Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

Toward ultimate-efficiency frequency conversion in nonlinear optical microresonators

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

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

Pith's one-line read A dimensionless M factor sets the absolute efficiency ceiling for microresonator second-harmonic generation, and a strict nonlinear critical coupling condition lets a PPLN microresonator reach 61.3% on-chip conversion at 4.7 mW pump power.

desk verdict Solid theory, credible but calibration-sensitive record; the 61.3% number needs an error budget before it is used as a headline. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.11111 v1 pith:VY3HWBKB submitted 2024-12-15 physics.optics

Zhi-Yan Wang , Xiao Wu , Xiao Xiong , Chen Yang , Zhengzhong Hao , Qi-Fan Yang , Yaowen Hu , Fang Bo
show 2 more authors
Qi-Tao Cao Yun-Feng Xiao
This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.optics PACS 42.65.Ky
keywords second-harmonicgenerationabsoluteconversionefficiencynonlinearcriticalcouplinglithiumniobatemicroresonatorcoupled-modetheoryperiodicallypoledfrequencypulleycoupler
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 claims that second-harmonic generation in a nonlinear microresonator has a hard absolute-efficiency ceiling controlled by a single dimensionless factor $M = 8g^2 P_{in}/(\hbar\omega_p \gamma_a^2 \gamma_b)$, and that the ceiling is reached only under a strict “nonlinear critical coupling” condition (Eqs. 6–8). A sympathetic reader should care because this explains why microcavity-enhanced SHG has historically stalled around 30% conversion: the SHG process itself shifts the fundamental mode’s frequency and adds a power-dependent loss, and unless the pump is exactly re-tuned and the external couplings are chosen to balance those effects, the efficiency is suppressed. The paper also demonstrates the protocol on a periodically poled lithium niobate microresonator, reporting a record on-chip ACE of 61.3% at 4.7 mW pump power, with the theory predicting higher values as $M$ grows. If correct, the work turns the vague goal of “efficient frequency conversion” into a design recipe with a quantitative upper bound.

What carries the argument

The central object is the dimensionless factor $M$ (Eq. 5), which packages all intrinsic device parameters and pump power into a single number that sets both the ACE upper limit and the required external coupling ratios. The carrying mechanism is the coupled-mode evolution (Eq. 1) in which SHG and parasitic parametric down-conversion give the fundamental mode an intensity-dependent frequency shift $\Delta_{NL}$ (Eq. 2) and an effective loss $\gamma_{NL}$ (Eq. 3); the maximum-efficiency argument then reduces the optimization to the NCC condition (Eqs. 6–8), requiring zero FW transmission, double resonance, and a matched ratio between the modes’ external couplings and intrinsic losses.

What would settle it

Measure the ACE of a PPLN microresonator at a series of pump powers while independently tuning $\kappa_a$ and $\kappa_b$, and check whether the maximum observed ACE at each $M$ ever exceeds $1 - 1/R(M) - (R(M)-1)^2/M$, or whether the optimum coupling ratios differ from Eqs. 7–8; any systematic excess or mismatch would falsify the model. A simpler check: at $M \approx 55$ with independently characterized $g$, $\gamma_a$, $\gamma_b$, the 2-mW ACE should be at most about 60% — observing a higher value, or observing the SHG signal’s maximum occur when $\kappa_a \neq \gamma_a + \gamma_{NL}$, would break the central claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Within a two-mode coupled-mode model of a pump (fundamental) mode $a$ and second-harmonic mode $b$, the authors derive that the maximum absolute conversion efficiency is $\mathrm{ACE}_{\max} = 1 - 1/R(M) - (R(M)-1)^2/M$, with $M = 8g^2 P_{in}/(\hbar\omega_p \gamma_a^2 \gamma_b)$, where $g$ is the single-photon nonlinear coupling, $P_{in}$ the input pump power, and $\gamma_a$, $\gamma_b$ the intrinsic losses. This maximum is attained only when the nonlinear frequency shift $\Delta_{NL}$ is compensated ($\Delta_a + \Delta_{NL} = 0$), the SH mode is exactly resonant ($\Delta_b = 0$), and the external coupling rates obey $\kappa_a = \gamma_a + \gamma_{NL}$ and $(\kappa_a + \gamma_{NL})/\gamma_a = \kappa_b/\gamma_b$ — the nonlinear critical coupling condition. The authors further show that parasitic processes (photothermal, Kerr, photorefractive) enter only through static shifts of the mode frequencies, so the same framework applies across platforms. Experimentally, they design a periodically poled lithium niobate racetrack microresonator with pulley couplers tuned to the predicted $\kappa$ values and measure an on-chip SHG efficiency of 61.3% at 4.7 mW pump power, close to the theoretical $\sim$60% ceiling for $M \approx 55$, and higher than the prior ~30% plateau.

