Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 3 minor 38 references

Silicon's Al1 defect emits bright telecom photons with a spin

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-01 15:25 UTC pith:ZRG774FY

load-bearing objection Solid single-defect spin-photon interface data, but the Al1 label is load-bearing and the wavelength registry is loose. the 4 major comments →

arxiv 2607.18435 v2 pith:ZRG774FY submitted 2026-07-20 quant-ph physics.optics

Bright Telecom Spin-Photon Interface in Silicon Photonics

Carolina Crosta , Amirehsan Alizadehherfati , Purbita Purkayastha , Kyu-Young Kim , Jasvith Raj Basani , Chang-Min Lee , Fabio Pezzoli , Edo Waks This is my paper
classification quant-ph physics.optics
keywords Al1 centersilicon color centerspin-photon interfacesingle-photon emittertelecom S-bandquantum photonicsoptical pumpingnanophotonic waveguide
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper reports that the Al1-center — a defect in silicon made of one aluminum and one carbon atom sharing a lattice site — is a bright, waveguide-integrated single-photon emitter whose ground state carries a spin that can be addressed optically. Individual centers emit photons in the telecom S-band with near-perfect single-photon purity (g(2)(0)=0.04), a 135 ns excited-state lifetime, and a narrow homogeneous linewidth of 47 MHz, all measured in silicon nanophotonic devices. If correct, this fills a long-standing gap in silicon quantum photonics: a telecom-band emitter with an optically addressable spin that is much brighter and faster than the benchmark T-center. The paper demonstrates the key building blocks — single-photon emission, fast decay, narrow linewidth, and spin-selective optical pumping — toward a scalable spin-photon interface in silicon.

Core claim

The central claim is that the (Al–C)_Si Al1-center is a bright telecom-band spin-photon interface in silicon photonics. The authors isolate single Al1-centers in isotopically purified silicon-on-insulator nanobeams and measure g(2)(0)=0.04 without background subtraction, an excited-state lifetime of 135±2 ns, a homogeneous linewidth of 47±8 MHz, and spin-dependent optical transitions that allow spin-selective optical pumping. They also measure a longitudinal spin relaxation time of 123±27 µs at 7 T and 4.2 K, which they interpret as dominated by high-field spin–phonon relaxation rather than an intrinsic limit. The paper positions the Al1-center as outperforming the T-center in brightness (20

What carries the argument

The Al1-center: a substitutional aluminum–carbon defect in silicon, (Al–C)_Si, predicted to have a large transition dipole moment, C2v symmetry, and a spin-1/2 ground state localized on the unpaired carbon p orbital. The paper also relies on a tapered silicon nanobeam waveguide with a photonic crystal mirror to couple single-defect emission to a lensed fiber at ~70% efficiency, and on two-tone photoluminescence excitation spectroscopy to extract the homogeneous linewidth and resolve spin transitions.

Load-bearing premise

The single emitter is assumed to be the specific (Al–C)_Si Al1-center based on wavelength registry with known ensemble photoluminescence and on the line appearing only after aluminum implantation; no atomically resolved structural measurement confirms this assignment.

