Cited by 37Semiconductor Quantum Structures and DevicesStrong Light-Matter InteractionsQuantum optics and atomic interactions

Two-photon interference from a quantum dot microcavity: Persistent pure dephasing and suppression of time jitter

Open access
Unsleber, Sebastian, McCutcheon, Dara P. S., Dambach, Michael, Lermer, Matthias, Gregersen, Niels, Höfling, Sven, Mørk, Jesper, Schneider, Christian +1 more·2015·Physical Review B

Abstract

We demonstrate the emission of highly indistinguishable photons from a quasi-resonantly pumped coupled quantum dot--microcavity system operating in the regime of cavity quantum electrodynamics. Changing the sample temperature allows us to vary the quantum dot--cavity detuning and, on spectral resonance, we observe a threefold improvement in the Hong-Ou-Mandel interference visibility, reaching values in excess of 80%. Our measurements off-resonance allow us to investigate varying Purcell enhancements, and to probe the dephasing environment at different temperatures and energy scales. By comparison with our microscopic model, we are able to identify pure dephasing and not time jitter as the dominating source of imperfections in our system.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1103/physrevb.91.075413

Cites

43 of 43 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Unsleber, S., McCutcheon, D. P. S., Dambach, M., Lermer, M., Gregersen, N., Höfling, S., Mørk, J., Schneider, C., & Kamp, M.
Affiliations
  • University of Würzburg (DE)
  • Technical University of Denmark (DK)
  • University of St Andrews (GB)
Venue
Physical Review B
Published
2015-02-12
Volume
91
Issue
7
ISSN
  • 1098-0121 (ISSN-L)
  • 1550-235X
OpenAlex
W2098850878
Cited by
37
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 2
FWCI
3.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Physical Review B (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (publishedVersion)
  • Technical University of Denmark, DTU Orbit (Technical University of Denmark, DTU) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • St Andrews Research Repository (St Andrews Research Repository) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung
  • Royal Society
  • Wolfson Foundation
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Semiconductor Quantum Structures and Devices
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Strong Light-Matter Interactions
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum optics and atomic interactions
Keywords
two-photon interference, Hong-Ou-Mandel interference, quantum dot microcavities, cavity quantum electrodynamics, photon indistinguishability, pure dephasing, timing jitter, Purcell effect, temperature dependence, spectral resonance

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review