Load-bearing premise

The efficiency ceiling and the NCC condition are derived from a two-mode coupled-mode model in which every parasitic effect only shifts the mode frequencies and the second-harmonic mode follows the pump adiabatically; if additional power-dependent losses or mode distortions beyond this model are present, the $M$-limited ceiling and the NCC conditions would not bound the true conversion efficiency.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For a given material platform and pump power, $M$ fixes the highest possible ACE before fabrication; reaching meaningful efficiency (>10%) requires $M$ near unity, and near-unity efficiency requires $M$ in the thousands.
  • Devices should be designed by first measuring $g$, $\gamma_a$, $\gamma_b$, computing $M$, then setting $\kappa_a$ and $\kappa_b$ to the NCC values; the paper’s four-device comparison shows that the device closest to these values has the highest ACE.
  • The NCC protocol is general: the same formulas apply to other second-order and third-order nonlinear processes, and to platforms beyond lithium niobate, because the derivation explicitly folds parasitic effects into static mode shifts.
  • The demonstrated 61.3% ACE is not the end of the curve; the same device formula says that increasing $M$, for example by reducing intrinsic losses, raises the ceiling toward the 100% limit.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because $M$ scales as $g^2/\gamma_a^2\gamma_b$, the theory identifies loss reduction in both modes as the most direct route to higher efficiency; this suggests that ultra-high-$Q$ platforms with moderate nonlinearity could out-perform high-nonlinearity, lossier platforms at equal pump power.
  • The NCC condition can be read as nonlinear impedance matching: the effective nonlinear loss $\gamma_{NL}$ acts like a load that must be balanced by external coupling, providing a design analogy for other power-dependent conversion processes such as parametric oscillators.
  • A direct test of the $M$ scaling prediction would be to measure ACE versus $M$ for a single device whose $g$ or $\gamma_b$ is tuned (e.g., by temperature or duty-cycle variation); Eq. 4 predicts a universal curve that should be independent of how $M$ is changed.
  • The record is reported on-chip; if one includes fiber-chip coupling losses, user-accessible efficiency would be lower, so translating the 61.3% to end-to-end efficiency would require integration with the pump source or low-loss packaging.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper develops a coupled-mode theory for second-harmonic generation (SHG) in doubly resonant microresonators. It introduces a dimensionless figure of merit M = 8g^2 P_in / (hbar omega_p gamma_a^2 gamma_b) and claims that the maximum absolute conversion efficiency (ACE) is ACEmax = 1 - 1/R(M) - (R(M)-1)^2/M, attained when the nonlinear critical coupling (NCC) conditions of Eqs. (6)-(8) are satisfied. The authors fabricate periodically poled lithium niobate racetrack microresonators, characterize the poling duty cycle, intrinsic linewidths, SH-induced frequency shift, and nonlinear loss, and design pulley couplers to approach the NCC condition. They report an on-chip ACE of 61.3% at 4.7 mW pump power, which they state is a record among microcavity-enhanced platforms. The theoretical comparison uses measured intrinsic linewidths and an independently estimated nonlinear coupling g, so the ACE limit is not fitted to the efficiency data.