What would settle it

Perform single-defect electron paramagnetic resonance or atom-probe tomography on the same isolated emitter: if the defect is not (Al–C)_Si with a spin-1/2 ground state, or if the 1482 nm line appears in samples without aluminum implantation, the central claim fails.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Al1-centers provide a 20-fold brighter saturated single-photon emission than T-centers in the same nanobeam geometry, enabling higher-rate spin-photon interfaces.
  • The 47 MHz homogeneous linewidth is threefold narrower than T-centers at comparable temperature, indicating better optical coherence for photon-mediated entanglement.
  • Spin-selective optical pumping with cyclicity η ≈ 14 achieves high-fidelity all-optical spin initialization without microwave control.
  • The large ~18 meV excited-state separation makes the Al1-center robust against thermal depopulation, unlike the T-center's narrow TX0–TX1 splitting.
  • With improved annealing, the Al1-center could operate at lower magnetic fields, where spin relaxation is slower, and could support coherent control using the intrinsic Al and C nuclear spins.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the Al1-center's C2v symmetry is confirmed, its six magnetically non-equivalent orientations could simplify magnetic-field alignment for multi-spin addressing compared with T-centers' twelve orientations — a consequence the paper mentions only in passing.
  • The measured T1 = 123 µs at 7 T, combined with the paper's cited B^5 spin–phonon scaling, suggests that operating near 0.1 T could extend spin lifetimes by orders of magnitude, which would make the Al1-center competitive for memory applications; this extrapolation is ours, not the paper's.
  • The contrast between single-exponential decay of isolated centers and stretched-exponential ensemble decay implies that local strain and disorder, not the intrinsic transition, set the ensemble linewidth; this could be tested by measuring the homogeneous linewidth of many individual centers.
  • The paper's g-factor values (ge ≈ 1.98, gh ≈ 2.30) and the predicted 27Al and 13C nuclear spins suggest the Al1-center could host a nuclear-spin register, a capability not demonstrated here.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper reports optical characterization of isolated Al-related defect centers in isotopically purified silicon-on-insulator nanobeams and claims to establish the Al1-center, identified as (Al–C)_Si, as a bright telecom S-band spin-photon interface. The main results are: single-photon emission with g^(2)(0)=0.04 without background subtraction; an excited-state lifetime of 135 ns; a homogeneous linewidth of 47 MHz extracted from two-tone spectral-hole burning; and spin-selective optical pumping with a longitudinal spin-relaxation time T1=123 µs at 7 T. The authors also report a 20-fold saturation-brightness enhancement over T-centers, based on comparison with their prior T-center nanobeam work. The manuscript includes ensemble PL, single-emitter PL, PLE, magnetospectroscopy, and time-resolved measurements in the main text and appendices. The central caveat is that the microscopic identification of the isolated emitters as the Al1-center rests on implantation dependence and approximate wavelength registry, and that registry is internally inconsistent.

Significance. If the central defect assignment holds, this is a significant advance: it would provide a telecom-band emitter with a spin ground state, a fast radiative lifetime, and a narrower homogeneous linewidth than the T-center, integrated into a silicon nanophotonic waveguide. The paper's strengths include the direct measurement of g^(2)(0)=0.04 without background subtraction, the clean single-exponential lifetime for the main emitter, the two-tone PLE protocol for homogeneous linewidth extraction, and the resolved spin-selective pumping data with explicit fit models. The appendices give substantial detail for replication. However, the claim that the emitter is specifically the (Al–C)_Si Al1-center is load-bearing and is not yet established: the single-emitter wavelengths differ by up to ~0.5 meV from the ensemble ZPL and from each other, and the brightness benchmark relies on a comparison to a prior T-center measurement in nominally the same geometry rather than an internal same-setup calibration. Thus the significance is conditional on additional identification and controlled comparison.

