Two-dimensional plasmonic waveguides for nanolasing and four-wave mixing

C. Martijn de Sterke; Guangyuan Li; Stefano Palomba

arxiv: 1906.08523 · v1 · pith:3ICM4MMMnew · submitted 2019-06-20 · ⚛️ physics.optics · physics.app-ph

Two-dimensional plasmonic waveguides for nanolasing and four-wave mixing

Guangyuan Li , Stefano Palomba , C. Martijn de Sterke This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-25 19:19 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.optics physics.app-ph

keywords plasmonic waveguidesnanolasersfour-wave mixinghybrid plasmonicsmetallic wedgesnanophotonicsnonlinear optics

0 comments

The pith

Hybrid plasmonic waveguides optimize four-wave mixing while metallic wedges suit nanolasers, with high-index buffers outperforming low-index ones in lasers.

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

The paper establishes that plasmonic waveguide design must be chosen according to the end application rather than evaluated in isolation. Hybrid structures that sandwich a nonlinear material between a metal substrate and a high-index layer deliver the strongest performance for four-wave mixing. Metallic wedge waveguides perform better for nanolasers, and within nanolasers a high-index buffer layer improves results over the more common low-index buffers. A reader would care because nanoscale coherent sources require efficient light-matter interaction at small scales, and mismatched waveguide choice wastes that efficiency.

Core claim

Plasmonic waveguide geometry should be selected for the target function: hybrid plasmonic waveguides with a nonlinear material between metal and high-index layer maximize four-wave mixing, metallic wedges are preferred for nanolasers, and high-index buffer layers outperform traditional low-index buffers inside nanolasers.

What carries the argument

Application-specific comparison of hybrid plasmonic waveguides versus metallic wedges, including buffer-layer index variation, for propagation loss, nonlinear conversion, and gain.

If this is right

Hybrid plasmonic designs should be used when the goal is efficient four-wave mixing at the nanoscale.
Metallic wedge geometries should be selected for nanolaser cavities.
High-index buffer layers improve nanolaser threshold and output compared with low-index buffers.
Waveguide selection in future plasmonic sources must start from the intended nonlinear or gain process.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

Device integration may favor one geometry over the other when both FWM and lasing are needed on the same chip.
The same application-driven logic could apply to other plasmonic nonlinear processes such as second-harmonic generation.
Buffer-layer index choice may also affect thermal management or electrical pumping in real devices.

Load-bearing premise

Numerical models used to rank the waveguides correctly capture plasmon propagation, nonlinear interactions, and gain without missing major losses or fabrication effects.

What would settle it

Fabrication and measurement of both a hybrid waveguide FWM device and a metallic-wedge nanolaser showing the opposite performance ranking from the simulations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1906.08523 by C. Martijn de Sterke, Guangyuan Li, Stefano Palomba.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: Square modulus of the electric field |e| 2 of the fundamental plasmonic mode for four 2D plasmonic waveguides (top panel) and their variations with a low-index (“L¯”, middle panel) and high-index (“H¯”, bottom panel) buffer layers of thickness g = 5 nm. (a) MD wedge waveguide with θ = 60◦ ; (b) MDM slot waveguide with h = 300 nm and w = 20 nm; (c) MDA DLSPP waveguide with w = 300 nm and h = 400 nm; and (d)… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: Nonlinear contribution ratios rD2M for (a) MD wedges, (b) MDM slot waveguides, (c) MDA DLSPP waveguides, and (d) MDHA hybrid plasmonic waveguides with hH = 200 nm [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: compares the nanolasing and DFWM characteristics of the four 2D plasmonic waveguides from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Waveguiding and active (gain/nonlinear) characteristics of (a)(b) MD [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Direct comparison of the (a) nanolasing and (b) DFWM characteristics of all four plas [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: Effects of low- (indicated by “L¯” with nL¯ = 1.38) and high-index (“H¯ ” with nH¯ = 3.0) buffer layers (of thickness g = 5 nm and sandwiched between “M” and “D”) on the nanolasing characteristics of all four plasmonic waveguides under study: (a) MD wedges, (b) MDM slot with h = 200 nm, (c) MDA DLSPP waveguide w = 400 nm, and (d) MDHA hybrid with w = 200 nm. The other parameters, including the varying para… view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Plasmonic waveguides are an essential element of nanoscale coherent sources, including nanolasers and four-wave mixing (FWM) devices. Here we report how the design of the plasmonic waveguide needs to be guided by the ultimate application. This contrasts with traditional approaches in which the waveguide is considered in isolation. We find that hybrid plasmonic waveguides, with a nonlinear material sandwiched between the metal substrate and a high-index layer, are best suited for FWM applications, whereas metallic wedges are preferred in nanolasers. We also find that in plasmonic nanolasers high-index buffer layers perform better than more traditional low-index buffers.

