Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Enhancing Quantum Memories with Light-Matter Interference

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Pith's one-line read By looping the light a quantum memory fails to store back through the atoms and tuning its phase for constructive interference with the stored spin wave, this paper demonstrates a threefold total-efficiency gain in a 1 GHz Raman memory…

desk verdict A genuine three-fold efficiency improvement in a Raman memory via light-matter interference; the near-unity projections are an idealized bound, not a robustness claim. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.17365 v3 pith:7D6HXJPF submitted 2024-11-26 quant-ph

classification quant-ph
keywords quantummemoryRamanlight-matterinterferenceMach-Zehnderinterferometerspinwavebroadbandefficiencyenhancementwarmatomicvapor
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper proposes and demonstrates a way to make optical quantum memories more efficient without the usual trade-offs: send the light that a memory fails to store (or retrieve) back through the same atomic ensemble, and tune the phase so it constructively interferes with the spin wave left behind. The memory acts like a beam splitter, so two passes with 50% coupling behave like a Mach-Zehnder interferometer, and full constructive interference can in principle recover 100% of the light. In a warm cesium-vapor Raman memory operating at 1 GHz bandwidth, the authors measure a more than threefold improvement in total efficiency, reaching (34.3±8.4)%, with no added noise. Numerical simulations with optimized control pulses predict efficiencies above 96% in cold ensembles and above 95% in warm vapors while cutting the required control intensity by more than an order of magnitude. If these predictions hold, the method would relax the main resource constraints—optical depth, control power, and noise—that currently limit broadband quantum memories.

What carries the argument

The central object is the light-matter Mach-Zehnder interferometer formed by two memory passes. The memory itself is first decomposed as a unitary beam splitter between temporal optical modes and spatial spin-wave modes, so a single write or read pulse with coupling r gives storage or retrieval efficiency |r|². EEVI runs the interaction twice: a first pulse at 50% coupling stores half the field, the non-stored (or retrieved) light is looped back with transmission η_L and phase Δθ, and a second 50% pulse makes it interfere with the residual spin wave; the resulting storage efficiency is η_s,EEVI = √η_L sin²(Δθ/2) + (1−η_L)²/4. The mechanism is that constructive interference lets the second pass add field amplitude to the spin wave rather than being limited by the product of two independent inefficiencies, and the same phase-matched cascade of beam-splitter slices that makes ordinary retrieval directional is extended by an externally controllable phase.

What would settle it

Deliberately misalign the return beam so its spatial mode at the cell is orthogonal to the stored spin wave, then scan Δθ: if the model's premise is correct, the sinusoidal modulation in Eq. 3 should wash out and the maximum efficiency should return to the no-interference value, with the fitted visibility tracking the measured mode overlap.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a quantum memory's storage and retrieval interactions can be combined coherently rather than treated as single-shot processes. Viewed through the beam-splitter decomposition of the memory interaction, a first control pulse maps part of the input to a spin wave and transmits the rest; looping that transmitted light back and applying a second control pulse lets the optical field and the spin wave interfere. With the relative phase Δθ set for constructive interference, the second pass adds field amplitude instead of intensity, so the total efficiency can approach unity even when each individual pass is only 50% efficient. The authors demonstrate this in a GHz-bandwidth Raman memory in warm cesium vapor, measuring storage efficiency up to (72.3±8.3)%, retrieval efficiency up to (74.3±14.0)%, and total efficiency up to (34.3±8.4)%—more than three times the standard memory's (10.4±2.3)%—while the noise floor stays flat. Simulations using the same Maxwell-Bloch dynamics then show that optimized pulse shaping plus low-loss loops would push cold-ensemble total efficiency from roughly 65% to above 96% and warm-vapor efficiency above 95% at reduced control Rabi frequency, while keeping the memory near single-mode (Schmidt number 1.01 at high efficiency).

