pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.23960 · v2 · pith:RLEUAAARnew · submitted 2026-06-22 · ⚛️ physics.optics

Single-Shot Realization of 10000-Mode Octave-Spanning Artificial Gauge Fields

Lida Xu , Apurva Padhye , Supratik Sarkar , Alireza Parhizkar , Christopher J. Flower , Gregory Moille , Kartik Srinivasan , Mohammad Hafezi
show 1 more author
Mahmoud Jalali Mehrabad
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-26 06:48 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.optics
keywords artificial gauge fieldsintegrated photonicsfrequency combquantum Hall effectKerr nonlinearitydispersion correctionphotonic modesoctave spanning
0
0 comments X

The pith

Integrated photonics realizes over 100 artificial gauge fields hosting more than 10,000 modes across nearly an optical octave, achieving the first frequency-comb version of the integer quantum Hall model for photons.

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

The paper presents a theoretical framework for designing artificial gauge fields that operate across wide frequency ranges and support many simultaneous modes while correcting for dispersion effects in both linear and nonlinear settings. It then reports an experimental demonstration in integrated photonics of more than 100 distinct gauge fields that together contain over 10,000 modes spanning nearly a full optical octave. This setup is described as the first realization of the integer quantum Hall model for photons using a frequency-comb approach. Control of the gauge fields is achieved in a single shot through Kerr nonlinearity, making the method tolerant to typical manufacturing variations across a wafer. A reader would care because the approach directly addresses the bandwidth and mode-count limits that have previously restricted photonic simulations of fermionic phenomena.

Core claim

We introduce a general theoretical framework for ultra-broadband, multi-modal dispersion-corrected AGFs in both linear and nonlinear regimes. Using integrated photonics, we realize over 100 distinct AGFs hosting more than 10,000 modes across nearly an optical octave—the first frequency-comb realization of the integer quantum Hall model for photons. Leveraging Kerr nonlinearity, we achieve single-shot AGF control beyond waveguide dispersion, robust to wafer-scale fabrication variations.

What carries the argument

Dispersion-corrected artificial gauge fields realized through Kerr nonlinearity in integrated photonic devices, enabling single-shot control across octave bandwidth and thousands of modes.

If this is right

  • Exotic dispersion-corrected AGF dynamics and simulations become accessible in photonic systems.
  • Waveguide-dispersion-resilient photonic circuits can be manufactured at volume scale.
  • AGF-enabled programmable nonlinear and quantum optics and optoelectronics become feasible.
  • The integer quantum Hall model for photons can now be studied in frequency-comb formats with high mode counts.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The demonstrated robustness suggests these AGF devices could be fabricated in standard foundry processes without custom tuning per chip.
  • Combining the octave bandwidth with frequency-comb sources may enable new multimode topological simulations that link optical and microwave regimes.
  • The single-shot control method could extend to other nonlinear platforms where dispersion engineering has been a bottleneck.

Load-bearing premise

The Kerr nonlinearity enables single-shot AGF control beyond waveguide dispersion and remains robust to wafer-scale fabrication variations.

What would settle it

A direct measurement of the mode transmission spectra that fails to show the predicted chiral edge transport signatures or that falls short of octave-spanning coverage would falsify the claimed realization.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.23960 by Alireza Parhizkar, Apurva Padhye, Christopher J. Flower, Gregory Moille, Kartik Srinivasan, Lida Xu, Mahmoud Jalali Mehrabad, Mohammad Hafezi, Supratik Sarkar.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Measured (top) and simulated (bottom) drop port linear transmission spectra in the pump band [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_5.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Artificial gauge fields (AGFs) enable photons and other bosons to emulate fermionic phenomena such as chiral edge transport and quantum Hall phases; however, existing theories and realizations remain confined to narrow bandwidths under single-mode approximation. We introduce a general theoretical framework for ultra-broadband, multi-modal dispersion-corrected AGFs in both linear and nonlinear regimes. Using integrated photonics, we realize over 100 distinct AGFs hosting more than 10,000 modes across nearly an optical octave -- the first frequency-comb realization of the integer quantum Hall model for photons. Leveraging Kerr nonlinearity, we achieve single-shot AGF control beyond waveguide dispersion, robust to wafer-scale fabrication variations. Our results establish a new regime of ultra-broadband multimodal AGFs, opening pathways to exotic dispersion-corrected AGF dynamics and simulations, as well as volume-manufacturable device functionalities such as waveguide-dispersion-resilient photonic circuits, and AGF-enabled programmable nonlinear and quantum optics and optoelectrics.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 0 minor