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.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

Hybrid plasmonic structures rank best for four-wave mixing while wedges suit nanolasers, but the rankings hinge on unverified simulation accuracy.

read the letter

The paper's core message is that waveguide design for plasmonic nanolasers and FWM devices should be tailored to the application rather than treated generically. It concludes that hybrid plasmonic waveguides suit FWM best, metallic wedges work better for nanolasers, and high-index buffers outperform low-index ones in lasers. What stands out is the shift from isolated waveguide analysis to application-driven comparison. The authors evaluate several established geometries and give clear rankings for each use case. This kind of targeted guidance can help device designers avoid one-size-fits-all approaches. The soft spot is the reliance on numerical models without visible checks. The abstract gives no equations, no solver details, no comparison to analytic limits or measured data. If the simulations underplay scattering, thermal effects, or material dispersion inaccuracies, the preferred structures could switch. Without those cross-checks, the recommendations stay provisional. The stress-test concern about model fidelity is on point. The central claims depend on comparative figures of merit from electromagnetic simulations. If those miss fabrication roughness or gain saturation, the ordering of wedges versus hybrids could flip. The paper would be stronger with at least one benchmark against known analytic cases or published experimental propagation lengths. This work is aimed at nanophotonics researchers building nanoscale coherent sources. A reader working on FWM or nanolaser prototypes would find the comparative results useful as a starting point, though they would need to run their own simulations or experiments to confirm. I would send it to peer review because the topic is practical and the approach is straightforward, even if the current evidence is thin on validation. The authors should be asked to add model validation and sensitivity analysis in revision.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript claims that plasmonic waveguide design must be application-specific rather than considered in isolation: hybrid plasmonic waveguides (nonlinear material between metal substrate and high-index layer) are optimal for four-wave mixing, metallic wedges are preferred for nanolasers, and high-index buffer layers outperform traditional low-index buffers in nanolasers.

Significance. If the comparative figures of merit extracted from the electromagnetic simulations are robust, the work supplies concrete design rules that could improve device performance in nanoscale coherent sources and nonlinear optics by matching waveguide geometry to the target application.

major comments (2)

[Numerical Methods / Results] The central ranking of waveguide geometries for FWM versus nanolasing rests entirely on numerical extraction of propagation lengths, confinement factors, and nonlinear overlap integrals, yet the manuscript provides no demonstration that the chosen solver reproduces known analytic limits (e.g., dispersion relations for planar SPPs or wedge modes) or matches published experimental propagation lengths in comparable structures.
[Results / Discussion] No sensitivity analysis or error propagation is reported for the material dispersion models, gain saturation, or surface-roughness scattering; if these are underestimated, the reported superiority of hybrid structures for FWM or high-index buffers for lasing can reverse.

minor comments (2)

Figure captions should explicitly state the operating wavelength, the nonlinear coefficient used, and the precise definition of each figure of merit (e.g., how the FWM efficiency is normalized).
[Abstract] The abstract states conclusions without reference to any equation, table, or figure; a short methods paragraph or table summarizing the simulation parameters would improve readability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the detailed and constructive report. The two major comments highlight important aspects of numerical validation and robustness that were not sufficiently addressed in the original submission. We respond to each below and outline the revisions we will make.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Numerical Methods / Results] The central ranking of waveguide geometries for FWM versus nanolasing rests entirely on numerical extraction of propagation lengths, confinement factors, and nonlinear overlap integrals, yet the manuscript provides no demonstration that the chosen solver reproduces known analytic limits (e.g., dispersion relations for planar SPPs or wedge modes) or matches published experimental propagation lengths in comparable structures.

Authors: We agree that explicit validation of the numerical solver strengthens the central claims. The original manuscript relied on standard finite-element methods without dedicated benchmarking sections. In the revision we will add an appendix that (i) reproduces the analytic dispersion relation for planar SPPs at a metal-dielectric interface and (ii) compares computed wedge-mode propagation lengths against published experimental values for comparable silver-wedge structures. These checks will be performed with the same mesh density and material models used for the comparative study, thereby confirming that the reported ranking of geometries is not an artifact of the solver. revision: yes
Referee: [Results / Discussion] No sensitivity analysis or error propagation is reported for the material dispersion models, gain saturation, or surface-roughness scattering; if these are underestimated, the reported superiority of hybrid structures for FWM or high-index buffers for lasing can reverse.

