Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 40 references

Monolithically Integrated C-Band Quantum Emitters on Foundry Silicon Photonics

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Foundry-fabricated silicon cavities with erbium-doped TiO2 yield Purcell enhancement ~500 and single photons in the telecom C-band.

desk verdict Foundry-made nanobeam cavities plus backend Er:TiO2 is a real scaling step, but the headline Purcell factor of ~500 is a lifetime ratio with no proof that the short lifetime is radiative. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.00224 v2 pith:OZVCGVCE submitted 2025-05-01 physics.optics quant-ph

Robert M. Pettit , Skylar Deckoff-Jones , Angela Donis , Ana Elias , Jayson Briscoe , Gerald Leake , Daniel Coleman , Michael Fanto
show 4 more authors
Ananthesh Sundaresh Shobhit Gupta Manish Kumar Singh Sean E. Sullivan
This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.opticsquant-ph
keywords siliconphotonicssinglephotonsourceerbiumPurcellenhancementphotoniccrystalcavitytelecomC-bandfoundryfabricationquantumnetworking
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 tries to show that mass-manufacturable silicon photonic chips, fabricated in a standard 300 mm CMOS foundry, can host single erbium ions and turn them into fast, single-photon emitters in the telecom C-band. The route is a nanobeam photonic-crystal cavity with a tiny mode volume, carved into the silicon layer; after the wafer leaves the foundry, a thin erbium-doped TiO2 film is deposited through a sensing trench in the oxide cladding. A single ion coupled to such a cavity has its optical lifetime shortened from 6.86 ms to 13.8 microseconds, a Purcell factor around 500, and the autocorrelation $g^{(2)}(0)=0.27(4)$ confirms one-photon-at-a-time emission. If true, this moves deterministic single-photon sources for fiber networks from small-batch electron-beam fabrication to wafer-scale production.

What carries the argument

The carrying object is the photonic-crystal nanobeam cavity: a silicon waveguide with a parabolic taper of hole pitches forming a resonant midgap state, read out through a bus waveguide and a Sagnac loop mirror. Its combination of high quality factor and small mode volume gives a large Purcell factor, the mechanism that shortens the erbium ion's emission lifetime. The second piece is the backend deposition of an Er$^{3+}$:TiO$_2$ film through a trench in the oxide cladding, placing roughly 200 ions within the cavity mode volume and allowing individual ions to be addressed; cavities are tuned onto the rutile ensemble line at 1520.5 nm by condensing nitrogen gas onto the device.

What would settle it

Measure the lifetime of the same single ion after tuning the cavity away from resonance (or after removing the cavity) and compare it with the 6.86 ms ensemble value; if the off-resonant single-ion lifetime is not 6.86 ms, the Purcell factor estimate $P = 496$ collapses. Alternatively, measure $g^{(2)}(0)$ with pulsed excitation and background subtraction to confirm the stated single-photon purity.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that monolithically integrated, cavity-enhanced single erbium ions emitting in the telecom C-band can be made on a scalable 300 mm silicon photonic foundry platform. Foundry-fabricated nanobeam cavities, with quality factors above 150,000 before coating and about 37,400 for the single-ion device, and simulated mode volumes below $0.4\,(\lambda/n)^3$, isolate individual erbium ions in the rutile phase of a back-end-deposited Er$^{3+}$:TiO$_2$ film. Resonant single ions show a Purcell-enhanced lifetime $T_1 = 13.80(56)\,\mu s$ compared with the 6.86(44) ms ensemble lifetime, yielding $P = 496(38)$, an inferred single-photon coupling rate $g/2\pi = 3.9$ MHz, and $g^{(2)}(0)=0.27(4)$, indicating single-photon emission. The paper also reports wafer-scale characterization of more than 5,000 cavities per reticle, linear tuning of resonance with hole diameter, and only modest degradation of cavity quality factor after film deposition.