Summary. The manuscript introduces a general theoretical framework for ultra-broadband, multi-modal dispersion-corrected artificial gauge fields (AGFs) in both linear and nonlinear regimes. Using integrated photonics, it claims realization of over 100 distinct AGFs hosting more than 10,000 modes across nearly an optical octave—the first frequency-comb realization of the integer quantum Hall model for photons—achieved by leveraging Kerr nonlinearity for single-shot AGF control beyond waveguide dispersion and robust to wafer-scale fabrication variations.

Significance. If the experimental claims hold with supporting data and analysis, the work would advance photonic emulation of quantum Hall physics into an ultra-broadband multimodal regime, with implications for dispersion-resilient circuits and programmable nonlinear optics. The general theoretical framework for dispersion-corrected AGFs is a clear strength. The significance is limited by the absence of quantitative validation for the Kerr-enabled robustness claim.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The claim that 'Leveraging Kerr nonlinearity, we achieve single-shot AGF control beyond waveguide dispersion, robust to wafer-scale fabrication variations' is presented as the enabling mechanism for the >10,000-mode realization, yet supplies no quantitative tolerance analysis (variation amplitude, Chern-number drift, or measured vs. designed gauge-field strength). This directly undermines the central experimental claim when dispersion and ~1-5% geometric scatter are considered.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the detailed review and constructive feedback on our manuscript. We address the single major comment below and agree that adding quantitative support will strengthen the presentation of our central claims.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The claim that 'Leveraging Kerr nonlinearity, we achieve single-shot AGF control beyond waveguide dispersion, robust to wafer-scale fabrication variations' is presented as the enabling mechanism for the >10,000-mode realization, yet supplies no quantitative tolerance analysis (variation amplitude, Chern-number drift, or measured vs. designed gauge-field strength). This directly undermines the central experimental claim when dispersion and ~1-5% geometric scatter are considered.

    Authors: We agree with the referee that the abstract states the robustness claim without accompanying quantitative metrics, which weakens its impact. The manuscript develops the general theoretical framework and demonstrates the multi-modal AGF realizations via simulations, but does not include an explicit tolerance analysis quantifying variation amplitudes (e.g., 1-5% geometric scatter), resulting Chern-number drift, or direct comparisons of Kerr-controlled vs. designed gauge-field strengths. We will add this analysis in the revision, including new figures or an appendix with the requested metrics to support the claim. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: experimental realization stands on independent measurements

full rationale

The paper's core claim is an experimental demonstration of >100 distinct AGFs across >10,000 modes using integrated photonics and Kerr nonlinearity. No derivation step reduces a predicted quantity to a fitted parameter by construction, nor does any load-bearing premise rest solely on self-citation whose content is itself unverified. The theoretical framework is presented as general and the results are tied to fabricated devices whose performance is reported via direct measurement; the Kerr-enabled single-shot control is asserted as an enabling mechanism but is not shown to be tautological with the reported mode counts or Chern numbers. The work is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only; no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are stated. The central claim rests on an unelaborated theoretical framework for dispersion-corrected AGFs.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption A general theoretical framework exists for ultra-broadband, multi-modal dispersion-corrected AGFs in linear and nonlinear regimes.
    Invoked as the basis for the experimental realization.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5739 in / 1047 out tokens · 14661 ms · 2026-06-26T06:48:07.846683+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

92 extracted references · 6 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    (D) The exact linear and nonlinear simulations of panel (C)

    Second row: The linear integrated dispersion of the same lattice measured within the same frequency range. (D) The exact linear and nonlinear simulations of panel (C). 40 FIG. S18. (A) The linear drop spectrum of a 300 nm gap IQH device. We generate frequency combs by sweeping the pump wavelength across one of the chiral edge bands with a fixed pump power...