Load-bearing premise

The whole gain hinges on the looped optical field and the remaining spin wave occupying the same spatial and temporal mode at the second pass, with only a controllable phase Δθ between them—and the paper itself finds that when this overlap degrades, the interference visibility and the efficiency gain shrink.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • In atomic-density-limited cold ensembles, the paper's simulations show optimized EEVI-Raman raising total forward-retrieval efficiency from roughly 65% to above 96% at fixed control intensity.
  • In warm vapors, EEVI cuts the control Rabi frequency needed for 80% total efficiency by more than a factor of four (a more than 16-fold intensity reduction), and 95% total efficiency becomes reachable at 1.4 GHz Rabi frequency.
  • Because the noise floor stays flat while the signal grows, the signal-to-noise ratio of the demonstrated memory rises from 47±20 for standard Raman to 187±104 for EEVI-Raman, implying higher-fidelity storage of quantum states.
  • EEVI preserves single-mode character: the Schmidt number at near-unity storage efficiency drops from 1.33 for standard Raman to 1.01 for EEVI-Raman, keeping the memory useful for coherent mode filtering and high-dimensional encoding.
  • The protocol is not tied to Raman memories: the same split-step interference applies to resonant protocols such as EIT and ATS, and the paper's resonant simulations show efficiency gains at low optical depth, for example from 40% to 80% at an optical depth of 100.
  • The paper's own numbers imply that improving loop transmission from the measured 63.5% to the 98.8% demonstrated in similar setups would raise the maximum total efficiency to about 55% with the same experimental parameters, and to over 96% at unity loop transmission with optimized pulses.

Reading between the lines

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

  • An untested consequence is that EEVI turns the memory into a tunable light-matter beam splitter: scanning Δθ continuously sweeps the effective reflectivity of the two-pass interaction, so the same setup could act as a variable-ratio splitter or switch between an optical field and a spin wave, not just a fixed efficiency booster.
  • Because the gain is essentially an interference-visibility effect, further engineering of the loop optics should convert loop quality almost directly into memory efficiency; the combination of low-loss loops and pulse shaping is the clearest next step beyond this paper.
  • For memories whose dominant noise is four-wave mixing, which scales quadratically with control energy, the order-of-magnitude reduction in control intensity that EEVI enables should suppress noise more than linearly, an effect the paper mentions but does not quantify experimentally.
  • A natural test of the mechanism's universality is to apply EEVI to an EIT memory in a cold ensemble: the paper's resonant simulations predict a jump from 40% to 80% at an optical depth of 100, which would confirm that the interference enhancement is independent of the specific memory protocol.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. The paper introduces EEVI (Efficiency Enhancement via light-matter Interference), a protocol that loops the non-stored (or retrieved) optical field back into an ensemble-based quantum memory for a second, phase-controlled write (or read) interaction, so that constructive interference between the optical field and a residual spin wave increases storage and retrieval efficiency. The authors derive a Mach-Zehnder-type expression for the enhanced efficiency (Eq. 3), implement EEVI in a GHz-bandwidth warm-cesium Raman memory, and report a three-fold improvement in total efficiency from (10.4±2.3)% to (34.3±8.4)% for EEVI-Raman, with no increase in measured noise. Maxwell-Bloch simulations reproduce the measured sinusoidal phase dependence and are used to predict that EEVI, combined with pulse shaping and a lossless loop, can surpass 96% total efficiency in cold ensembles and 95% in warm vapors while preserving single-mode capacity.