Load-bearing premise

The Purcell factor assumes the 6.86 ms ensemble lifetime of erbium in the rutile waveguide equals the intrinsic radiative lifetime of the single ion inside the cavity; if local surfaces, phase differences, or film structure change that unenhanced lifetime, the reported ~500 enhancement is not the true Purcell factor, although the lifetime reduction is still real.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Wafer-scale, reproducible fabrication of Purcell-enhanced single-photon sources in the C-band becomes possible, removing electron-beam lithography as a throughput bottleneck.
  • Because erbium's 1.5 micrometer transition matches the loss minimum of optical fiber, these sources could plug directly into existing fiber-based quantum networks and repeaters.
  • The backend trench deposition decouples foundry front-end fabrication from qubit integration, so different quantum materials could be added post-fabrication on the same platform.
  • With cavities retaining quality factors above 100,000 after coating and with gas-based resonance tuning, many devices on a single chip could be brought into resonance, enabling arrays of single-photon emitters.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural next step is moving the erbium-doped TiO2 deposition into the foundry's front end via atomic-layer deposition, which the paper notes is already CMOS-compatible; if film quality improves, single-ion optical linewidths could drop from tens of megahertz toward the radiative limit.
  • The bunching analysis attributes most of the single-ion linewidth to spectral diffusion; this suggests surface passivation or thicker buffer layers, rather than higher-Q cavities, may be the fastest route to indistinguishable photons.
  • Because the highest-Q cavities on the chip were outside the gas-tuning range used here, devices that land on resonance with the erbium ensemble could push the inferred single-photon coupling rate well beyond $g/2\pi \approx 3.9$ MHz.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper reports silicon photonic crystal nanobeam cavities fabricated through AIM Photonics' 300 mm foundry platform, achieving measured quality factors above 150,000 and simulated mode volumes below 0.4 (λ/n)^3 in the telecom C-band. After receiving the wafers, the authors deposit a polyphase Er3+:TiO2 film through foundry-provided sensing trenches and characterize the resulting cavity shifts and Q-factor degradation. At T = 3.4 K, they isolate single Er3+ ions in the rutile phase, measure a cavity-shortened optical lifetime of T1 = 13.80(56) µs, compare it with the 6.86(44) ms ensemble lifetime measured in an uncavity waveguide to infer a Purcell factor of P = 496(38), and derive a single-photon coupling rate g/2π = 3.9 MHz. They also report a single-ion linewidth of 57.7 MHz (Voigt fit with 13.5 MHz homogeneous contribution), significant spectral diffusion, and a g(2)(0) = 0.27(4) (background-corrected 0.10) confirming single-photon emission. The paper concludes that this demonstrates a route toward manufacturable deterministic single-photon sources in the telecom C-band.

Significance. If the Purcell-factor interpretation is correct, the work represents an important step toward scalable, foundry-compatible telecom-wavelength single-photon sources: the cavity fabrication is performed on a commercial 300 mm platform with wafer-scale statistics (>5,000 devices), and the single-ion measurements include a direct lifetime ratio, a single-photon autocorrelation, and linewidth characterization. The manuscript is generally careful with error propagation on the central lifetime measurements, and the g(2)(0) result is a genuine single-photon signature. However, the quantitative claim of Purcell enhancement rests on identifying the ensemble lifetime with the intrinsic radiative lifetime, and the title's 'monolithically integrated' framing is stronger than the actual post-foundry deposition flow described in the text.