Authors: We acknowledge the absence of quantitative sensitivity analysis. We will add a dedicated subsection that varies the real and imaginary parts of the metal and dielectric permittivities within their reported experimental uncertainties and recomputes the key figures of merit (propagation length, confinement factor, nonlinear overlap). For gain saturation we will examine the effect of different saturation intensities on the lasing threshold ranking. Surface-roughness scattering is not included in the present ideal-surface model; we will add a brief discussion citing literature estimates of additional loss and note that the comparative conclusions assume smooth interfaces. Because a full Monte-Carlo error propagation for all parameters simultaneously would require extensive new simulations, we will present the sensitivity results as a partial but informative robustness check rather than a complete uncertainty budget. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: claims rest on independent numerical comparisons of waveguide figures of merit.

full rationale

The paper derives application-specific waveguide rankings (hybrid structures for FWM, wedges for nanolasers, high-index buffers preferred) from electromagnetic simulations of propagation, nonlinearity, and gain. No equations, parameters, or premises reduce by construction to the target results; no self-citations are invoked as uniqueness theorems or ansatzes; the derivation chain is self-contained against external benchmarks such as known analytic plasmon limits. This is the normal non-finding for simulation-driven design papers.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review; no free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are stated or derivable from the provided text.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5635 in / 1058 out tokens · 20926 ms · 2026-05-25T19:19:50.430289+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Lean theorems connected to this paper

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

IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/RealityFromDistinction.lean reality_from_one_distinction unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

We characterize four realistic 2D plasmonic waveguides... using finite element method... Aeﬀ/A0, k0/gth, F/Δnmax... gain confinement factor ΓG and nonlinear effectiveness EFFNL
IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean washburn_uniqueness_aczel unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

The theory we developed shows that plasmonic waveguides... measured using... dimensionless parameters... effective area Aeﬀ normalized by diffraction-limited area

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

36 extracted references · 36 canonical work pages

[1]

D. A. B. Miller. Device requirements for optical interconnects to silicon chips.Proc. IEEE, 97:1166–1185, 2009

work page 2009
[2]

T. G. Tiecke et al. Nanophotonic quantum phase switch with a single atom.Nature (London), 508:241–244, 2014

work page 2014
[3]

Monat, P

C. Monat, P. Domachuk, and B. J. Eggleton. Integrated optoﬂuidics: A new river of light. Nat. Photon., 1:106–114, 2007

work page 2007
[4]

D. J. Bergman and M. I. Stockman. Surface plasmon ampliﬁcation by stimulated emission of radiation: quantum generation of coherent surface plasmons in nanosystems.Phys. Rev. Lett., 90:027402, 2003

work page 2003
[5]

Kauranen and A

M. Kauranen and A. V. Zayats. Nonlinear plasmonics.Nat. Photon., 6:737–748, 2012

work page 2012
[6]

R.-M. Ma, R. F. Oulton, V. J. Sorger, and X. Zhang. Plasmon lasers: Coherent light source at molecular scales. Laser Photon. Rev., 7:1–21, 2013

work page 2013
[7]

Gwo and C.-K

S. Gwo and C.-K. Shih. Semiconductor plasmonic nanolasers: Current status and perspec- tives. Rep. Prog. Phys., 79:086501, 2016. 9

work page 2016
[8]

A. Yang, D. Wang, W. Wang, and T. W. Odom. Coherent light sources at the nanoscale. Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem. , 68:83–99, 2017

work page 2017
[9]

F. J. Diaz et al. Sensitive method for measuring third order nonlinearities in compact dielectric and hybrid plasmonic waveguides.Opt. Express, 24:545–554, 2016

work page 2016
[10]

Kravtsov, R

V. Kravtsov, R. Ulbricht, J. M. Atkin, and M. B. Raschke. Plasmonic nanofocused four-wave mixing for femtosecond near-ﬁeld imaging.Nat. Nanotech., 11:459–464, 2016

work page 2016
[11]

M. P. Nielsen, X. Shi, P. Dichtl, S. A. Maier, and R. F. Oulton. Giant nonlinear response at a plasmonic nanofocus drives eﬃcient four-wave mixing.Science, 358:1179–1181, 2017

work page 2017
[12]