Significance. The experimental demonstration is a solid and useful advance: the measured sinusoidal efficiency variation, the independent loop-transmission measurement, the three-fold improvement in total efficiency, and the careful noise characterization support the core claim that light-matter interference can enhance memory efficiency without increasing atomic density or control intensity. The numerical model agrees with the experimental trends, and the analysis of the beam-splitter analogy is instructive. However, the headline near-unity efficiency predictions rest on idealized assumptions—perfect spatial and temporal mode overlap, 100% loop transmission, and a simplified three-level model with several fitted parameters—and the paper does not quantify how these idealizations affect the projections. The experimental core is sound, but the predictive claims need to be either substantiated with a sensitivity analysis or explicitly reframed as idealized upper bounds.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 5, Fig. 5] The predictions of >96% total efficiency for cold ensembles and >95% for warm vapors assume 100% loop transmission and, crucially, perfect spatial and temporal mode overlap between the looped optical field and the stored spin wave. The Maxwell-Bloch simulations are one-dimensional (see the Supplementary), so they cannot capture transverse mode mismatch, lateral beam displacement, or wavefront errors in the loop. The experiment itself indicates imperfect overlap: in EEVI-retrieval the R1 control energy had to be reduced from 800 pJ to 460 pJ to improve overlap, and the measured EEVI-storage maximum of (72.3±8.3)% lies below the ~83% ideal value from Eq. 3 for η_L=(63.5±2.5)%. No sensitivity analysis is provided for how the optimized efficiencies in Fig. 5 degrade with finite mode mismatch. Since the abstract and conclusion headline these near-unity numbers, this is a load-bearing issue for the paper's central predictive claim; the authors should either include a quantitative analysis of mode-mismatch degradation or explicitly state that the >96% and >95% figures are idealized upper bounds that require perfect mode matching.
  2. [Section 2, Eq. 3; Section 3] Equation (3) is derived for two 50:50 beam splitters, but in the experiment the first-pass storage efficiency is (42.1±5.0)% (Section 3), not 50%. The statement that the measured maximum EEVI-storage efficiency of (72.3±8.3)% 'is in agreement with Eq. 3 for η_L=(63.5±2.5)%' is therefore not a direct quantitative test of Eq. 3 as written; a generalized expression for arbitrary first-pass reflectivity, e.g., η_s(1−η_s)|1−√η_L e^{iΔθ}|², would be the appropriate comparison. The current comparison obscures the role of the actual beam-splitter ratio and makes the validation of the theoretical model appear stronger than it is.
  3. [Supplementary 'Numerical simulations' and Fig. 5] The extrapolated efficiencies in Fig. 5 rely on several fitted parameters: an optical-depth correction factor of 1/2.2, a control Rabi-frequency calibration factor ranging from 1/5.5 to 1/7.5 depending on control energy, and the nonlinear refractive index n2(0) fitted to beam-radius data. The paper does not provide an uncertainty propagation or sensitivity analysis for these parameters in the optimized predictions. Given that the calibration factor varies by ~30% across the measured range, the >96% and >95% claims should be reported with a confidence interval or a discussion of how the parameter uncertainties affect the predicted efficiencies.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 2, Eq. 3] The first term of Eq. (3), √η_L sin²(Δθ/2), and the second term, (1−η_L)²/4, have different functional dependences on the loop transmission, and the derivation is not shown; please clarify the assumptions and refer the reader to the relevant step in the Supplementary.
  2. [Section 3, first paragraph] The sentence 'all control pulse energies are set to be the same: 400 pJ' is ambiguous, because in the EEVI-retrieval measurements the normal-memory control energy is 800 pJ and the EEVI-retrieval R1 energy is 460 pJ; please specify that the equality refers only to the EEVI-storage configuration.
  3. [Abstract and Section 3] The claimed 'more than three-fold improvement' is based on the ratio of (34.3±8.4)% to (10.4±2.3)%, but the uncertainties make the ratio statistically consistent with a smaller improvement; please report the ratio with its propagated uncertainty or discuss the significance explicitly.
  4. [Fig. 5 and Supplementary 'Modal capacity'] There is an internal numbering inconsistency: the Schmidt-number panel is referred to as Fig. 5d in the main text but as Fig. 6d in the Supplementary; please align the cross-references.