  2. [2]

    Dalibard, F

    J. Dalibard, F. Gerbier, G. Juzeli¯ unas, and P. ¨Ohberg, Reviews of Modern Physics 83, 1523 (2011)

    2011

  3. [3]

    Gross and I

    C. Gross and I. Bloch, Science 357, 995 (2017)

    2017

  4. [4]

    S. Ding, G. Si, Y. Zheng, Z. Wang, and C. Lu, Applied Physics Reviews 12 (2025)

    2025

  5. [5]

    Aidelsburger, S

    M. Aidelsburger, S. Nascimbene, and N. Goldman, Comptes Rendus Physique 19, 394 (2018)

    2018

  6. [6]

    Z. Wang, Y. Chong, J. D. Joannopoulos, and M. Soljaˇ ci´ c, Nature461, 772 (2009)

    2009

  7. [7]

    K. Fang, Z. Yu, and S. Fan, Nature photonics 6, 782 (2012)

    2012

  8. [8]

    M. C. Rechtsman, J. M. Zeuner, Y. Plotnik, Y. Lumer, D. Podolsky, F. Dreisow, S. Nolte, M. Segev, and A. Szameit, Nature 496, 196 (2013)

    2013

  9. [9]

    Roushan, C

    P. Roushan, C. Neill, A. Megrant, Y. Chen, R. Babbush, R. Barends, B. Campbell, Z. Chen, B. Chiaro, A. Dunsworth, et al. , Nature Physics 13, 146 (2017)

    2017

  10. [10]

    A. Dutt, Q. Lin, L. Yuan, M. Minkov, M. Xiao, and S. Fan, Science 367, 59 (2020)

    2020

  11. [11]

    I. T. Rosen, S. Muschinske, C. N. Barrett, A. Chatterjee, M. Hays, M. A. DeMarco, A. H. Karamlou, D. A. Rower, R. Das, D. K. Kim, et al. , Nature Physics 20, 1881 (2024)

    2024

  12. [12]

    Hafezi, E

    M. Hafezi, E. A. Demler, M. D. Lukin, and J. M. Taylor, Nature Physics 7, 907 (2011)

    2011

  13. [13]

    Mittal, V

    S. Mittal, V. V. Orre, D. Leykam, Y. D. Chong, and M. Hafezi, Physical review letters 123, 043201 (2019)

    2019

  14. [15]

    M. J. Mehrabad, A. Parhizkar, L. Xu, G. Moille, A. Dutt, D. Englund, K. Srinivasan, D. Leykam, and M. Hafezi, arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.13831 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  15. [16]

    J. Suh, G. Kim, H. Park, S. Fan, N. Park, and S. Yu, Physical Review Letters 132, 033803 (2024)

    2024

  16. [17]

    S¨ usstrunk and S

    R. S¨ usstrunk and S. D. Huber, Science349, 47 (2015)

    2015

  17. [18]

    K. Fang, J. Luo, A. Metelmann, M. H. Matheny, F. Marquardt, A. A. Clerk, and O. Painter, Nature Physics 13, 465 (2017)

    2017

  18. [19]

    Galitski, G

    V. Galitski, G. Juzeli¯ unas, and I. B. Spielman, Physics Today 72, 38 (2019)

    2019

  19. [20]

    Klembt, T

    S. Klembt, T. Harder, O. Egorov, K. Winkler, R. Ge, M. Bandres, M. Emmerling, L. Worschech, T. Liew, M. Segev, et al. , Nature 562, 552 (2018)

    2018

  20. [21]

    Gardin, G

    A. Gardin, G. Bourcin, J. Bourhill, V. Vlaminck, C. Person, C. Fumeaux, G. C. Tettamanzi, and V. Castel, Physical Review Applied 21, 064033 (2024)

    2024

  21. [22]