R. F. Oulton, G. Bartal, D. F. P. Pile, and X. Zhang. Conﬁnement and propagation charac- teristics of subwavelength plasmonic modes.New J. Phys. , 10:105018, 2008

work page 2008
[13]

R. F. Oulton et al. Plasmon lasers at deep subwavelength scale.Nature (London), 461:629– 632, 2009

work page 2009
[14]

R.-M. Ma, R. F. Oulton, V. J. Sorger, G. Bartal, and X. Zhang. Room-temperature sub- diﬀraction-limited plasmon laser by total internal reﬂection.Nat. Mater., 10:110–113, 2011

work page 2011
[15]

Lu et al

Y.-J. Lu et al. Plasmonic nanolaser using epitaxially grown silver ﬁlm.Science, 337:450–453, 2012

work page 2012
[16]

T. P. H. Sidiropoulos et al. Ultrafast plasmonic nanowire lasers near the surface plasmon frequency. Nat. Phys., 10:870–876, 2014

work page 2014
[17]

Zhang et al

Q. Zhang et al. A room temperature low-threshold ultraviolet plasmonic nanolaser.Nat. Commun., 5:4953, 2014

work page 2014
[18]

Yu et al

H. Yu et al. Organic-inorganic perovskite plasmonic nanowire lasers with a low threshold and a good thermal stability.Nanoscale, 8:19536–19540, 2016

work page 2016
[19]

Zhang, P

J. Zhang, P. Zhao, E. Cassan, and X. Zhang. Phase regeneration of phase-shift keying signals in highly nonlinear hybrid plasmonic waveguides.Opt. Lett., 38:848–850, 2013

work page 2013
[20]

Highlynonlinearhybridsilicon-plasmonicwaveguides: Analysis and optimization

A.PitilakisandE.E.Kriezis. Highlynonlinearhybridsilicon-plasmonicwaveguides: Analysis and optimization. J. Opt. Soc. Am. B , 30:1954–1965, 2013

work page 1954
[21]

F. J. Diaz, G. Li, C. M. de Sterke, B. T. Kuhlmey, and S. Palomba. Kerr eﬀect in hybrid plasmonic waveguides. J. Opt. Soc. Am. B , 33:957–962, 2016

work page 2016
[22]

G. Li, S. Palomba, and C. M. de Sterke. Theory of waveguide design for plasmonic nanolasers. Nanoscale, 10:21434–21440, 2018

work page 2018
[23]

Han and S

Z. Han and S. I. Bozhevolnyi. Radiation guiding with surface plasmon polaritons.Rep. Prog. Phys., 76:016402, 2013

work page 2013
[24]

Marini, M

A. Marini, M. Conforti, G. Della Valle, H. W. Lee, Tr. X. Tran, W. Chang, M. A. Schmidt, S. Longhi, P. St. J. Russell, and F. Biancalana. Ultrafast nonlinear dynamics of surface plasmon polaritons in gold nanowires due to the intrinsic nonlinearity of metals.New J. Phys., 15:013033, 2013

work page 2013
[25]

R. W. Boyd, Z. Shi, and I. De Leon. The third-order nonlinear optical susceptibility of gold. Opt. Commun., 326:74–79, 2014

work page 2014
[26]

H. Qian, Y. Xiao, and Z. Liu. Giant kerr response of ultrathin gold ﬁlms from quantum size eﬀect. Nat. Commun., 7:13153, 2016

work page 2016
[27]

Baron, S

A. Baron, S. Larouche, D. J. Gauthier, and D. R. Smith. Scaling of the nonlinear response of the surface plasmon polariton at a metal/dielectric interface.J. Opt. Soc. Am. B , 32:9–14, 2015

work page 2015
[28]

G. Li, C. M. de Sterke, and S. Palomba. Fundamental limitations to the ultimate kerr nonlinear performance of plasmonic waveguides.ACS Photon., 5:1034–1040, 2018. 10

work page 2018
[29]

S. J. P. Kress et al. Wedge waveguides and resonators for quantum plasmonics.Nano Lett., 15:6267–6275, 2015

work page 2015
[30]

P. B. Johnson and R. W. Christy. Optical constants of the noble metals.Phys. Rev. B , 6:4370–4379, 1972

work page 1972
[31]

R. W. Boyd.Nonlinear Optics. Academic, Orlando, 3rd edition, 2008

work page 2008
[32]

Esembeson, M

B. Esembeson, M. L. Scimeca, T. Michinobu, F. Diederich, and I. Biaggio. A high-optical quality supramolecular assembly for third-order integrated nonlinear optics.Adv. Mater., 20:4584–4587, 2008

work page 2008
[33]