  5. [Data availability statement] Given the journal's expectations for reproducibility, the statement that data are 'not publicly available at this time' is a limitation; consider depositing the underlying datasets in a public repository.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity found: the EEVI enhancement is experimentally demonstrated and the numerical predictions are extrapolations of an independently calibrated Maxwell-Bloch model, not fits to the claimed outcome.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained. The beam-splitter picture (Eq. 2) is taken from prior published work (Refs. [28,29]) and is not used to define the measured efficiencies; those are obtained from photon-counting conservation relations (Eqs. 8-11). The ideal Mach-Zehnder formula (Eq. 3) is explicitly an idealized model for perfect mode overlap, and the experimental sinusoidal phase dependence is compared with, not fitted from, that formula. The numerical Maxwell-Bloch model is calibrated to independent standard-Raman data: optical depth from transmission spectra and control-field Rabi frequency from standard Raman storage and total efficiencies. The EEVI simulations then impose a physical second-pass boundary condition (looped field with phase and loop loss) and are checked against the EEVI measurements rather than used to set the EEVI parameters. The high-efficiency projections for cold ensembles and warm vapors assume 100% loop transmission and perfect mode overlap, which the paper states as idealizations; this is an experimental-realizability assumption, not a circular reduction. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, no load-bearing claim rests solely on a self-citation, and no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' prior work. The core three-fold measured improvement is an independent experimental result.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central experimental claim rests on measured loop transmission, count ratios, and a unitary beam-splitter model; the extrapolated high-efficiency claims require the fitted calibration parameters listed above and simplified physical assumptions. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (4)
  • Optical depth correction factor = 1/2.2
    Obtained by comparing resonant Maxwell-Bloch transmission to measured spectra; absorbs three-level and hyperfine approximations, and affects all simulated efficiencies.
  • Control Rabi frequency calibration factor = 1/5.5 chosen; range 1/5.5 to 1/7.5 across pulse energies
    Fitted by comparing simulated standard memory efficiencies to experiment; used to convert Rabi frequency to peak power and to generate predictions in Fig. 5.
  • Nonlinear refractive index n2(0) = -7.5e-8 cm^2/W
    Fitted from measured control beam radius versus pulse energy; used in the nonlinear extension of the model.
  • EEVI control pulse energy ratios = W2/W1 = R1/R2 = 0.6; R1 reduced to 460 pJ in EEVI-retrieval
    Hand-optimized in the experiment to maximize visibility and efficiency; not a prediction from the theory.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The memory interaction is a unitary, adiabatic mapping decomposable by Bloch-Messiah into independent beam-splitter modes (Eqs. 1-2, after Wasilewski and Raymer [28]).
    Underlies the Mach-Zehnder picture and the EEVI efficiency formula.
  • domain assumption The looped optical field after round trip overlaps the residual spin wave in the same temporal and spatial mode, with only phase Δθ and amplitude sqrt(eta_L) changed.
    Needed for Eq. 3; experimentally only approximately satisfied.
  • domain assumption Noise from four-wave mixing is fully suppressed at 18.4 GHz detuning, and remaining noise sources are incoherent and scale linearly with control energy.
    Used to claim no additional noise from EEVI; based on Ref. [24] and the chosen detuning.
  • domain assumption A three-level lambda Maxwell-Bloch model with Doppler averaging and neglected two-photon detuning (k_c - k_s ≈ 0) is adequate for the simulated memory regimes.
    Basis for all numerical predictions; authors acknowledge the three-level approximation and introduce calibration corrections.
  • ad hoc to paper During EEVI, the spin wave acquires no additional phase and the two write or read control fields have zero relative phase in the simulations.
    A simplification in the numerical model; in the experiment only the total relative phase Δθ is scanned and controlled.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Enhancing Quantum Memories with Light-Matter Interference." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7D6HXJPF