    Hafezi, A

    M. Hafezi, A. S. Sørensen, E. Demler, and M. D. Lukin, Physical Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics 76, 023613 (2007)

    2007

  22. [23]

    L. W. Clark, N. Schine, C. Baum, N. Jia, and J. Simon, Nature 582, 41 (2020)

    2020

  23. [24]

    J. Deng, H. Dong, C. Zhang, Y. Wu, J. Yuan, X. Zhu, F. Jin, H. Li, Z. Wang, H. Cai, et al. , Science 378, 966 (2022)

    2022

  24. [25]

    Wang, F.-M

    C. Wang, F.-M. Liu, M.-C. Chen, H. Chen, X.-H. Zhao, C. Ying, Z.-X. Shang, J.-W. Wang, Y.-H. Huo, C.-Z. Peng, et al. , Science 384, 579 (2024)

    2024

  25. [26]

    W. Song, Y. Yang, Z. Lin, X. Liu, S. Wu, C. Chen, Y. Ke, C. Lee, W. Liu, S. Zhu, et al. , Nature Reviews Physics , 1 (2025)

    2025

  26. [27]

    A. Celi, P. Massignan, J. Ruseckas, N. Goldman, I. B. Spielman, G. Juzeli¯ unas, and M. Lewenstein, Physical review letters 112, 043001 (2014)

    2014

  27. [28]

    Ozawa and H

    T. Ozawa and H. M. Price, Nature Reviews Physics 1, 349 (2019)

    2019

  28. [29]

    Y.-J. Lin, R. L. Compton, K. Jim´ enez-Garc´ ıa, J. V. Porto, and I. B. Spielman, Nature462, 628 (2009)

    2009

  29. [30]

    H. Qian, M. Gong, J. Zhang, S. Guo, C. Zha, F. Chen, Y. Ye, Y. Wu, S. Cao, C. Ying, et al. , Science 390, 930 (2025)

    2025

  30. [31]

    Whittaker, T

    C. Whittaker, T. Dowling, A. Nalitov, A. Yulin, B. Royall, E. Clarke, M. Skolnick, I. Shelykh, and D. Krizhanovskii, Nature Photonics 15, 193 (2021). 48

    2021

  31. [32]

    Z. Li, X. Liu, Z. Jin, G. Guo, X. Zheng, and P. Yan, arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.21743 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  32. [33]

    Chen, Y.-L

    Y. Chen, Y.-L. Zhang, Z. Shen, C.-L. Zou, G.-C. Guo, and C.-H. Dong, Physical review letters 126, 123603 (2021)

    2021

  33. [34]

    J. J. Slim, J. Del Pino, and E. Verhagen, Nature Communications 16, 7471 (2025)

    2025

  34. [35]

    Y. Yang, B. Yang, G. Ma, J. Li, S. Zhang, and C. Chan, Science 383, eadf9621 (2024)

    2024

  35. [36]

    Cheng, K

    D. Cheng, K. Wang, C. Roques-Carmes, E. Lustig, O. Y. Long, H. Wang, and S. Fan, Nature 637, 52 (2025)

    2025

  36. [37]

    Z. Dong, X. Chen, and L. Yuan, Nature Communications 16, 10166 (2025)

    2025

  37. [38]

    Y. Lai, Y. Zhang, and K. Chang, Physical Review Letters 135, 233802 (2025)

    2025

  38. [39]

    Barczyk, L

    R. Barczyk, L. Kuipers, and E. Verhagen, Nature Photonics 18, 574 (2024)

    2024

  39. [40]

    Barsukova, F

    M. Barsukova, F. Gris´ e, Z. Zhang, S. Vaidya, J. Guglielmon, M. I. Weinstein, L. He, B. Zhen, R. McEntaffer, and M. C. Rechtsman, Nature Photonics 18, 580 (2024)

    2024

  40. [41]

    Jalali Mehrabad and M

    M. Jalali Mehrabad and M. Hafezi, Nature Photonics 18, 527 (2024)

    2024

  41. [42]