major comments (4)
  1. [§III, Fig. 2(a), §IV, Fig. A5] The central claim requires identifying the isolated single emitters as the (Al–C)_Si Al1-center, but the wavelength evidence is inconsistent. The ensemble ZPL is quoted at 1481.4 nm in §III; the main single emitter is at 1482.437 nm (Fig. 2a); the resonant emitter in §IV is near 1481.8 nm; and the four 'Al1' centers in Fig. A5 span ~1479.4–1482.8 nm. These shifts reach ~0.5 meV, far exceeding the 10.85 GHz inhomogeneous width reported in §IV. The only identification evidence is Al-implantation dependence and approximate wavelength registry, so the emitter could be a different Al-related complex or a strain-shifted variant. Please provide isotopic (e.g., ¹³C), structural (single-defect EPR), or statistical spectral identification, or explicitly limit the claims to Al-related defects.
  2. [§III, Fig. 2(c), Ref. [28]] The 20-fold brightness enhancement is a headline quantitative claim, but the comparison to T-centers is not controlled. Ref. [28] is a separate device/measurement in 'the same nanobeam geometry', not the same sample and setup; collection efficiency, excitation wavelength/power, filters, and detector calibration may all differ. A factor ~7 is already expected from the lifetime difference, so the additional factor must come from extraction/collection and needs a side-by-side calibration. Please report the reference conditions in detail or provide a same-setup T-center/Al1-center comparison, and otherwise rephrase the factor as an estimate.
  3. [Abstract; §III; Appendix A, Fig. A4] The abstract and conclusion claim 'high-purity single-photon emission', but this is demonstrated on one selected emitter. The second fully characterized emitter, used for resonant PLE, has g^(2)(0)=0.35±0.02 (Fig. A4) due to background. The paper should report the distribution of g^(2)(0) across all isolated emitters and state the selection criteria, or qualify the purity claim as 'best-emitter'.
  4. [§IV, Fig. 3, Eq. (B2)] The zero-power extrapolation of the spectral-hole width is used to claim a 47 MHz homogeneous linewidth. The paper also reports 10.85 GHz inhomogeneous broadening and pronounced spectral diffusion. In such a regime, a transient spectral hole can be broadened by diffusion during the measurement time, and Eq. (B2) assumes a Lorentzian hole with no diffusion contribution. Please justify the timescale separation (e.g., hole-recovery time vs. measurement window) or include a diffusion term in the model; otherwise the 47 MHz value may be an upper bound on the homogeneous linewidth.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Fig. A5] The effective g-factors spread from 0.186 to 0.344 across four centers. Since the paper claims six non-equivalent orientations, this spread is expected; please state this explicitly and include orientation/strain as a possible cause rather than leaving it implicit.
  2. [Appendix A, Eq. (A4)] The displayed formula is garbled ('1 1 B +A·P'); please correct to 1/(B + A P) and define A and B.
  3. [Section II] 'This makes the Al1-center more symmetric compared to T-center' is a prediction from theory/stress spectroscopy, not from this experiment; phrase it as predicted.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the Al1-center properties are measured and fitted with standard models; the only self-citations are non-load-bearing experimental benchmarks.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is experimental, not self-referential. Every headline quantity — g(2)(0)=0.04, τ=135 ns, homogeneous linewidth 47 MHz, g_e=1.98, g_h=2.30, T1=123 µs — is directly measured and fitted with standard analytic models (Eqs. A1-A3, B1-B2, B3-B7). No fitted parameter is relabeled as a prediction, and no quantity is defined in terms of the result it is used to establish. The cyclicity calculation in Eqs. B5-B6 uses the independently measured lifetime and the fitted optical-pumping rate as an ordinary derived consistency check, not as an input-output tautology. The central identification of the emitter as the (Al-C)_Si Al1 center rests on external ensemble photoluminescence references [23-25] and on the absence of the zero-phonon line in Al-free samples; this is an identification assumption rather than a circular reduction, and it is a correctness risk, not a circularity. The only self-citations are [28] (nanobeam T-center brightness benchmark) and, to a lesser extent, [31] (T1 comparison); both are experimental benchmarks external to the Al1 characterization and are not load-bearing premises. The manuscript itself flags residual implantation damage, spectral diffusion, and the need for better annealing conditions (Section IV and Appendix A), but these are limitations that do not reduce the claims to their inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 4 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper reports measured quantities extracted from standard fitting models (saturation, exponential decay, power broadening). It introduces no ad hoc free parameters or invented entities; its assumptions are the defect assignment, the bound-exciton model, and the spin-relaxation scaling.