Significance. If the experimental calibration is robust, this paper reports a substantial advance: a 61.3% on-chip SHG efficiency at milliwatt power would be a clear improvement over the roughly 30% plateau cited for earlier microcavity SHG work. The theoretical contribution is also valuable. The closed-form ACE limit and the explicit NCC design conditions provide a concrete, transferable protocol for designing high-efficiency frequency converters, and an independent steady-state analysis of the coupled-mode equations reproduces Eq. (4), confirming internal consistency. The paper usefully compares attainable M factors across material platforms and validates the predicted nonlinear frequency shift and coupling-efficiency behavior. The main uncertainties are experimental: the headline efficiency rests on large fiber-chip coupling corrections, and the paper does not yet document their accuracy.

major comments (2)
  1. [Materials and Methods; Fig. 5B] The headline experimental claim rests on large and unquantified fiber-chip coupling corrections. The Methods state that fiber-chip coupling losses are 8.67 dB per facet at the fundamental band and 11.17 dB per facet at the second-harmonic band, corresponding to input transmission of about 13.6% and output transmission of about 7.6%. The on-chip ACE is obtained by dividing the detected power by these two numbers, so a ±1 dB error in the input calibration alone changes the quoted 61.3% by roughly -13 to +16 percentage points, with a comparable effect from the output calibration. The paper reports no uncertainty bars on the ACE, no repeated calibration statistics, and no independent cross-check of the facet losses on the actual pulley-coupler device used for the efficiency measurement. Because the 'record-high' claim depends on these constants being accurate to well under 1 dB, this is load-bearing. Please provide an uncertainty budget, repeated calibration data, and ideally an independent check of the on-chip power budget, and adjust the strength of the record claim accordingly.
  2. [Methods; Figs. 3D/E and 5B] The theoretical efficiency curve in Fig. 5B is computed using averaged device parameters, but the uncertainties in those parameters are not propagated. The nonlinear coupling is quoted as g/2π = 0.3 ± 0.12 MHz, and the intrinsic linewidth distributions in Figs. 3D and 3E are broad. Since M scales as g^2 / gamma_a^2 gamma_b, a 40% uncertainty in g alone changes M by roughly a factor of two, and the linewidth spreads contribute comparably. The paper should provide a sensitivity analysis, for example a shaded uncertainty band around the predicted ACEmax curve and around the design targets for kappa/gamma, or justify why the comparison to the measured 52-61% efficiencies is robust to these variations.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Results, Eq. (4)] Please define R(M) explicitly in the main text or just after Eq. (4); as written, Eq. (4) is not self-contained because R(M) is only described as a function defined in the Supplementary Materials.
  2. [Results, 'Measurement of ACE'] The sentence 'these values fall due to the increasing deviation from the NCC condition at higher pump powers' is ambiguous because the measured ACE at 4.7 mW (61.3%) is higher than that at 2 mW (52%); please specify that it is the gap to the theoretical limit, or the theoretical limit itself, that falls with increasing pump power.
  3. [Results, 'Device'; Fig. 3C] The mean poling duty cycle is reported as 0.38 with standard deviation 0.183, which is well below the ideal 0.5; please state explicitly how this systematic deviation was incorporated into the estimate of g and how it contributes to the ±0.12 MHz uncertainty.
  4. [Results, 'Device'] The preliminary test is described as pumping at 1566 nm to generate 783 nm, whereas the stated design wavelengths are 1560 nm and 780 nm; please clarify whether this is a different device, a different resonance, or a different poling period.
  5. [Fig. 2B] The cross-platform comparison of the largest attainable M at 1 mW would be more useful if the caption or a note described how M was estimated for each cited platform, since the cited papers do not all report the nonlinear coupling g in the same convention.
  6. [References] Reference 35 is cited for the parasitic parametric down-conversion (PDC) process, but the cited paper appears to be about electro-optic control of Kerr nonlinearity; please verify that this citation supports the PDC claim or replace it with the appropriate source.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the ACE limit and NCC condition are analytically derived and tested against independently characterized parameters.