    Jalali Mehrabad, A

    M. Jalali Mehrabad, A. Foster, R. Dost, E. Clarke, P. Patil, I. Farrer, J. Heffernan, M. Skolnick, and L. Wilson, Applied physics letters 116 (2020)

    2020

  42. [43]

    Jalali Mehrabad, A

    M. Jalali Mehrabad, A. P. Foster, R. Dost, E. Clarke, P. K. Patil, A. M. Fox, M. S. Skolnick, and L. R. Wilson, Optica 7, 1690 (2020)

    2020

  43. [44]

    K. Wang, A. Dutt, K. Y. Yang, C. C. Wojcik, J. Vuˇ ckovi´ c, and S. Fan, Science371, 1240 (2021)

    2021

  44. [45]

    K. Wang, A. Dutt, C. C. Wojcik, and S. Fan, Nature 598, 59 (2021)

    2021

  45. [46]

    H. Zhao, X. Qiao, T. Wu, B. Midya, S. Longhi, and L. Feng, Science 365, 1163 (2019)

    2019

  46. [47]

    W. Song, T. Li, S. Wu, Z. Wang, C. Chen, Y. Chen, C. Huang, K. Qiu, S. Zhu, Y. Zou, et al., Physical Review Letters 129, 053901 (2022)

    2022

  47. [48]

    T. Dai, A. Ma, J. Mao, Y. Ao, X. Jia, Y. Zheng, C. Zhai, Y. Yang, Z. Li, B. Tang, et al. , Nature Materials 23, 928 (2024)

    2024

  48. [49]

    X. Feng, T. Wu, Z. Gao, H. Zhao, S. Wu, Y. Zhang, L. Ge, and L. Feng, Nature Photonics 19, 264 (2025)

    2025

  49. [50]

    Mittal, E

    S. Mittal, E. A. Goldschmidt, and M. Hafezi, Nature 561, 502 (2018)

    2018

  50. [51]

    Blanco-Redondo, B

    A. Blanco-Redondo, B. Bell, D. Oren, B. J. Eggleton, and M. Segev, Science 362, 568 (2018)

    2018

  51. [52]

    Tambasco, G

    J.-L. Tambasco, G. Corrielli, R. J. Chapman, A. Crespi, O. Zilberberg, R. Osellame, and A. Peruzzo, Science advances 4, eaat3187 (2018)

    2018

  52. [53]

    Mittal, V

    S. Mittal, V. V. Orre, E. A. Goldschmidt, and M. Hafezi, Nature Photonics 15, 542 (2021)

    2021

  53. [54]

    M. A. Bandres, S. Wittek, G. Harari, M. Parto, J. Ren, M. Segev, D. N. Christodoulides, and M. Kha- javikhan, Science 359, eaar4005 (2018)

    2018

  54. [55]

    Amelio and I

    I. Amelio and I. Carusotto, Physical Review X 10, 041060 (2020)

    2020

  55. [56]

    Mittal, G

    S. Mittal, G. Moille, K. Srinivasan, Y. K. Chembo, and M. Hafezi, Nature Physics 17, 1169 (2021)

    2021

  56. [57]

    C. J. Flower, M. Jalali Mehrabad, L. Xu, G. Moille, D. G. Suarez-Forero, O.¨Orsel, G. Bahl, Y. Chembo, K. Srinivasan, S. Mittal, et al. , Science 384, 1356 (2024)

    2024

  57. [58]

    L. Xu, M. J. Mehrabad, C. J. Flower, G. Moille, A. Restelli, D. G. Suarez-Forero, Y. Chembo, S. Mittal, K. Srinivasan, and M. Hafezi, Science Advances 11, eadw7696 (2025)

    2025

  58. [59]

    M. J. Mehrabad, L. Xu, G. Moille, C. J. Flower, S. Sarkar, A. Padhye, S.-C. Ou, D. G. Su´ arez-Forero, M. Ghafariasl, Y. Chembo, et al. , Science 390, 612 (2025)

    2025

  59. [60]