axioms (4)
  • domain assumption The 1481 nm emission line is assigned to the Al1-center based on prior literature and Al-implantation dependence.
    Section III: 'This emission line is consistent with the zero-phonon line of the Al1-center previously reported [23, 24]' and 'We do not observe this peak in samples that have not been implanted with Al.' No direct atomic-scale identification.
  • domain assumption The Al1-center has a spin-1/2 ground state and C2v symmetry as predicted by computational study [22].
    Section II: 'the neutral defect has a doublet, spin-1/2, ground state' and 'predicted point-group symmetry... C2v'. This is taken from the cited computational work.
  • domain assumption The four-level bound-exciton model describes the spin-dependent optical transitions under magnetic field.
    Section V and Figure 4 inset: magnetospectroscopy interpreted with four allowed transitions of the bound-exciton manifold.
  • domain assumption Direct one-phonon spin-lattice relaxation scales as T1^-1 ∝ B^5 coth(gµB B/2kT), used to interpret the short T1.
    Section V, cited [32,33]; used to argue that T1 = 123 µs at 7 T is consistent with high-field enhancement rather than intrinsic short lifetime.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 16249 in / 12274 out tokens · 167167 ms · 2026-08-01T15:25:20.162067+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Silicon is an attractive host for scalable quantum photonics, but the absence of bright telecom-band emitters with optically addressable spin states has limited its use for spin-photon interfaces. Here we demonstrate the Al1-center, an aluminum--carbon defect in silicon, as a bright waveguide-integrated single-photon emitter with a ground-state spin. Using isotopically purified silicon-on-insulator nanophotonic devices, we isolate individual Al1-centers and observe high-purity single-photon emission with $g^{(2)}(0)=0.04$ without background subtraction. Time-resolved photoluminescence spectroscopy reveals a fast excited-state lifetime of 135 ns, nearly an order of magnitude shorter than the benchmark provided by the well-studied T-center. Resonant photoluminescence excitation measurements further resolve the zero-phonon transition and reveal a narrow homogeneous linewidth reaching 47 MHz, threefold narrower than the T-center under comparable temperature. Through magneto-optical spectroscopy, we resolve the spin-dependent transitions of the bound-exciton manifold and achieve spin-selective optical pumping, fulfilling the prerequisite for quantum state initialization and readout. These results establish the Al1-center as a bright telecom-band spin-photon interface in silicon photonics and introduce a promising platform for integrated quantum networks.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.18435 by Amirehsan Alizadehherfati, Carolina Crosta, Chang-Min Lee, Edo Waks, Fabio Pezzoli, Jasvith Raj Basani, Kyu-Young Kim, Purbita Purkayastha.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: a shows the expected atomic structure of the Al1-center [22]. The structure is assigned to a substitutional acceptor–carbon complex, (Al–C)Si, in which an aluminum atom and a carbon atom share a silicon lattice site. This defect is T-center-like be￾cause it is structurally and electronically analogous to the T center (C–C–H)Si. In both cases, the relevant in-gap defect state is primarily localized on the u… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Optical characterization of a single Al1- [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Transient spectral hole burning measurements on a single Al1-center. a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Magnetospectroscopy and time-resolved optical pumping of a single Al1-center. a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗

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

38 extracted references · 1 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Ultralow-loss silicon photonics beyond the singlemode regime,

    L. Zhang, S. Hong, Y. Wang, H. Yan, Y. Xie, T. Chen, M. Zhang, Z. Yu, Y. Shi, L. Liu,et al., “Ultralow-loss silicon photonics beyond the singlemode regime,”Laser & Photonics Reviews, vol. 16, no. 4, p. 2100292, 2022

    2022

  2. [2]

    Losses in single-mode silicon-on-insulator strip waveguides and bends,

    Y. A. Vlasov and S. J. McNab, “Losses in single-mode silicon-on-insulator strip waveguides and bends,”Optics Express, vol. 12, no. 8, pp. 1622–1631, 2004

    2004

  3. [3]

    Slow-light sil- icon modulator with 110-ghz bandwidth,

    C. Han, Z. Zheng, H. Shu, M. Jin, J. Qin, R. Chen, Y. Tao, B. Shen, B. Bai, F. Yang,et al., “Slow-light sil- icon modulator with 110-ghz bandwidth,”Science Ad- vances, vol. 9, no. 42, p. eadi5339, 2023

    2023

  4. [4]

    A high- speed silicon optical modulator based on a metal-oxide- semiconductor capacitor,

    A. Liu, R. Jones, L. Liao, D. Samara-Rubio, D. Rubin, O. Cohen, R. Nicolaescu, and M. Paniccia, “A high- speed silicon optical modulator based on a metal-oxide- semiconductor capacitor,”Nature, vol. 427, pp. 615– 618, 2004

    2004

  5. [5]

    Ultra-fast germanium photodiode with 3-db bandwidth of 265 ghz,

    S. Lischke, A. Peczek, J. Morgan, K. Sun, D. Steckler, Y. Yamamoto, F. Korndörfer, C. Mai, S. Marschmeyer, M. Fraschke,et al., “Ultra-fast germanium photodiode with 3-db bandwidth of 265 ghz,”Nature Photonics, vol. 15, no. 12, pp. 925–931, 2021

    2021

  6. [6]

    High performance, waveguide integrated ge photode- tectors,

    D. Ahn, C.-Y. Hong, J. Liu, W. Giziewicz, M. Beals, L. C. Kimerling, J. Michel, J. Chen, and F. X. Kärtner, “High performance, waveguide integrated ge photode- tectors,”Optics Express, vol. 15, no. 7, pp. 3916–3921, 2007