@misc{pith2026241117365,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Enhancing Quantum Memories with Light-Matter Interference},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7D6HXJPF}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.17365}
}
abstract

Future optical quantum technologies, such as quantum networks, distributed quantum computing and sensing, demand efficient, broadband quantum memories. However, achieving high efficiency without introducing noise, reducing bandwidth, or limiting scalability remains a challenge. Here, we present a new approach to enhance quantum memory protocols by leveraging constructive light-matter interference, leading to an increase in memory efficiency without increasing atomic density or laser intensity. We implement this method in a Raman quantum memory in warm Cesium vapor, and achieve more than a three-fold improvement in total efficiency reaching $(34.3\pm8.4)\%$, while retaining GHz-bandwidth operation and low noise levels. Numerical simulations predict that this approach can boost efficiencies in systems limited by atomic density, such as cold atomic ensembles, from $65\%$ to beyond $96\%$, while in warm atomic vapors it could reduce the laser intensity needed to reach a given efficiency by over an order-of-magnitude, exceeding $95\%$ total efficiency. Furthermore, our method preserves the single-mode nature of the memory at high efficiencies. This new protocol is applicable to various memory architectures, paving the way toward scalable, efficient, low-noise, and high-bandwidth quantum memories.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.17365 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The EEVI memory concept using the beam splitter analogy. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The experimental implementation of EEVI. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Results and simulations for EEVI-Storage and -Retrieval. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (7 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Results and simulations for EEVI - Raman. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Simulation results using optimized control pulses for Raman and EEVI￾Raman. a. Total efficiency for forwards retrieval as a function of optical depth for the standard Raman memory (diamond) and EEVI-Raman (circle), assuming 100% loop transmission and for cryogenically …
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: An illustration of interference in an ensemble-based quantum memory. If [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The full experimental setup used during the experiments consists out of four [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The pulse sequences for the control field [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Modeling experimental results. a Experimentally measured Storage (red diamonds) and Total (blue diamonds) efficiency vs control pulse energy of the standard Raman memory described in the main text. The solid lines and shaded region show the predicted efficiencies of th…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Optimized total efficiency for forwards retrieval as a function of optical depth [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_10.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Super-resolving frequency measurement with mode-selective quantum memory

    quant-ph 2025-06 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    A mode-selective Raman quantum memory in warm cesium vapor estimates the separation between two spectral lines with up to a 34-fold precision enhancement over direct intensity detection, resolving separations down to ...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

41 extracted references · 38 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [14]

    High-selectivityquantumpulsegatingofphotonictemporalmodesusingall-optical Ramsey interferometry,

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

  2. [32]

    Interferometry-integratednoise-immunequantummemory,

    Z.Yu,Z.Wu,X.Li, et al.,“Interferometry-integratednoise-immunequantummemory,”Phys.Rev.Lett. 131,150804 (2023)

  3. [1]

    Quantum Memories: Emerging Applications and Recent Advances,

    K. Heshami, D. G. England, P. C. Humphreys,et al., “Quantum Memories: Emerging Applications and Recent Advances,” J. Mod. Opt.63, 2005–2028 (2016)

  4. [2]

    Optical quantum memory,

    A. I. Lvovsky, B. C. Sanders, and W. Tittel, “Optical quantum memory,” Nat. Photonics3, 706–714 (2009)

  5. [3]

    Enhancing multiphoton rates with quantum memories,

    J. Nunn, N. K. Langford, W. S. Kolthammer,et al., “Enhancing multiphoton rates with quantum memories,” Phys. Rev. Lett.110, 133601 (2013)

  6. [4]

    Quantum-memory-assisted multi-photon generation for efficient quantum information processing,

    F. Kaneda, F. Xu, J. Chapman, and P. G. Kwiat, “Quantum-memory-assisted multi-photon generation for efficient quantum information processing,” Optica4, 1034–1037 (2017)

  7. [5]

    Linear optical quantum computing with photonic qubits,

    P. Kok, W. J. Munro, K. Nemoto,et al., “Linear optical quantum computing with photonic qubits,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 79, 135–174 (2007)

  8. [6]

    Quantum repeaters: The role of imperfect local operations in quantum communication,

    H.-J. Briegel, W. Dür, J. I. Cirac, and P. Zoller, “Quantum repeaters: The role of imperfect local operations in quantum communication,” Phys. Rev. Lett.81, 5932–5935 (1998)

Show all 41 references
  1. [7]

    Long-distance quantum communication with atomic ensembles and linear optics,

    L. M. Duan, M. D. Lukin, J. I. Cirac, and P. Zoller, “Long-distance quantum communication with atomic ensembles and linear optics,” Nature414, 413–418 (2001)

  2. [8]

    The quantum internet,

    H. J. Kimble, “The quantum internet,” Nature453, 1023–1030 (2008)

  3. [9]

    Quantum repeaters based on atomic ensembles and linear optics,

    N. Sangouard, C. Simon, H. de Riedmatten, and N. Gisin, “Quantum repeaters based on atomic ensembles and linear optics,” Rev. Mod. Phys.83, 33–80 (2011)