    Hafezi, S

    M. Hafezi, S. Mittal, J. Fan, A. Migdall, and J. Taylor, Nature Photonics 7, 1001 (2013)

    2013

  60. [61]

    A. Ma, T. Dai, J. Mao, Z. Fu, Y. Yang, X. Hu, Q. Gong, and J. Wang, Optica 11, 1533 (2024)

    2024

  61. [62]

    J. Li, A. Li, Y. Chen, T. Xiao, R. Huang, X. Zhuo, J. Guan, Z. Gao, P. Zhan, M. Lu, et al. , arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.04465 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  62. [63]

    Huang, W

    L. Huang, W. Zhang, Y. Zong, L. He, and X. Zhang, ACS Photonics 12, 219 (2024)

    2024

  63. [64]

    S. D. Hashemi and S. Mittal, Science Advances 11, eadu6554 (2025)

    2025

  64. [65]

    S. D. Hashemi and S. Mittal, Nature Communications 15, 9642 (2024)

    2024

  65. [66]

    X. Xu, M. Tan, B. Corcoran, J. Wu, T. G. Nguyen, A. Boes, S. T. Chu, B. E. Little, R. Morandotti, A. Mitchell, et al. , Laser & Photonics Reviews 14, 2000070 (2020)

    2020

  66. [67]

    See SI section S3 for details

    The ratio between the relative size and shift of the link ring. See SI section S3 for details

  67. [68]

    Hafezi, Physical Review Letters 112, 210405 (2014)

    M. Hafezi, Physical Review Letters 112, 210405 (2014). 49

    2014

  68. [69]

    Y. K. Chembo and C. R. Menyuk, Physical Review A: Atomic, molecular, and optical physics [1990- 2015] 87, 053852 (2013)

    1990

  69. [70]

    Mittal, S

    S. Mittal, S. Ganeshan, J. Fan, A. Vaezi, and M. Hafezi, Nature Photonics 10, 180 (2016)

    2016

  70. [71]

    Q.-F. Yang, X. Yi, K. Y. Yang, and K. Vahala, Nature Photonics 11, 560 (2017)

    2017

  71. [72]

    Vasco and V

    J. Vasco and V. Savona, Physical Review Applied 12, 064065 (2019)

    2019

  72. [73]

    Mittal, V

    S. Mittal, V. V. Orre, G. Zhu, M. A. Gorlach, A. Poddubny, and M. Hafezi, Nature Photonics 13, 692 (2019)

    2019

  73. [74]

    H. Yang, J. Xu, Z. Xiong, X. Lu, R.-Y. Zhang, H. Li, Y. Chen, and S. Zhang, Physical Review Letters 127, 043904 (2021)

    2021

  74. [75]

    T. Liu, M. Qiu, and W. Yan, Nature Communications (2025)

    2025

  75. [76]

    A. Dutt, L. Yuan, K. Y. Yang, K. Wang, S. Buddhiraju, J. Vuˇ ckovi´ c, and S. Fan, Nature Communi- cations 13, 3377 (2022)

    2022

  76. [77]

    Y. Hu, M. Yu, N. Sinclair, D. Zhu, R. Cheng, C. Wang, and M. Lonˇ car, Nature Communications 13, 6293 (2022)

    2022

  77. [78]

    M. K. Chin and S. T. Ho, Journal of Lightwave Technology 16, 1433 (1998)

    1998

  78. [79]

    E. S. Hosseini, S. Yegnanarayanan, A. H. Atabaki, M. Soltani, and A. Adibi, Optics Express 18, 2127 (2010)

    2010

  79. [80]

    Moille, Q

    G. Moille, Q. Li, T. C. Briles, S.-P. Yu, T. Drake, X. Lu, A. Rao, D. Westly, S. B. Papp, and K. Srinivasan, Optics Letters 44, 4737 (2019)

    2019

  80. [81]

    T. Kim, M. Hasan, Y. S. Choi, J. W. Yoon, and S. Kim, Dual-Bus Resonator for Multi-Port Spectral Engineering (2025), arXiv:2510.24267 [physics]

    work page arXiv 2025

Showing first 80 references.