    2007

  7. [7]

    Silicon mi- croring resonators,

    W. Bogaerts, P. De Heyn, T. Van Vaerenbergh, K. De Vos, S. K. Selvaraja, T. Claes, P. Dumon, P. Bi- enstman, D. Van Thourhout, and R. Baets, “Silicon mi- croring resonators,”Laser & Photonics Reviews, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 47–73, 2012

    2012

  8. [8]

    High-bandwidth density silicon photonic resonators for energy-efficient optical interconnects,

    A. Novick, A. James, L. Y. Dai, Z. Wu, A. Rizzo, S. Wang, Y. Wang, M. Hattink, V. Gopal, K. Jang, R. Parsons, and K. Bergman, “High-bandwidth density silicon photonic resonators for energy-efficient optical interconnects,”Applied Physics Reviews, vol. 10, no. 4, p. 041306, 2023

    2023

  9. [9]

    Roadmap on silicon photonics,

    D. Thomson, A. Zilkie, J. E. Bowers, T. Komljenovic, G. T. Reed, L. Vivien, D. Marris-Morini, E. Cassan, L. Virot, J.-M. Fédéli, J.-M. Hartmann, J. H. Schmid, D.-X. Xu, F. Boeuf, P. O’Brien, G. Z. Mashanovich, and M. Nedeljkovic, “Roadmap on silicon photonics,” Journal of Optics, vol. 18, no. 7, p. 073003, 2016

    2016

  10. [10]

    Large-scale silicon quan- tum photonics implementing arbitrary two-qubit pro- cessing,

    X. Qiang, X. Zhou, J. Wang, C. M. Wilkes, T. Loke, S. O’Gara, L. Kling, G. D. Marshall, R. Santagati, T. C. Ralph, J. B. Wang, J. L. O’Brien, M. G. Thomp- son, and J. C. F. Matthews, “Large-scale silicon quan- tum photonics implementing arbitrary two-qubit pro- cessing,”Nature Photonics, vol. 12, pp. 534–539, 2018

    2018

  11. [11]

    In- tegrated photonics for quantum communications and metrology,

    L.Labonté, O.Alibart, V.D’auria, F.Doutre, J.Etesse, G. Sauder, A. Martin, É. Picholle, and S. Tanzilli, “In- tegrated photonics for quantum communications and metrology,”Prx Quantum, vol. 5, no. 1, p. 010101, 2024

    2024

  12. [12]

    Integrated photonic quantum technologies,

    J. Wang, F. Sciarrino, A. Laing, and M. G. Thomp- son, “Integrated photonic quantum technologies,”Na- ture Photonics, vol. 14, pp. 273–284, 2020

    2020

  13. [13]

    Single artificial atoms in silicon emitting at telecom wavelengths,

    W. Redjem, A. Durand, T. Herzig, A. Benali, S. Pezza- gna, J. Meijer, A. Y. Kuznetsov, H. Nguyen, S. Cueff, J.-M. Gérard,et al., “Single artificial atoms in silicon emitting at telecom wavelengths,”Nature Electronics, vol. 3, no. 12, pp. 738–743, 2020

    2020

  14. [14]

    Detection of sin- gle w-centers in silicon,

    Y. Baron, A. Durand, P. Udvarhelyi, T. Herzig, M. Khoury, S. Pezzagna, J. Meijer, I. Robert-Philip, M. Abbarchi, J.-M. Hartmann,et al., “Detection of sin- gle w-centers in silicon,”ACS photonics, vol. 9, no. 7, pp. 2337–2345, 2022

    2022

  15. [15]

    Programmable quantum emitter for- mation in silicon,

    K. Jhuria, V. Ivanov, D. Polley, Y. Zhiyenbayev, W. Liu, A. Persaud, W. Redjem, W. Qarony, P. Para- juli, Q. Ji,et al., “Programmable quantum emitter for- mation in silicon,”Nature Communications, vol. 15, no. 1, p. 4497, 2024

    2024

  16. [16]