major comments (3)
  1. [Single-ion characterization (Fig. 4b and surrounding text)] The Purcell factor P = 496(38) is computed as the ratio of the ensemble lifetime in a waveguide (6.86(44) ms) to the single-ion cavity lifetime (13.80(56) µs). This ratio rigorously quantifies lifetime shortening, but it is a Purcell factor only if the ensemble lifetime equals the intrinsic radiative lifetime of the isolated ion and if the cavity-shortened lifetime is purely radiative. The manuscript provides no quantum efficiency measurement, no off-resonant lifetime control, and no independent bound from the cavity parameters (e.g., the maximum Purcell factor implied by the measured Q ≈ 37,400 and simulated mode volume). Given the polyphase film, the 2.4 nm RMS roughness, and the delta-doped layer placed between two 10 nm TiO2 buffers, surface- and defect-mediated nonradiative decay could shorten the cavity lifetime without radiative enhancement. The authors should either supply evidence that the ensemble decay is radiative-limited (for example, temperature-dependent lifetime or comparison with the known bulk rutile radiative lifetime) or explicitly re-frame the central claim as a measured lifetime reduction rather than a Purcell enhancement.
  2. [Title, abstract, and conclusion] The title and abstract describe the device as 'monolithically integrated' on foundry silicon photonics, but the manuscript states on page 9 that 'The results presented here are from post-processing after the wafer left the foundry' and describes front-end ALD integration as a future step. The emitter layer is therefore not part of the foundry process flow, and the device is better described as backend- or hybrid-integrated. The title and abstract should be revised to match the actual process flow, or the term 'monolithically integrated' should be defined in a way that does not imply front-end fabrication.
  3. [Abstract and conclusion (deterministic single-photon sources)] The abstract claims a route toward 'manufacturable deterministic single photon sources,' but the data do not yet support the 'deterministic' qualifier. The observed single-ion count rate is about 170 Hz, and with a shot repetition period of approximately 4T1 (about 7.4 µs for T1 = 13.8 µs), the inferred emission probability per excitation pulse is on the order of 10^-3, far below the on-demand single-photon regime. The wording should be softened to 'promising route toward single-photon sources' or the claim should be qualified with the current count-rate-limited performance.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Fig. 4c caption] The word 'linewdith' appears in the caption and should be corrected to 'linewidth'.
  2. [References] References 14 and 29 are the same paper (Ji et al., ACS Nano 2024) and are cited as separate entries in the reference list.
  3. [Fig. 3b caption] The phrase 'different reticle than those showed in Figure 2' should read 'different reticle than those shown in Figure 2.'
  4. [Cryogenic characterization paragraph] The manuscript reports count rates but does not specify the excitation pulse duration, repetition rate, or optical power at the device; providing these parameters would help the reader assess the single-photon count rate and the claim that spectral diffusion limits the count rate.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No circular derivation: the Purcell factor is a ratio of two independent lifetime measurements; self-citations are background only.

full rationale

The central quantitative claim, P = 496(38), is computed as the ratio of the measured ensemble lifetime in a waveguide without a resonant cavity, 6.86(44) ms, to the measured single-ion lifetime in the resonant cavity, 13.80(56) microseconds. Both lifetimes are independently measured, and no parameter is fitted to force the result; the inferred coupling rate g/(2pi) = 3.9 MHz is then obtained from the standard cavity-QED relation P = 4g^2/(kappa * Gamma0) using measured P, kappa, and Gamma0. The only step that can be challenged is the physical identification of the ensemble waveguide lifetime with the intrinsic radiative lifetime of the isolated ion, since nonradiative quenching could shorten the cavity lifetime without radiative enhancement; however, that is a correctness or assumption issue, not a definitional reduction, fitted-input renaming, or self-citation loop. The paper's self-citations (refs 12, 13, 16, 29) are used for film-growth background and prior demonstrations, and the ensemble lifetime used in the ratio is measured in this work rather than imported from those citations. The antibunching result g2(0) = 0.27(4) is also a direct measurement. Therefore no specific circular step can be exhibited under the stated hard rules.

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

The central claim rests on measurements rather than on free parameters or invented entities. The most important auxiliary assumptions are the interpretation of the ensemble lifetime as the unenhanced lifetime and the applicability of the standard cavity-QED formulas. No new physical entities are introduced.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Purcell factor is computed as the ratio of ensemble lifetime in a waveguide to cavity-enhanced single-ion lifetime, assuming the ensemble lifetime equals the ion's intrinsic radiative lifetime in the absence of the cavity.
    The single ion's unenhanced lifetime is not measured directly; the comparison to the rutile ensemble lifetime assumes the ion is representative and that non-radiative channels are comparable. Appears in the Purcell-enhanced lifetime section (Fig. 4b).
  • standard math The single-emitter cavity-QED relation P = 4g^2/(kappa*Gamma0) is used to convert the measured Purcell factor into a coupling rate.
    Standard weak-coupling cavity QED, used to report g/2pi = 3.9 MHz.
  • domain assumption The bunching model of Delteil et al. (ref 39) is assumed to describe the spectral diffusion statistics and to yield the homogeneous linewidth from the bunching amplitude.
    Used to derive Gammahom=10 MHz; the displayed formula is inconsistent with the reported values, making this assumption especially fragile.
  • domain assumption Resonance tuning by nitrogen gas condensation is assumed not to alter the emitter or the cavity-ion coupling.
    Used to bring cavities into resonance with the rutile ensemble; no control measurement for the effect of the condensed gas on lifetime is shown.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Monolithically Integrated C-Band Quantum Emitters on Foundry Silicon Photonics." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/OZVCGVCE