  4. [10]

    Towards high-speed optical quantum memories,

    K. F. Reim, J. Nunn, V. O. Lorenz,et al., “Towards high-speed optical quantum memories,” Nat. Photonics4, 218–221 (2010)

  5. [11]

    Optimal coherent filtering for single noisy photons,

    S. Gao, O. Lazo-Arjona, B. Brecht,et al., “Optimal coherent filtering for single noisy photons,” Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 213604 (2019)

  6. [12]

    Optical-domain spectral super-resolution via a quantum-memory- based time-frequency processor,

    M. Mazelanik, A. Leszczyński, and M. Parniak, “Optical-domain spectral super-resolution via a quantum-memory- based time-frequency processor,” Nat. Commun. 2022 13:113, 1–12 (2022)

  7. [13]

    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. Rev. Lett.121, 090501 (2018)

  8. [15]

    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)

  9. [16]

    Mapping broadband single-photon wave packets into an atomic memory,

    J. Nunn, I. A. Walmsley, M. G. Raymer,et al., “Mapping broadband single-photon wave packets into an atomic memory,” Phys. Rev. A75, 011401 (2007)

  10. [17]

    Photon storage inΛ-type optically dense atomic media. II. Free-space model,

    A. V. Gorshkov, A. André, M. D. Lukin, and A. S. Sørensen, “Photon storage inΛ-type optically dense atomic media. II. Free-space model,” Phys. Rev. A - At. Mol. Opt. Phys.76, 033805 (2007)

  11. [18]

    Highly efficient coherent optical memory based on electromagnetically induced transparency,

    Y.-F. Hsiao, P.-J. Tsai, H.-S. Chen,et al., “Highly efficient coherent optical memory based on electromagnetically induced transparency,” Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 183602 (2018)

  12. [19]

    Storing short single-photon-level optical pulses in bose–einstein condensates for high-performance quantum memory,

    E. Saglamyurek, T. Hrushevskyi, A. Rastogi,et al., “Storing short single-photon-level optical pulses in bose–einstein condensates for high-performance quantum memory,” New J. Phys.23, 043028 (2021)

  13. [20]

    Prospects for storage and retrieval of a quantum-dot single photon in an ultracold87Rb ensemble,

    M. T. Rakher, R. J. Warburton, and P. Treutlein, “Prospects for storage and retrieval of a quantum-dot single photon in an ultracold87Rb ensemble,” Phys. Rev. A88, 053834 (2013)

  14. [21]

    Deterministic storage and retrieval of telecom light from a quantum dot single-photon source interfaced with an atomic quantum memory,

    S. E. Thomas, L. Wagner, R. Joos,et al., “Deterministic storage and retrieval of telecom light from a quantum dot single-photon source interfaced with an atomic quantum memory,” Sci. Adv.10, eadi7346 (2024)

  15. [22]

    Quantum memory for light,

    A. E. Kozhekin, K. Mølmer, and E. Polzik, “Quantum memory for light,” Phys. Rev. A62, 033809 (2000)

  16. [23]

    High-performance Raman quantum memory with optimal control in room temperature atoms,

    J. Guo, X. Feng, P. Yang,et al., “High-performance Raman quantum memory with optimal control in room temperature atoms,” Nat Commun10 (2019)

  17. [24]

    Raman quantum memory with built-in suppression of four-wave-mixing noise,

    S. E. Thomas, T. M. Hird, J. H. D. Munns,et al., “Raman quantum memory with built-in suppression of four-wave-mixing noise,” Phys. Rev. A100, 033801 (2019)

  18. [25]

    Cavity-enhanced room-temperature broadband raman memory,

    D. J. Saunders, J. H. D. Munns, T. F. M. Champion,et al., “Cavity-enhanced room-temperature broadband raman memory,” Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 090501 (2016)

  19. [26]

    Interfacing GHz-bandwidth heralded single photons with a warm vapour Raman memory,

    P. S. Michelberger, T. F. M. Champion, M. R. Sprague,et al., “Interfacing GHz-bandwidth heralded single photons with a warm vapour Raman memory,” New J. Phys.17, 043006 (2015)