    Optical observation of single spins in silicon,

    D. B. Higginbottom, A. T. Kurkjian, C. Chartrand, M. Kazemi, N. A. Brunelle, E. R. MacQuarrie, J. R. Klein, N. R. Lee-Hone, J. Stacho, M. Ruether,et al., “Optical observation of single spins in silicon,”Nature, vol. 607, no. 7918, pp. 266–270, 2022

    2022

  17. [17]

    Quantum repeaters: From quantum networks to the quantum internet,

    K. Azuma, S. E. Economou, D. Elkouss, P. Hilaire, L. Jiang, H.-K. Lo, and I. Tzitrin, “Quantum repeaters: From quantum networks to the quantum internet,”Re- views of Modern Physics, vol. 95, p. 045006, 2023

    2023

  18. [18]

    Distributed quantum computing across an optical network link,

    D. Main, P. Drmota, D. P. Nadlinger, E. M. Ainley, A. Agrawal, B. C. Nichol, R. Srinivas, G. Araneda, and D. M. Lucas, “Distributed quantum computing across an optical network link,”Nature, vol. 638, no. 8050, pp. 383–388, 2025

    2025

  19. [19]

    Silicon- integrated telecommunications photon-spin interface,

    L. Bergeron, C. Chartrand, A. Kurkjian, K. Morse, H. Riemann, N. Abrosimov, P. Becker, H.-J. Pohl, M. Thewalt, and S. Simmons, “Silicon- integrated telecommunications photon-spin interface,” PRX Quantum, vol. 1, no. 2, p. 020301, 2020

    2020

  20. [20]

    Distributed quantum computinginsilicon,

    F. Afzal, M. Akhlaghi, S. J. Beale, O. Bedroya, K. Bell, L. Bergeron, K. Bonsma-Fisher, P. Bychkova, Z. M. Chaisson, C. Chartrand,et al., “Distributed quantum computinginsilicon,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.01704, 2024

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  21. [21]

    Entangle- ment of a nuclear spin qubit register in silicon photon- ics,

    H. Song, X. Zhang, L. Komza, N. Fiaschi, Y. Xiong, Y. Zhi, S. Dhuey, A. Schwartzberg, T. Schenkel, G. Hautier, Z.-H. Zhang, and A. Sipahigil, “Entangle- ment of a nuclear spin qubit register in silicon photon- ics,”Nature Nanotechnology, vol. 21, pp. 53–57, 2026

    2026

  22. [22]

    Computationally driven discovery of t center-like quantum defects in silicon,

    Y.Xiong, J.Zheng, S.McBride, X.Zhang, S.M.Griffin, and G. Hautier, “Computationally driven discovery of t center-like quantum defects in silicon,”Journal of the American Chemical Society, vol. 146, no. 44, pp. 30046– 30056, 2024

    2024

  23. [23]

    Alu- minum and gallium impurity effects on the photolumi- nescence from electron irradiated, pulled silicon,

    J. Noonan, C. Kirkpatrick, and B. Streetman, “Alu- minum and gallium impurity effects on the photolumi- nescence from electron irradiated, pulled silicon,”Solid State Communications, vol. 15, no. 6, pp. 1055–1059, 1974

    1974

  24. [24]

    Alu- minum in complex luminescence defects in irradiated silicon,

    E. Irion, N. Bürger, K. Thonke, and R. Sauer, “Alu- minum in complex luminescence defects in irradiated silicon,”Physical Review B, vol. 38, no. 18, p. 13079, 1988

    1988

  25. [25]

    Photoluminescence study 14 of acceptor-carbon complexes in irradiated silicon: Aluminum-related defects,

    E. Irion, N. Bürger, W. Kürner, K. Thonke, R. Sauer, W. Zulehner, and G. Pensl, “Photoluminescence study 14 of acceptor-carbon complexes in irradiated silicon: Aluminum-related defects,”Applied Physics A, vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 25–30, 1989

    1989

  26. [26]

    Interstitial-carbon hydrogen interaction in silicon,

    A. Safonov, E. Lightowlers, G. Davies, P. Leary, R. Jones, and S. Öberg, “Interstitial-carbon hydrogen interaction in silicon,”Physical review letters, vol. 77, no. 23, p. 4812, 1996

    1996

  27. [27]