@misc{pith2026250500224,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Monolithically Integrated C-Band Quantum Emitters on Foundry Silicon Photonics},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/OZVCGVCE}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.00224}
}
read the original abstract

Solid-state spin-based quantum systems have emerged as popular platforms for quantum networking applications due to their optical interfaces, their long-lived quantum memories, and their natural compatibility with semiconductor manufacturing. Photonic crystal cavities are often used to enhance radiative emission; however, fabrication of the necessary subwavelength cavities is typically limited to small batch electron beam lithography. In this work, we demonstrate high quality factor, small mode volume nanobeam cavities fabricated on a scalable silicon photonic foundry platform. The foundry fabricated cavities are then interfaced with single erbium ions through backend deposition of TiO2 thin films lightly doped with erbium. Single ion lifetime measurements indicate Purcell enhancement up to about 500, thereby demonstrating a route toward manufacturable deterministic single photon sources in the telecom C-band.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.00224 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. (a) SEM image of fabricated photonic crystal nanobeam cavity. (b) Simulated optical [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. (a) Box and whisker plot (interquartile range and +/- 1.5 quartiles) of the cavity resonance [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Portrayal of photonic crystal cavity with trench opening for deposition of quantum layer. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (a) Photoluminescence excitation of the Er [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

40 extracted references · 40 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Quantum Internet: A Vision for the Road Ahead

    Wehner, S.; Elkouss, D.; Hanson, R. Quantum Internet: A Vision for the Road Ahead. Science 2018, 362, eaam9288

    work page 2018

  2. [2]

    Towards Real-World Quantum Networks : A Review

    Wei, S.-H.; Jing, B.; Zhang, X.-Y.; Liao, J.-Y.; Yuan, C.-Z.; Fan, B.-Y.; Lyu, C.; Zhou, D.-L.; Wang, Y.; Deng, G.-W.; Song, H.-Z.; Oblak, D.; Guo, G.-C.; Zhou, Q. Towards Real-World Quantum Networks : A Review . Laser & Photonics Reviews 2022, 16, 2100219

    work page 2022

  3. [3]

    Cuomo, D.; Caleffi, M.; Cacciapuoti, A. S. Towards a Distributed Quantum Computing Ecosystem. IET Quantum Communication 2020, 1, 3--8

    work page 2020

  4. [4]

    M.; Farshi, F

    Pettit, R. M.; Farshi, F. H.; Sullivan, S. E.; V \'e liz-Osorio , \'A .; Singh, M. K. A Perspective on the Pathway to a Scalable Quantum Internet Using Rare-Earth Ions. Applied Physics Reviews 2023, 10, 031307

    work page 2023

  5. [5]

    D.; Hanson, R.; Wrachtrup, J.; Zhou, B

    Awschalom, D. D.; Hanson, R.; Wrachtrup, J.; Zhou, B. B. Quantum Technologies with Optically Interfaced Solid-State Spins. Nature Photon 2018, 12, 516--527

    work page 2018

  6. [6]

    M.; Raha, M.; Phenicie, C

    Dibos, A. M.; Raha, M.; Phenicie, C. M.; Thompson, J. D. Atomic Source of Single Photons in the Telecom Band . Phys. Rev. Lett. 2018, 120, 243601

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    M.; Bartholomew, J

    Craiciu, I.; Lei, M.; Rochman, J.; Kindem, J. M.; Bartholomew, J. G.; Miyazono, E.; Zhong, T.; Sinclair, N.; Faraon, A. Nanophotonic Quantum Storage at Telecommunication Wavelength . Phys. Rev. Appl. 2019, 12, 024062

    work page 2019

  8. [8]

    M.; Ruskuc, A.; Bartholomew, J

    Kindem, J. M.; Ruskuc, A.; Bartholomew, J. G.; Rochman, J.; Huan, Y. Q.; Faraon, A. Control and Single-Shot Readout of an Ion Embedded in a Nanophotonic Cavity. Nature 2020, 580, 201--204

    work page 2020

Show all 40 references
  1. [9]