full rationale

The central theoretical results (Eqs. 4-8) are derived analytically from the two-mode coupled-mode equations (Eqs. 1-3), with M defined by Eq. 5 in terms of intrinsic parameters and pump power. The experimental test is not constructed from the measured efficiency: the intrinsic linewidths gamma_a and gamma_b are obtained from Lorentzian fits of transmission spectra, and the single-photon nonlinear coupling g is estimated independently from SH-microscopy poling duty-cycle statistics and mode-overlap simulation. The external coupling rates are then designed from the predicted M and the NCC condition, and the measured ACE values (52% at 2 mW and 61.3% at 4.7 mW) are compared with the theoretical curve, so the agreement constitutes a genuine test of the framework. The self-citations in the paper (e.g., Refs. 18, 36, 37, 42) are contextual or methodological and are not load-bearing for the central bound. The large facet-coupling calibration corrections noted in the skeptic analysis affect the robustness of the experimental record claim, but that is an experimental-uncertainty concern, not a circularity in the derivation chain.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The theory introduces no free parameters fitted to the ACE data; the M factor is computed from measured intrinsic linewidths and an estimated single-photon coupling strength g. The main assumptions are the two-mode model, adiabatic elimination of the SH mode, the treatment of parasitic effects as static shifts, and perfect phase matching.

free parameters (1)
  • g, single-photon nonlinear coupling strength = 0.3 ± 0.12 MHz (g/2π)
    Estimated from poling duty cycle statistics and mode-overlap simulation, not from the ACE data. Since M and the predicted limit scale as g², uncertainty in g directly affects how closely the experiment approaches the predicted limit.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Two-mode coupled-mode model (Eq. 1 with Eqs. 2-3) faithfully describes the device.
    The FW and SH modes are treated as single modes with Lorentzian losses and external coupling; the nonlinear back-action enters only through Delta_NL and gamma_NL. The validity of this model underlies all subsequent limits.
  • domain assumption SH mode reaches steady state faster than the nonlinear dynamics (adiabatic elimination).
    The effective FW equation requires the SH amplitude to follow its steady state; this is valid when kappa_b+gamma_b dominates the nonlinear coupling rate, which is typical but not explicitly demonstrated in the main text.
  • domain assumption Parasitic photothermal, Kerr, and photorefractive effects only shift resonance frequencies and are compensated by tuning.
    The text states these effects are incorporated into omega_a and omega_b; the model assumes no additional power-dependent losses or mode distortions arise from them.
  • domain assumption Quasi-phase matching is perfect and only the phase-matched FW and SH modes participate.
    Periodic poling with a period of 4.3 um is used; the analysis assumes Delta_b can be tuned to zero and that no competing spatial modes are excited.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Toward ultimate-efficiency frequency conversion in nonlinear optical microresonators." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/VY3HWBKB

@misc{pith2026241211111,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Toward ultimate-efficiency frequency conversion in nonlinear optical microresonators},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/VY3HWBKB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.11111}
}
read the original abstract

Integrated nonlinear photonics has emerged as a transformative platform, enabling nanoscale nonlinear optical processes with significant implications for sensing, computation, and metrology. Achieving efficient nonlinear frequency conversion in optical microresonators is paramount to fully unlocking this potential, yet the absolute conversion efficiency (ACE) of many processes, such as second-harmonic generation (SHG), remains fundamentally constrained by dissipative losses and intrinsic nonlinear effects in the device. In this work, we establish a unified theoretical framework for SHG in microresonators, identifying a decisive factor M that predicts the upper limit of ACE under the nonlinear critical coupling (NCC) condition. Using this framework, we fabricate integrated periodically poled lithium niobate microresonators and address the dispersive and dissipative suppression to approach the NCC condition. We achieve a record-high experimental ACE of 61.3% with milliwatt-level pump powers toward the ultimate efficiency, with the potential for even higher efficiency as the M factor increases. These results provide a versatile paradigm for high-efficiency nonlinear optical devices, offering new opportunities for advancements across classical and quantum photonic applications.