V. J. Sorger et al. Strongly enhanced molecular ﬂuorescence inside a nanoscale waveguide gap. Nano Lett., 11:4907–4911, 2011

work page 2011
[34]

G. Li, C. M. de Sterke, and S. Palomba. Figure of merit for Kerr nonlinear plasmonic waveguides. Laser Photon. Rev., 10:639–646, 2016

work page 2016
[35]

J. T. Robinson, K. Preston, O. Painter, and M. Lipson. First-principle derivation of gain in high-index-contrast waveguides. Opt. Express, 16:16659–16669, 2008

work page 2008
[36]

Holmgaard and S

T. Holmgaard and S. I. Bozhevolnyi. Theoretical analysis of dielectric-loaded surface plasmon-polariton waveguides. Phys. Rev. B , 75:245405, 2007. 11

work page 2007

[1] [1]

D. A. B. Miller. Device requirements for optical interconnects to silicon chips.Proc. IEEE, 97:1166–1185, 2009

work page 2009

[2] [2]

T. G. Tiecke et al. Nanophotonic quantum phase switch with a single atom.Nature (London), 508:241–244, 2014

work page 2014

[3] [3]

Monat, P

C. Monat, P. Domachuk, and B. J. Eggleton. Integrated optoﬂuidics: A new river of light. Nat. Photon., 1:106–114, 2007

work page 2007

[4] [4]

D. J. Bergman and M. I. Stockman. Surface plasmon ampliﬁcation by stimulated emission of radiation: quantum generation of coherent surface plasmons in nanosystems.Phys. Rev. Lett., 90:027402, 2003

work page 2003

[5] [5]

Kauranen and A

M. Kauranen and A. V. Zayats. Nonlinear plasmonics.Nat. Photon., 6:737–748, 2012

work page 2012

[6] [6]

R.-M. Ma, R. F. Oulton, V. J. Sorger, and X. Zhang. Plasmon lasers: Coherent light source at molecular scales. Laser Photon. Rev., 7:1–21, 2013

work page 2013

[7] [7]

Gwo and C.-K

S. Gwo and C.-K. Shih. Semiconductor plasmonic nanolasers: Current status and perspec- tives. Rep. Prog. Phys., 79:086501, 2016. 9

work page 2016

[8] [8]

A. Yang, D. Wang, W. Wang, and T. W. Odom. Coherent light sources at the nanoscale. Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem. , 68:83–99, 2017

work page 2017

[9] [9]

F. J. Diaz et al. Sensitive method for measuring third order nonlinearities in compact dielectric and hybrid plasmonic waveguides.Opt. Express, 24:545–554, 2016

work page 2016

[10] [10]

Kravtsov, R

V. Kravtsov, R. Ulbricht, J. M. Atkin, and M. B. Raschke. Plasmonic nanofocused four-wave mixing for femtosecond near-ﬁeld imaging.Nat. Nanotech., 11:459–464, 2016

work page 2016

[11] [11]

M. P. Nielsen, X. Shi, P. Dichtl, S. A. Maier, and R. F. Oulton. Giant nonlinear response at a plasmonic nanofocus drives eﬃcient four-wave mixing.Science, 358:1179–1181, 2017

work page 2017

[12] [12]

R. F. Oulton, G. Bartal, D. F. P. Pile, and X. Zhang. Conﬁnement and propagation charac- teristics of subwavelength plasmonic modes.New J. Phys. , 10:105018, 2008

work page 2008

[13] [13]

R. F. Oulton et al. Plasmon lasers at deep subwavelength scale.Nature (London), 461:629– 632, 2009

work page 2009

[14] [14]

R.-M. Ma, R. F. Oulton, V. J. Sorger, G. Bartal, and X. Zhang. Room-temperature sub- diﬀraction-limited plasmon laser by total internal reﬂection.Nat. Mater., 10:110–113, 2011

work page 2011

[15] [15]

Lu et al

Y.-J. Lu et al. Plasmonic nanolaser using epitaxially grown silver ﬁlm.Science, 337:450–453, 2012

work page 2012

[16] [16]

T. P. H. Sidiropoulos et al. Ultrafast plasmonic nanowire lasers near the surface plasmon frequency. Nat. Phys., 10:870–876, 2014

work page 2014

[17] [17]

Zhang et al

Q. Zhang et al. A room temperature low-threshold ultraviolet plasmonic nanolaser.Nat. Commun., 5:4953, 2014

work page 2014

[18] [18]