    M.; Ourari, S.; Dibos, A

    Raha, M.; Chen, S.; Phenicie, C. M.; Ourari, S.; Dibos, A. M.; Thompson, J. D. Optical Quantum Nondemolition Measurement of a Single Rare Earth Ion Qubit. Nat Commun 2020, 11, 1605

    2020

  2. [10]

    Yang, L.; Wang, S.; Shen, M.; Xie, J.; Tang, H. X. Controlling single rare earth ion emission in an electro-optical nanocavity. Nature Communications 2023, 14, 1718, Publisher: Nature Publishing Group

    2023

  3. [11]

    K.; Prakash, A.; Wolfowicz, G.; Wen, J.; Huang, Y.; Rajh, T.; Awschalom, D

    Singh, M. K.; Prakash, A.; Wolfowicz, G.; Wen, J.; Huang, Y.; Rajh, T.; Awschalom, D. D.; Zhong, T.; Guha, S. Epitaxial Er-doped Y _2 O _3 on Silicon for Quantum Coherent Devices. APL Materials 2020, 8, 031111

    2020

  4. [12]

    M.; Solomon, M

    Dibos, A. M.; Solomon, M. T.; Sullivan, S. E.; Singh, M. K.; Sautter, K. E.; Horn, C. P.; Grant, G. D.; Lin, Y.; Wen, J.; Heremans, F. J.; Guha, S.; Awschalom, D. D. Purcell Enhancement of Erbium Ions in TiO _2 on Silicon Nanocavities . Nano Lett. 2022, 22, 6530--6536

    2022

  5. [13]

    K.; Grant, G

    Singh, M. K.; Grant, G. D.; Wolfowicz, G.; Wen, J.; Sullivan, S. E.; Prakash, A.; Dibos, A. M.; Joseph Heremans, F.; Awschalom, D. D.; Guha, S. Optical and Microstructural Studies of Erbium-Doped TiO _2 Thin Films on Silicon, SrTiO _3 , and Sapphire. Journal of Applied Physics...

    2024

  6. [14]

    T.; Grant, G

    Ji, C.; Solomon, M. T.; Grant, G. D.; Tanaka, K.; Hua, M.; Wen, J.; Seth, S. K.; Horn, C. P.; Masiulionis, I.; Singh, M. K.; Sullivan, S. E.; Heremans, F. J.; Awschalom, D. D.; Guha, S.; Dibos, A. M. Nanocavity- Mediated Purcell Enhancement of Er in TiO _2 Thin Films Grown via...

    2024

  7. [15]

    M.; Stevenson, P.; Welinski, S.; Rose, B

    Phenicie, C. M.; Stevenson, P.; Welinski, S.; Rose, B. C.; Asfaw, A. T.; Cava, R. J.; Lyon, S. A.; de Leon , N. P.; Thompson, J. D. Narrow Optical Line Widths in Erbium Implanted in TiO _2 . Nano Lett. 2019, 19, 8928--8933

    2019

  8. [16]

    M.; Gupta, S.; Grant, G

    Ji, C.; Pettit, R. M.; Gupta, S.; Grant, G. D.; Masiulionis, I.; Sundaresh, A.; Deckoff--Jones , S.; Olberding, M.; Singh, M. K.; Heremans, F. J.; Guha, S.; Dibos, A. M.; Sullivan, S. E. Isolation of Individual Er Quantum Emitters in Anatase TiO _2 on Si Photonics. Applied Phy...

    2024

  9. [17]

    Photonic Crystal Nanobeam Lasers

    Zhang, Y.; Khan, M.; Huang, Y.; Ryou, J.; Deotare, P.; Dupuis, R.; Lon c ar, M. Photonic Crystal Nanobeam Lasers. Applied Physics Letters 2010, 97, 051104

    2010

  10. [18]

    S.; Vu c kovi \'c , J

    Gong, Y.; Ellis, B.; Shambat, G.; Sarmiento, T.; Harris, J. S.; Vu c kovi \'c , J. Nanobeam Photonic Crystal Cavity Quantum Dot Laser. Optics Express, Vol. 18, Issue 9, pp. 8781-8789 2010,

    2010

  11. [19]

    Ultra-Low-Power Consumption Silicon Electro-Optic Switch Based on Photonic Crystal Nanobeam Cavity