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. Accelerating Photonic Integrated Circuit Design: Traditional, ML and Quantum Methods

    quant-ph 2025-06

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

48 extracted references · 47 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Franken, A

    P. Franken, A. E. Hill, C. e. Peters, G. Weinreich, Generation of optical harmonics. Phys. Rev. Lett. 7 (4), 118 (1961)

    work page 1961

  2. [2]

    R. W. Boyd, Nonlinear optics (Academic press) (2020)

    work page 2020

  3. [3]

    M. M. Fejer, Nonlinear Optical Frequency Conversion . Physics Today 47 (5), 25--32 (1994)

    work page 1994

  4. [4]

    Krausz, M

    F. Krausz, M. Ivanov, Attosecond physics. Rev. Mod. Phys. 81, 163--234 (2009)

    work page 2009

  5. [5]

    F\" u rst, A

    L. F\" u rst, A. Kirchner, A. Eber, F. Siegrist, R. di Vora, B. Bernhardt, Broadband near-ultraviolet dual comb spectroscopy. Optica 11 (4), 471--477 (2024)

    work page 2024

  6. [6]

    J. J. McCauley, M. C. Phillips, R. R. D. Weeks, Y. Zhang, S. S. Harilal, R. J. Jones, Dual-comb spectroscopy in the deep ultraviolet. Optica 11 (4), 460--463 (2024)

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    Heide, Y

    C. Heide, Y. Kobayashi, S. R. U. Haque, S. Ghimire, Ultrafast high-harmonic spectroscopy of solids. Nature Physics pp. 1--12 (2024)

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    Gorlach, M

    A. Gorlach, M. E. Tzur, M. Birk, M. Kr \"u ger, N. Rivera, O. Cohen, I. Kaminer, High-harmonic generation driven by quantum light. Nature Physics 19 (11), 1689--1696 (2023)

    work page 2023

Show all 48 references
  1. [9]

    Gorlach, O

    A. Gorlach, O. Neufeld, N. Rivera, O. Cohen, I. Kaminer, The quantum-optical nature of high harmonic generation. Nature Communications 11 (1), 4598 (2020)

    2020

  2. [10]

    S. Cha, M. Kim, Y. Kim, S. Choi, S. Kang, H. Kim, S. Yoon, G. Moon, T. Kim, Y. W. Lee, et al., Gate-tunable quantum pathways of high harmonic generation in graphene. Nature Communications 13 (1), 6630 (2022)

    2022

  3. [11]

    Stammer, J

    P. Stammer, J. Rivera-Dean, A. S. Maxwell, T. Lamprou, J. Arg\"uello-Luengo, P. Tzallas, M. F. Ciappina, M. Lewenstein, Entanglement and Squeezing of the Optical Field Modes in High Harmonic Generation. Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 143603 (2024)

    2024

  4. [12]

    T. Udem, R. Holzwarth, T. W. H \"a nsch, Optical frequency metrology. Nature 416 (6877), 233--237 (2002)

    2002

  5. [13]

    Rosenband, D

    T. Rosenband, D. Hume, P. Schmidt, C.-W. Chou, A. Brusch, L. Lorini, W. Oskay, R. E. Drullinger, T. M. Fortier, J. E. Stalnaker, et al., Frequency ratio of Al+ and Hg+ single-ion optical clocks; metrology at the 17th decimal place. Science 319 (5871), 1808--1812 (2008)

    2008

  6. [14]

    Pupeza, C

    I. Pupeza, C. Zhang, M. H \"o gner, J. Ye, Extreme-ultraviolet frequency combs for precision metrology and attosecond science. Nature Photonics 15 (3), 175--186 (2021)

    2021

  7. [15]

    V. S. Ilchenko, A. A. Savchenkov, A. B. Matsko, L. Maleki, Nonlinear optics and crystalline whispering gallery mode cavities. Physical Review Letters 92 (4), 043903 (2004)

    2004

  8. [16]

    F \"u rst, D

    J. F \"u rst, D. Strekalov, D. Elser, M. Lassen, U. L. Andersen, C. Marquardt, G. Leuchs, Naturally phase-matched second-harmonic generation in a whispering-gallery-mode resonator. Physical Review Letters 104 (15), 153901 (2010)

    2010

  9. [17]

    J.-Y. Chen, C. Tang, M. Jin, Z. Li, Z. Ma, H. Fan, S. Kumar, Y. M. Sua, Y.-P. Huang, Efficient frequency doubling with active stabilization on chip. Laser & Photonics Reviews 15 (11), 2100091 (2021)

    2021

  10. [18]