    Optical-transition parameters of the silicontcenter,

    C. Clear, S. Hosseini, A. AlizadehKhaledi, N. Brunelle, A. Woolverton, J. Kanaganayagam, M. Kazemi, C. Chartrand, M. Keshavarz, Y. Xiong, L. Alaerts, O. O. Soykal, G. Hautier, V. Karassiouk, M. Thewalt, D. Higginbottom, and S. Simmons, “Optical-transition parameters of the silicontcenter,”Phys. Rev. Appl., vol. 22, p. 064014, Dec 2024

    2024

  28. [28]

    High- efficiency single photon emission from a silicon t-center in a nanobeam,

    C.-M. Lee, F. Islam, S. Harper, M. A. Buyukkaya, D. Higginbottom, S. Simmons, and E. Waks, “High- efficiency single photon emission from a silicon t-center in a nanobeam,”ACS Photonics, vol. 10, no. 11, pp. 3844–3849, 2023

    2023

  29. [29]

    Laser-induced spectral diffusion of t centers in silicon nanophotonic devices,

    X. Zhang, N. Fiaschi, L. Komza, H. Song, T. Schenkel, and A. Sipahigil, “Laser-induced spectral diffusion of t centers in silicon nanophotonic devices,”PRX Quan- tum, vol. 6, no. 3, p. 030351, 2025

    2025

  30. [30]

    Optical dephasing in defect-rich crystals,

    V. Hizhnyakov and P. Reineker, “Optical dephasing in defect-rich crystals,”The Journal of chemical physics, vol. 111, no. 17, pp. 8131–8135, 1999

    1999

  31. [31]

    Waveguide-integrated silicon t centres,

    A. DeAbreu, C. Bowness, A. Alizadeh, C. Char- trand, N. A. Brunelle, E. R. MacQuarrie, N. R. Lee- Hone, M. Ruether, M. Kazemi, A. Kurkjian,et al., “Waveguide-integrated silicon t centres,”Optics Ex- press, vol. 31, no. 9, pp. 15045–15057, 2023

    2023

  32. [32]

    OUP oxford, 2012

    A.AbragamandB.Bleaney,Electron paramagnetic res- onance of transition ions. OUP oxford, 2012

    2012

  33. [33]

    Spin-lattice relaxation of shallow donor states in ge and si through a direct phonon process,

    H. Hasegawa, “Spin-lattice relaxation of shallow donor states in ge and si through a direct phonon process,” Physical Review, vol. 118, no. 6, p. 1523, 1960

    1960

  34. [34]

    Radiation damage in silicon exposed to high-energy protons,

    G. Davies, S. Hayama, L. Murin, R. Krause- Rehberg, V. Bondarenko, A. Sengupta, C. Davia, and A. Karpenko, “Radiation damage in silicon exposed to high-energy protons,”Physical Review B—Condensed Matter and Materials Physics, vol.73, no.16, p.165202, 2006

    2006

  35. [35]

    Spectral hole burning: ex- amples from photosynthesis,

    R. Purchase and S. Völker, “Spectral hole burning: ex- amples from photosynthesis,”Photosynthesis research, vol. 101, no. 2, pp. 245–266, 2009

    2009

  36. [36]

    Low-temperatureinvestigationsofsinglesil- icon vacancy colour centres in diamond,

    E. Neu, C. Hepp, M. Hauschild, S. Gsell, M. Fischer, H. Sternschulte, D. Steinmüller-Nethl, M. Schreck, and C.Becher, “Low-temperatureinvestigationsofsinglesil- icon vacancy colour centres in diamond,”New Journal of Physics, vol. 15, no. 4, p. 043005, 2013

    2013

  37. [37]

    A. E. Siegman,Lasers. University science books, 1986

    1986

  38. [38]

    Single-shot readout and weak measurement of a tin-vacancy qubit in diamond,

    E. I. Rosenthal, S. Biswas, G. Scuri, H. Lee, A. J. Stein, H. C. Kleidermacher, J. Grzesik, A. E. Rugar, S. Aghaeimeibodi, D. Riedel, M. Titze, E. S. Bielejec, J. Choi, C. P. Anderson, and J. Vučković, “Single-shot readout and weak measurement of a tin-vacancy qubit in diamond,”Physical Review X, vol. 14, p. 041008, 2024

    2024