Cited by 984Quantum optics and atomic interactionsQuantum Mechanics and ApplicationsQuantum Information and Cryptography

Experimental Evidence for a Photon Anticorrelation Effect on a Beam Splitter: A New Light on Single-Photon Interferences

Open access
Grangier, P, Roger, G, Aspect, A·1986·Europhysics Letters (EPL)

Abstract

We report on two experiments using an atomic cascade as a light source, and a triggered detection scheme for the second photon of the cascade. The first experiment shows a strong anticorrelation between the triggered detections on both sides of a beam splitter. This result is in contradiction with any classical wave model of light, but in agreement with a quantum description involving single-photon states. The same source and detection scheme were used in a second experiment, where we have observed interferences with a visibility over 98%.

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 · 10.1209/0295-5075/1/4/004

Cites

13 of 13 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?

  • In 1986, Aspect and co-workers used this atomic cascade source to demonstrate the wave-particle duality of a photon by sending single photons on a beam splitter.

    “In 1986, Aspect and co-workers (Grangier et al 1986) used this atomic cascade source to demonstrate the wave-particle duality of a photon by sending single photons on a beam splitter.”

    From Single-photon sources (2005) · cites this paper as Grangier et al 1986

  • They observed a strong anticorrelation between the triggered detections on the two sides of the beam splitter, which was a clear signature of a particle-like behaviour of the single photon.

    “They observed a strong anticorrelation between the triggered detections on the two sides of the beam splitter, which was a clear signature of a particle-like behaviour of the single photon.”

    From Single-photon sources (2005) · cites this paper as Grangier et al 1986

  • When the output beams of the beam splitter were recombined on a second beam splitter to form a Mach-Zehnder interferometer, interferences with a visibility of over 98% were observed when the optical path between the two arms was varied.

    “When the output beams of the beam splitter were recombined on a second beam splitter to form a Mach-Zehnder interferometer, interferences with a visibility of over 98% were observed when the optical path between the two arms of the interferometer was varied.”

    From Single-photon sources (2005) · cites this paper as Grangier et al 1986

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

Research works printed but not linked: 14

  1. For a review, see: R. LOUDON: Rep. Prog. Phys., 43, 913 (1980).
  2. D. C. BURNHAM and D. L. WEINBERG: Phys. Rev. Lett., 25, 84 (1970);
  3. J. F. CLAUSER: Phys. Rev. D, 9, 853 (1974).
  4. H. J. KIMBLE, M. DAGENAIS and L. MANDEL: Phys. Rev. Lett., 39, 691 (1977).
  5. R. SHORT and L. MANDEL: Phys. Rev. Lett., 51, 384 (1983).
  6. J. D. CRESSER, J. HAGER, G. LEUCHS, M. RATEIKE and H. WALTHER: Topic in Current Physics, Vol. 27, edited by R. BONIFACIO (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1982), p. 21.
  7. M. C. TEICH and B. E. A. SALEH: J . Opt. Soc. Am. B, 2, 275 (1985).
  8. For a review, see: F. M. PIPKIN: Adv. At. Mol. Phys., 14, 281 (1978).
  9. R. LOUDON: The Quantum Theory of Light, 2nd Edition (Clarendon, Oxford, 1983), p. 222. and L. MANDEL: Phys. Rev. Lett., 54, 2011 (1985).
  10. A. ASPECT, P. GRANGIER and G. ROGER: Phys. Rev. Lett., 47, 460 (1981).
  11. E. S. FRY: Phys. Rev. A, 8, 1219 (1973).
  12. B. E. A. SALEH and M. C. TEICH: Opt. Commun., 52, 429 (1985).
  13. L. MANDEL: Communication at the Conference New trends in Quantum Optics and
  14. E. JAKEMAN and J. G. WALKER: Opt. Commun., 55, 219 (1985). Electrodynamics, Roma, 1985.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Grangier, P., Roger, G., & Aspect, A.
Affiliations
  • Institut d’Optique Graduate School (FR)
  • Collège de France (FR)
Venue
Europhysics Letters (EPL)
Published
1986-02-15
Volume
1
Issue
4
Pages
173-179
ISSN
  • 0295-5075 (ISSN-L)
  • 1286-4854
OpenAlex
W1969232365
Cited by
984
References
13
Citations by year
2026: 34 · 2025: 45 · 2024: 36 · 2023: 43 · 2022: 33 · 2021: 37 · 2020: 34 · 2019: 47 · 2018: 34 · 2017: 39 · 2016: 39 · 2015: 35 · 2014: 48 · 2013: 36 · 2012: 48
FWCI
10.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Europhysics Letters (EPL) (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum optics and atomic interactions
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum Mechanics and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Quantum Information and Cryptography
Keywords
beam splitter, single-photon interference, atomic cascade, single-photon states, wave-particle duality, fringe visibility

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