    Zhong, H.; Li, J.; He, Y.; Zhang, R.; Wang, H.; Shen, J.; Zhang, Y.; Su, Y. Ultra-Low-Power Consumption Silicon Electro-Optic Switch Based on Photonic Crystal Nanobeam Cavity. npj Nanophoton. 2024, 1, 1--7

    2024

  12. [20]

    H.; Atwater, H

    Cheben, P.; Halir, R.; Schmid, J. H.; Atwater, H. A.; Smith, D. R. Subwavelength Integrated Photonics. Nature 2018, 560, 565--572

    2018

  13. [21]

    Fully Embedded Photonic Crystal Cavity with Q =06 Million Fabricated within a Full-Process CMOS Multiproject Wafer

    Dodane, D.; Bourderionnet, J.; Combri \'e , S.; De Rossi, A. Fully Embedded Photonic Crystal Cavity with Q =06 Million Fabricated within a Full-Process CMOS Multiproject Wafer. Opt. Express 2018, 26, 20868

    2018

  14. [22]

    P.; Whittington, C

    Arnold, K. P.; Whittington, C. S.; Allen, J. A.; Halimi, S. I.; Afzal, F. O.; Bian, Y.; Aboketaf, A.; Hirokawa, T.; Weiss, S. M. Deep Subwavelength Slotted Photonic Crystal Nanobeam in a Monolithic Silicon Photonics Foundry. Opt. Express 2024, 32, 40350

    2024

  15. [23]

    Panuski, C. L. et al. A full degree-of-freedom spatiotemporal light modulator. Nature Photonics 2022, 16, 834--842, Publisher: Nature Publishing Group

    2022

  16. [24]

    Olthaus, J.; Schrinner, P. P. J.; Reiter, D. E.; Schuck, C. Optimal Photonic Crystal Cavities for Coupling Nanoemitters to Photonic Integrated Circuits . Advanced Quantum Technologies 2020, 3, 1900084

    2020

  17. [25]

    W.; Pfeiffer, L

    Abulnaga, A.; Karg, S.; Mukherjee, S.; Gupta, A.; Baldwin, K. W.; Pfeiffer, L. N.; de Leon, N. P. Design and Fabrication of Robust Hybrid Photonic Crystal Cavities. Nanophotonics 2024,

    2024

  18. [26]

    Purcell, E. M. In Confined Electrons and Photons : New Physics and Applications ; Burstein, E., Weisbuch, C., Eds.; Springer US: Boston, MA, 1995; pp 839--839

    1995

  19. [27]

    Coherency- Broken Bragg Filters : Overcoming On-Chip Rejection Limitations

    Oser, D.; Mazeas, F.; Le Roux, X.; P \'e rez-Galacho , D.; Alibart, O.; Tanzilli, S.; Labont \'e , L.; Marris-Morini , D.; Vivien, L.; Cassan, \'E .; Alonso-Ramos , C. Coherency- Broken Bragg Filters : Overcoming On-Chip Rejection Limitations . Laser & Photonics Reviews 2019, ...

    2019

  20. [28]

    Deterministic Design of Wavelength Scale, Ultra-High Q Photonic Crystal Nanobeam Cavities

    Quan, Q.; Loncar, M. Deterministic Design of Wavelength Scale, Ultra-High Q Photonic Crystal Nanobeam Cavities. Opt. Express 2011, 19, 18529

    2011

  21. [29]

    T.; Grant, G

    Ji, C.; Solomon, M. T.; Grant, G. D.; Tanaka, K.; Hua, M.; Wen, J.; Seth, S. K.; Horn, C. P.; Masiulionis, I.; Singh, M. K.; Sullivan, S. E.; Heremans, F. J.; Awschalom, D. D.; Guha, S.; Dibos, A. M. Nanocavity- Mediated Purcell Enhancement of Er in TiO _2 Thin Films Grown via...

    2024

  22. [30]

    T.; Koppenh \"o fer, M.; Mamaev, M.; Ji, C.; Grant, G.; Masiulionis, I.; Sullivan, S

    Solomon, M. T.; Koppenh \"o fer, M.; Mamaev, M.; Ji, C.; Grant, G.; Masiulionis, I.; Sullivan, S. E.; Heremans, F. J.; Guha, S.; Awschalom, D. D.; Clerk, A. A.; Dibos, A. M. Anomalous Purcell Decay of Strongly Driven Inhomogeneous Emitters Coupled to a Cavity. Optica Quantum, ...