    X. Wu, Z. Hao, L. Zhang, D. Jia, R. Ma, C. Tao, F. Gao, F. Bo, G. Zhang, J. Xu, Second-harmonic generation with a 440 000 \

  11. [19]

    A. W. Bruch, X. Liu, X. Guo, J. B. Surya, Z. Gong, L. Zhang, J. Wang, J. Yan, H. X. Tang, 17 000\

  12. [20]

    J. Lin, N. Yao, Z. Hao, J. Zhang, W. Mao, M. Wang, W. Chu, R. Wu, Z. Fang, L. Qiao, W. Fang, F. Bo, Y. Cheng, Broadband Quasi-Phase-Matched Harmonic Generation in an On-Chip Monocrystalline Lithium Niobate Microdisk Resonator. Physical Review Letters 122, 173903 (2019)

    2019

  13. [21]

    X. Lu, G. Moille, Q. Li, D. A. Westly, A. Singh, A. Rao, S.-P. Yu, T. C. Briles, S. B. Papp, K. Srinivasan, Efficient telecom-to-visible spectral translation through ultralow power nonlinear nanophotonics. Nature Photonics 13 (9), 593--601 (2019)

    2019

  14. [22]

    J. Lu, M. Li, C.-L. Zou, A. Al Sayem, H. X. Tang, Toward 1\

  15. [23]

    M. Zhao, K. Fang, InGaP quantum nanophotonic integrated circuits with 1.5\

  16. [24]

    Nitiss, J

    E. Nitiss, J. Hu, A. Stroganov, C.-S. Br \`e s, Optically reconfigurable quasi-phase-matching in silicon nitride microresonators. Nature Photonics 16 (2), 134--141 (2022)

    2022

  17. [25]

    J. R. Stone, X. Lu, G. Moille, D. Westly, T. Rahman, K. Srinivasan, Wavelength-accurate nonlinear conversion through wavenumber selectivity in photonic crystal resonators. Nature Photonics 18, 192--199 (2024)

    2024

  18. [26]

    Wang, Y.-H

    J.-Q. Wang, Y.-H. Yang, M. Li, X.-X. Hu, J. B. Surya, X.-B. Xu, C.-H. Dong, G.-C. Guo, H. X. Tang, C.-L. Zou, Efficient Frequency Conversion in a Degenerate ^ (2) Microresonator. Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 133601 (2021)

    2021

  19. [27]

    A. Dutt, A. Mohanty, A. L. Gaeta, M. Lipson, Nonlinear and quantum photonics using integrated optical materials. Nature Reviews Materials pp. 1--26 (2024)

    2024

  20. [28]

    Q.-F. Yang, Y. Hu, V. Torres-Company, K. Vahala, Efficient microresonator frequency combs. eLight 4 (1), 18 (2024)

    2024

  21. [29]

    E. F. Perez, G. Moille, X. Lu, J. Stone, F. Zhou, K. Srinivasan, High-performance Kerr microresonator optical parametric oscillator on a silicon chip. Nature Communications 14 (1), 242 (2023)

    2023

  22. [30]

    Guo, C.-L

    X. Guo, C.-L. Zou, H. X. Tang, Second-harmonic generation in aluminum nitride microrings with 2500\

  23. [31]

    J. Lu, J. B. Surya, X. Liu, A. W. Bruch, Z. Gong, Y. Xu, H. X. Tang, Periodically poled thin-film lithium niobate microring resonators with a second-harmonic generation efficiency of 250,000\

  24. [32]

    X. Lu, G. Moille, A. Rao, D. A. Westly, K. Srinivasan, Efficient photoinduced second-harmonic generation in silicon nitride photonics. Nature Photonics 15 (2), 131--136 (2021)

    2021

  25. [33]

    T. P. McKenna, H. S. Stokowski, V. Ansari, J. Mishra, M. Jankowski, C. J. Sarabalis, J. F. Herrmann, C. Langrock, M. M. Fejer, A. H. Safavi-Naeini, Ultra-low-power second-order nonlinear optics on a chip. Nature Communications 13 (1), 4532 (2022)

    2022

  26. [34]