  20. [27]

    Quantum memory for photons: Dark-state polaritons,

    M. Fleischhauer and M. D. Lukin, “Quantum memory for photons: Dark-state polaritons,” Phys. Rev. A65, 022314 (2002)

  21. [28]

    Pairwise entanglement and readout of atomic-ensemble and optical wave-packet modes in traveling-wave Raman interactions,

    W. Wasilewski and M. G. Raymer, “Pairwise entanglement and readout of atomic-ensemble and optical wave-packet modes in traveling-wave Raman interactions,” Phys. Rev. A73, 063816 (2006)

  22. [29]

    Multimode memories in atomic ensembles,

    J. Nunn, K. Reim, K. C. Lee,et al., “Multimode memories in atomic ensembles,” Phys. Rev. Lett.101, 260502 (2008)

  23. [30]

    Measurement of the Kerr nonlinear refractive index of Cs vapor,

    M. O. Araújo, H. L. D. de S.Cavalcante, M. Oriá,et al., “Measurement of the Kerr nonlinear refractive index of Cs vapor,” Phys. Rev. A88, 063818 (2013)

  24. [31]

    Measuring saturable nonlinearity in atomic vapor via direct spatial mapping,

    J. Wu, P. Jia, S. Wang,et al., “Measuring saturable nonlinearity in atomic vapor via direct spatial mapping,” Opt. Express 30, 43012–43020 (2022)

  25. [33]

    Collisional decoherence during writing and reading quantum states,

    S. Manz, T. Fernholz, J. Schmiedmayer, and J.-W. Pan, “Collisional decoherence during writing and reading quantum states,” Phys. Rev. A75, 040101 (2007)

  26. [34]

    Photon storage inΛ-type optically dense atomic media. IV. Optimal control using gradient ascent,

    A. V. Gorshkov, T. Calarco, M. D. Lukin, and A. S. Sørensen, “Photon storage inΛ-type optically dense atomic media. IV. Optimal control using gradient ascent,” Phys. Rev. A - At. Mol. Opt. Phys.77, 043806 (2008)

  27. [35]

    Multiparameter optimisation of a magneto-optical trap using deep learning,

    A. D. Tranter, H. J. Slatyer, M. R. Hush,et al., “Multiparameter optimisation of a magneto-optical trap using deep learning,” Nat. Commun. 2018 9:19, 1–8 (2018)

  28. [36]

    An ultra-high optical depth cold atomic ensemble for quantum memories,

    B. M. Sparkes, J. Bernu, M. Hosseini,et al., “An ultra-high optical depth cold atomic ensemble for quantum memories,” J. Physics: Conf. Ser.467, 012009 (2013)

  29. [37]

    Experimental test of contextuality in quantum and classical systems,

    A. Zhang, H. Xu, J. Xie,et al., “Experimental test of contextuality in quantum and classical systems,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 080401 (2019)

  30. [38]

    Photon storage inΛ-type optically dense atomic media. III. Effects of inhomogeneous broadening,

    A. V. Gorshkov, A. André, M. D. Lukin, and A. S. Sørensen, “Photon storage inΛ-type optically dense atomic media. III. Effects of inhomogeneous broadening,” Phys. Rev. A76, 033806 (2007)

  31. [39]

    ElecSus: A program to calculate the electric susceptibility of an atomic ensemble,

    M. A. Zentile, J. Keaveney, L. Weller,et al., “ElecSus: A program to calculate the electric susceptibility of an atomic ensemble,” Comput. Phys. Commun.189, 162–174 (2015)

  32. [40]

    Cesium d line data,

    D. A. Steck, “Cesium d line data,” (28 May 2024)

  33. [41]

    Quantum memory in atomic ensembles,

    J. Nunn, “Quantum memory in atomic ensembles,” Ph.D. thesis, University of Oxford (2008). , EEVI 0π2π 0 1 0π2π 0 1 Normal Storage EEVI Retrieval a b c d , EEVI Fig. 1. The EEVI memory concept using the beam splitter analogy.a. The storage processoflightusinganensemble-basedRam...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.