    2024

  23. [31]

    C.; Sweet, J.; Khitrova, G.; Gibbs, H

    Mosor, S.; Hendrickson, J.; Richards, B. C.; Sweet, J.; Khitrova, G.; Gibbs, H. M.; Yoshie, T.; Scherer, A.; Shchekin, O. B.; Deppe, D. G. Scanning a Photonic Crystal Slab Nanocavity by Condensation of Xenon. Applied Physics Letters 2005, 87, 141105

    2005

  24. [32]

    N.; Huang, D.; Rong, H

    Jayatilleka, H.; Frish, H.; Kumar, R.; Heck, J.; Ma, C.; Sakib, M. N.; Huang, D.; Rong, H. Post- Fabrication Trimming of Silicon Photonic Ring Resonators at Wafer - Scale . Journal of Lightwave Technology 2021, 39, 5083--5088

    2021

  25. [33]

    Crossover from Inhomogeneous to Homogeneous Response of a Resonantly Driven hBN Quantum Emitter

    G \'e rard, D.; Buil, S.; Hermier, J.-P.; Delteil, A. Crossover from Inhomogeneous to Homogeneous Response of a Resonantly Driven hBN Quantum Emitter. Phys. Rev. B 2025, 111, 085304

    2025

  26. [34]

    Purcell Enhancement of Single-Photon Emitters in Silicon

    Gritsch, A.; Ulanowski, A.; Reiserer, A. Purcell Enhancement of Single-Photon Emitters in Silicon. Optica, OPTICA 2023, 10, 783--789

    2023

  27. [35]

    P.; Uysal, M

    Ourari, S.; Dusanowski, .; Horvath, S. P.; Uysal, M. T.; Phenicie, C. M.; Stevenson, P.; Raha, M.; Chen, S.; Cava, R. J.; de Leon , N. P.; Thompson, J. D. Indistinguishable Telecom Band Photons from a Single Er Ion in the Solid State. Nature 2023, 620, 977--981

    2023

  28. [36]

    G.; de Oliveira Lima , K.; Ferrier, A.; Goldner, P

    Bartholomew, J. G.; de Oliveira Lima , K.; Ferrier, A.; Goldner, P. Optical Line Width Broadening Mechanisms at the 10 kHz Level in Eu ^ 3+ : Y _2 O _3 Nanoparticles. Nano Lett. 2017, 17, 778--787

    2017

  29. [37]

    Controlled Size Reduction of Rare Earth Doped Nanoparticles for Optical Quantum Technologies

    Liu, S.; Serrano, D.; Fossati, A.; Tallaire, A.; Ferrier, A.; Goldner, P. Controlled Size Reduction of Rare Earth Doped Nanoparticles for Optical Quantum Technologies. RSC Adv. 2018, 8, 37098--37104

    2018

  30. [38]

    W.; Song, J

    Liu, J.; Konthasinghe, K.; Davan c o, M.; Lawall, J.; Anant, V.; Verma, V.; Mirin, R.; Nam, S. W.; Song, J. D.; Ma, B.; Chen, Z. S.; Ni, H. Q.; Niu, Z. C.; Srinivasan, K. Single Self-Assembled InAs/GaAs Quantum Dots in Photonic Nanostructures: The Role of Nanofabrication. Phys...

    2018

  31. [39]

    Photon Statistics of Resonantly Driven Spectrally Diffusive Quantum Emitters

    Delteil, A.; Buil, S.; Hermier, J.-P. Photon Statistics of Resonantly Driven Spectrally Diffusive Quantum Emitters. Phys. Rev. B 2024, 109, 155308

    2024

  32. [40]

    pHYs.#.# x?v tEXtSoftwarewww.inkscape.org< IDATx xTչLf&@ p

    Sallen, G.; Tribu, A.; Aichele, T.; Andr \'e , R.; Besombes, L.; Bougerol, C.; Richard, M.; Tatarenko, S.; Kheng, K.; Poizat, J.-P. Subnanosecond Spectral Diffusion Measurement Using Photon Correlation. Nature Photon 2010, 4, 696--699 mcitethebibliography main.tex0000664000000...

    2010

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.