    J. Ling, J. Staffa, H. Wang, B. Shen, L. Chang, U. A. Javid, L. Wu, Z. Yuan, R. Lopez-Rios, M. Li, Y. He, B. Li, J. E. Bowers, K. J. Vahala, Q. Lin, Self-Injection Locked Frequency Conversion Laser. Laser & Photonics Reviews 17 (5), 2200663 (2023)

    2023

  27. [35]

    C. Cui, L. Zhang, L. Fan, In situ control of effective K err nonlinearity with P ockels integrated photonics. Nature Physics 18 (5), 497--501 (2022)

    2022

  28. [36]

    Y. Hu, M. Yu, D. Zhu, N. Sinclair, A. Shams-Ansari, L. Shao, J. Holzgrafe, E. Puma, M. Zhang, M. Lon c ar, On-chip electro-optic frequency shifters and beam splitters. Nature 599 (7886), 587--593 (2021)

    2021

  29. [37]

    Y. Hu, M. Yu, B. Buscaino, N. Sinclair, D. Zhu, R. Cheng, A. Shams-Ansari, L. Shao, M. Zhang, J. M. Kahn, M. Lončar, High-efficiency and broadband on-chip electro-optic frequency comb generators. Nature Photonics 16 (10), 679--685 (2022)

    2022

  30. [38]

    Y. Zhao, J. K. Jang, Y. Okawachi, A. L. Gaeta, Theory of (2)-microresonator-based frequency conversion. Optics Letters 46 (21), 5393--5396 (2021)

    2021

  31. [39]

    Shoji, T

    I. Shoji, T. Kondo, A. Kitamoto, M. Shirane, R. Ito, Absolute scale of second-order nonlinear-optical coefficients. JOSA B 14 (9), 2268--2294 (1997)

    1997

  32. [40]

    Guo, C.-L

    X. Guo, C.-L. Zou, H. Jung, H. X. Tang, On-chip strong coupling and efficient frequency conversion between telecom and visible optical modes. Physical Review Letters 117 (12), 123902 (2016)

    2016

  33. [41]

    Del Bino, J

    L. Del Bino, J. M. Silver, S. L. Stebbings, P. Del'Haye, Symmetry breaking of counter-propagating light in a nonlinear resonator. Scientific Reports 7 (1), 43142 (2017)

    2017

  34. [42]

    Q.-T. Cao, H. Wang, C.-H. Dong, H. Jing, R.-S. Liu, X. Chen, L. Ge, Q. Gong, Y.-F. Xiao, Experimental Demonstration of Spontaneous Chirality in a Nonlinear Microresonator. Physical Review Letters 118, 033901 (2017)

    2017

  35. [43]

    DeSalvo, D

    R. DeSalvo, D. J. Hagan, M. Sheik-Bahae, G. Stegeman, E. W. V. Stryland, H. Vanherzeele, Self-focusing and self-defocusing by cascaded second-order effects in KTP. Opt. Lett. 17 (1), 28--30 (1992)

    1992

  36. [44]

    Moille, Q

    G. Moille, Q. Li, T. C. Briles, S.-P. Yu, T. Drake, X. Lu, A. Rao, D. Westly, S. B. Papp, K. Srinivasan, Broadband resonator-waveguide coupling for efficient extraction of octave-spanning microcombs. Optics Letters 44 (19), 4737--4740 (2019)

    2019

  37. [45]

    X. Lu, Q. Li, D. A. Westly, G. Moille, A. Singh, V. Anant, K. Srinivasan, Chip-integrated visible--telecom entangled photon pair source for quantum communication. Nature physics 15 (4), 373--381 (2019)

    2019

  38. [46]

    Zhang, X

    L. Zhang, X. Wu, Z. Hao, R. Ma, F. Gao, F. Bo, G. Zhang, J. Xu, Second-harmonic and cascaded third-harmonic generation in generalized quasiperiodic poled lithium niobate waveguides. Optics Letters 48 (7), 1906--1909 (2023)

    2023

  39. [47]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address author booktitle chapter doi edition editor eid howpublished institution journal key month note number organization pages publisher school series title type url volume year label INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sentence after.sentence after.block FUNCTION in...

  40. [48]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 gl...

Pith tools

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