration of hong-ou-mandel interference in an lnoi directional coupler,

    S. Babel, L. Bollmers, M. Massaro,et al., “Demonstration of hong-ou-mandel interference in an lnoi directional coupler,” Opt. Express31, 23140–23148 (2023)

    2023

  30. [37]

    Scalable quantum interference in integrated lithium niobate nanophotonics,

    T. Kuttner, A. Sabatti, J. Kellner,et al., “Scalable quantum interference in integrated lithium niobate nanophotonics,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.20519 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  31. [38]

    On-chip quantum interference between independent lithium niobate-on- insulator photon-pair sources,

    R. J. Chapman, T. Kuttner, J. Kellner,etal., “On-chip quantum interference between independent lithium niobate-on- insulator photon-pair sources,” Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 223602 (2025)

    2025

  32. [39]

    Ultrahigh-efficiency wavelength conversion in nanophotonic periodically poled lithium niobate waveguides,

    C. Wang, C. Langrock, A. Marandi,et al., “Ultrahigh-efficiency wavelength conversion in nanophotonic periodically poled lithium niobate waveguides,” Optica5, 1438–1441 (2018)

    2018

  33. [41]

    Generation of pure-state single-photon wavepackets by conditional preparation based on spontaneous parametric downconversion,

    A. U’Ren, C. Silberhorn, K. Banaszek,et al., “Generation of pure-state single-photon wavepackets by conditional preparation based on spontaneous parametric downconversion,” Laser Phys.15, 146–161 (2005)

    2005

  34. [43]

    Temperature and wavelength dependent refractive index equations for mgo-doped congruent and stoichiometric linbo 3,

    O. Gayer, Z. Sacks, E. Galun, and A. Arie, “Temperature and wavelength dependent refractive index equations for mgo-doped congruent and stoichiometric linbo 3,” Appl. Phys. B91, 343–348 (2008)

    2008

  35. [44]

    Ultrabright, two-color photon pair source based on thin-film lithium niobate for bridging visible and telecom wavelengths,

    S. Babel, L. Bollmers, F. Roeder,etal., “Ultrabright, two-color photon pair source based on thin-film lithium niobate for bridging visible and telecom wavelengths,” Opt. Express33, 52729–52743 (2025)

    2025

  36. [45]

    A newcomer’s guide to ultrashort pulse shaping and characterization,

    A. Monmayrant, S. Weber, and B. Chatel, “A newcomer’s guide to ultrashort pulse shaping and characterization,” J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys.43, 103001 (2010)

    2010

  37. [46]

    Fabrication limits of waveguides in nonlinear crystals and their impact on quantum optics applications,

    M. Santandrea, M. Stefszky, V. Ansari, and C. Silberhorn, “Fabrication limits of waveguides in nonlinear crystals and their impact on quantum optics applications,” New J. Phys.21, 033038 (2019)

    2019

  38. [47]

    Realization of a multi-output quantum pulse gate for decoding high-dimensional temporal modes of single-photon states,

    L. Serino, J. Gil-Lopez, M. Stefszky,et al., “Realization of a multi-output quantum pulse gate for decoding high-dimensional temporal modes of single-photon states,” PRX quantum4, 020306 (2023)

    2023

  39. [48]

    Tomography and purification of the temporal-mode structure of quantum light,

    V. Ansari, J. M. Donohue, M. Allgaier,et al., “Tomography and purification of the temporal-mode structure of quantum light,” Phys. review letters120, 213601 (2018)

    2018

  40. [49]

    High-selectivityquantumpulsegatingofphotonictemporalmodesusingall-optical ramsey interferometry,

    D.V.ReddyandM.G.Raymer, “High-selectivityquantumpulsegatingofphotonictemporalmodesusingall-optical ramsey interferometry,” Optica5, 423–428 (2018)

    2018

  41. [50]

    Periodically poled lithium niobate waveguide sum-frequency generator for efficient single-photon detection at communication wavelengths,

    R. Roussev, C. Langrock, J. Kurz, and M. Fejer, “Periodically poled lithium niobate waveguide sum-frequency generator for efficient single-photon detection at communication wavelengths,” Opt. Lett.29, 1518 – 1520 (2004)

    2004

  42. [51]

    Theoryofquantumfrequencyconversionandtype-iiparametric down-conversion in the high-gain regime,

    A.Christ,B.Brecht,W.Mauerer,andC.Silberhorn,“Theoryofquantumfrequencyconversionandtype-iiparametric down-conversion in the high-gain regime,” New J. Phys.15, 053038 (2013)

    2013

  43. [52]

    Time-frequency optical filtering: efficiency vs. temporal-mode discrimination in incoherent and coherent implementations,

    M. G. Raymer and K. Banaszek, “Time-frequency optical filtering: efficiency vs. temporal-mode discrimination in incoherent and coherent implementations,” Opt. Express28, 32819–32836 (2020)

    2020

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.