Yu et al

H. Yu et al. Organic-inorganic perovskite plasmonic nanowire lasers with a low threshold and a good thermal stability.Nanoscale, 8:19536–19540, 2016

work page 2016

[19] [19]

Zhang, P

J. Zhang, P. Zhao, E. Cassan, and X. Zhang. Phase regeneration of phase-shift keying signals in highly nonlinear hybrid plasmonic waveguides.Opt. Lett., 38:848–850, 2013

work page 2013

[20] [20]

Highlynonlinearhybridsilicon-plasmonicwaveguides: Analysis and optimization

A.PitilakisandE.E.Kriezis. Highlynonlinearhybridsilicon-plasmonicwaveguides: Analysis and optimization. J. Opt. Soc. Am. B , 30:1954–1965, 2013

work page 1954

[21] [21]

F. J. Diaz, G. Li, C. M. de Sterke, B. T. Kuhlmey, and S. Palomba. Kerr eﬀect in hybrid plasmonic waveguides. J. Opt. Soc. Am. B , 33:957–962, 2016

work page 2016

[22] [22]

G. Li, S. Palomba, and C. M. de Sterke. Theory of waveguide design for plasmonic nanolasers. Nanoscale, 10:21434–21440, 2018

work page 2018

[23] [23]

Han and S

Z. Han and S. I. Bozhevolnyi. Radiation guiding with surface plasmon polaritons.Rep. Prog. Phys., 76:016402, 2013

work page 2013

[24] [24]

Marini, M

A. Marini, M. Conforti, G. Della Valle, H. W. Lee, Tr. X. Tran, W. Chang, M. A. Schmidt, S. Longhi, P. St. J. Russell, and F. Biancalana. Ultrafast nonlinear dynamics of surface plasmon polaritons in gold nanowires due to the intrinsic nonlinearity of metals.New J. Phys., 15:013033, 2013

work page 2013

[25] [25]

R. W. Boyd, Z. Shi, and I. De Leon. The third-order nonlinear optical susceptibility of gold. Opt. Commun., 326:74–79, 2014

work page 2014

[26] [26]

H. Qian, Y. Xiao, and Z. Liu. Giant kerr response of ultrathin gold ﬁlms from quantum size eﬀect. Nat. Commun., 7:13153, 2016

work page 2016

[27] [27]

Baron, S

A. Baron, S. Larouche, D. J. Gauthier, and D. R. Smith. Scaling of the nonlinear response of the surface plasmon polariton at a metal/dielectric interface.J. Opt. Soc. Am. B , 32:9–14, 2015

work page 2015

[28] [28]

G. Li, C. M. de Sterke, and S. Palomba. Fundamental limitations to the ultimate kerr nonlinear performance of plasmonic waveguides.ACS Photon., 5:1034–1040, 2018. 10

work page 2018

[29] [29]

S. J. P. Kress et al. Wedge waveguides and resonators for quantum plasmonics.Nano Lett., 15:6267–6275, 2015

work page 2015

[30] [30]

P. B. Johnson and R. W. Christy. Optical constants of the noble metals.Phys. Rev. B , 6:4370–4379, 1972

work page 1972

[31] [31]

R. W. Boyd.Nonlinear Optics. Academic, Orlando, 3rd edition, 2008

work page 2008

[32] [32]

Esembeson, M

B. Esembeson, M. L. Scimeca, T. Michinobu, F. Diederich, and I. Biaggio. A high-optical quality supramolecular assembly for third-order integrated nonlinear optics.Adv. Mater., 20:4584–4587, 2008

work page 2008

[33] [33]

V. J. Sorger et al. Strongly enhanced molecular ﬂuorescence inside a nanoscale waveguide gap. Nano Lett., 11:4907–4911, 2011

work page 2011

[34] [34]

G. Li, C. M. de Sterke, and S. Palomba. Figure of merit for Kerr nonlinear plasmonic waveguides. Laser Photon. Rev., 10:639–646, 2016

work page 2016

[35] [35]

J. T. Robinson, K. Preston, O. Painter, and M. Lipson. First-principle derivation of gain in high-index-contrast waveguides. Opt. Express, 16:16659–16669, 2008

work page 2008

[36] [36]

Holmgaard and S

T. Holmgaard and S. I. Bozhevolnyi. Theoretical analysis of dielectric-loaded surface plasmon-polariton waveguides. Phys. Rev. B , 75:245405, 2007. 11

work page 2007